[House Report 112-355]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Union Calendar No. 240
112th Congress, 1st Session - - - - - - - - - - - - - - House Report 112-355
SECOND SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
DURING THE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
PURSUANT TO
Clause 1(d) Rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives
December 30, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Financial Services,
Washington, DC, December 30, 2011.
Hon. Karen Lehman Haas,
Clerk of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Ms. Haas: Pursuant to clause 1(d) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives for the 112th Congress, I
present herewith a report on the activity of the Committee on
Financial Services for the First Session of the 112th Congress,
including the Committee's review and study of legislation
within its jurisdiction, and the oversight activities
undertaken by the Committee.
Sincerely,
Spencer Bachus,
Chairman.
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Jurisdiction..................................................... 1
Memorandum of Understanding...................................... 2
Rules of the Committee........................................... 4
Membership and Organization...................................... 32
Legislative and Oversight Activities............................. 39
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises.................................................... 113
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology.......... 144
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit....... 148
Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity..... 161
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade.......... 175
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations..................... 179
Oversight Plan for the 112th Congress............................ 184
Implementation of the Oversight Plan for the 112th Congress...... 211
House Rule XI 1(d)(2)(E) Hearings................................ 263
House Resolution 72 Activity..................................... 264
Appendix I--Committee Legislation................................ 269
Part A--Committee Reports.................................... 269
Part B--Public Laws.......................................... 270
Appendix II--Committee Publications.............................. 271
Part A--Committee Hearings................................... 271
Part B--Committee Prints..................................... 274
Union Calendar No. 240
112th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 112-355
======================================================================
SECOND SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON
FINANCIAL SERVICES FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS
_______
December 30, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bachus, from the Committee on Financial Services, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
Clause 1(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires that each
standing committee, not later than the 30th day after June 1
and December 1, submit to the House a report on the activities
of that committee, including separate sections summarizing the
legislative and oversight activities of that committee during
that Congress.
JURISDICTION
Rules of the House
Clause 1(h) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress sets forth the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Financial Services as
follows--
(1) Banks and banking, including deposit insurance and
Federal monetary policy.
(2) Economic stabilization, defense production,
renegotiation, and control of the price of commodities, rents,
and services.
(3) Financial aid to commerce and industry (other than
transportation).
(4) Insurance generally.
(5) International finance.
(6) International financial and monetary organizations.
(7) Money and credit, including currency and the issuance
of notes and redemption thereof; gold and silver, including the
coinage thereof; valuation and revaluation of the dollar.
(8) Public and private housing.
(9) Securities and exchanges.
(10) Urban development.
Memorandum of Understanding
The Committee on Financial Services was established when
the House agreed to H. Res. 5, establishing the Rules of the
House of Representatives for the 107th Congress, on January 3,
2001. The jurisdiction of the Committee on Financial Services
consists of the jurisdiction granted the Committee on Banking
and Financial Services in the 106th Congress, along with
jurisdiction over insurance generally and securities and
exchanges, matters which had previously been within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Commerce in the 106th and
previous congresses. On January 20, 2001,\1\ the Speaker
inserted the following memorandum of understanding between the
chairmen of the Committee on Financial Services and the
Committee on Energy and Commerce further clarifying these
jurisdictional changes--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The version of the memorandum printed in the January 20, 2001
Congressional Record contained a typographic error. A corrected version
of the memorandum, which appears below, was printed in the January 30,
2001 edition of the Congressional Record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 20, 2001.
On January 3, 2001, the House agreed to H. Res. 5,
establishing the rules of the House for the 107th Congress.
Section 2(d) of H. Res. 5 contained a provision renaming the
Banking Committee as the Financial Services Committee and
transferring jurisdiction over securities and exchanges and
insurance from the Commerce Committee to the Financial Services
Committee. The Commerce Committee was also renamed the Energy
and Commerce Committee.
The Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on
Financial Services jointly acknowledge as the authoritative
source of legislative history concerning section 2(d) of H.
Res. 5 the following statement of Rules Committee Chairman
David Dreier during floor consideration of the resolution:
``In what is obviously one of our most significant changes,
Mr. Speaker, section 2(d) of the resolution establishes a new
Committee on Financial Services, which will have jurisdiction
over the following matters:
``(1) banks and banking, including deposit insurance and
Federal monetary policy;
``(2) economic stabilization, defense production,
renegotiation, and control of the price of commodities, rents,
and services;
``(3) financial aid to commerce and industry (other than
transportation);
``(4) insurance generally;
``(5) international finance;
``(6) international financial and monetary organizations;
``(7) money and credit, including currency and the issuance
of notes and redemption thereof; gold and silver, including the
coinage thereof; valuation and revaluation of the dollar;
``(8) public and private housing;
``(9) securities and exchanges; and
``(10) urban development.
``Mr. Speaker, jurisdiction over matters relating to
securities and exchanges is transferred in its entirety from
the Committee on Commerce, which will be redesignated under
this rules change to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and
it will now be transferred from the new Committee on Energy and
Commerce to this new Committee on Financial Services. This
transfer is not intended to convey to the Committee on
Financial Services jurisdiction currently in the Committee on
Agriculture regarding commodity exchanges.
``Furthermore, this change is not intended to convey to the
Committee on Financial Services jurisdiction over matters
relating to regulation and SEC oversight of multi-State public
utility holding companies and their subsidiaries, which remain
essentially matters of energy policy.
``Mr. Speaker, as a result of the transfer of jurisdiction
over matters relating to securities and exchanges, redundant
jurisdiction over matters relating to bank capital markets
activities generally and depository institutions securities
activities, which were formerly matters in the jurisdiction of
the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, have been
removed from clause 1 of rule X.
``Matters relating to insurance generally, formerly within
the jurisdiction of the redesignated Committee on Energy and
Commerce, are transferred to the jurisdiction of the Committee
on Financial Services.
``The transfer of any jurisdiction to the Committee on
Financial Services is not intended to limit the Committee on
Energy and Commerce's jurisdiction over consumer affairs and
consumer protection matters.
``Likewise, existing health insurance jurisdiction is not
transferred as a result of this change.
``Furthermore, the existing jurisdictions of other
committees with respect to matters relating to crop insurance,
Workers' Compensation, insurance anti-trust matters, disaster
insurance, veterans' life and health insurance, and national
social security policy are not affected by this change.
``Finally, Mr. Speaker, the changes and legislative history
involving the Committee on Financial Services and the Committee
on Energy and Commerce do not preclude future memorandum of
understanding between the chairmen of these respective
committees.''
By this memorandum the two committees undertake to record
their further mutual understandings in this matter, which will
supplement the statement quoted above.
It is agreed that the Committee on Energy and Commerce will
retain jurisdiction over bills dealing broadly with electronic
commerce, including electronic communications networks (ECNs).
However, a bill amending the securities laws to address the
specific type of electronic securities transaction currently
governed by a special SEC regulation as an Alternative Trading
System (ATS) would be referred to the Committee on Financial
Services.
While it is agreed that the jurisdiction of the Committee
on Financial Services over securities and exchanges includes
anti-fraud authorities under the securities laws, the Committee
on Energy and Commerce will retain jurisdiction only over the
issue of setting of accounting standards by the Financial
Accounting Standards Board.
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin,
Chairman, Committee on
Energy and Commerce,
Michael G. Oxley,
Chairman, Committee on
Financial Services.
However, on the opening day of the 109th Congress (January
4, 2005), the following announcement was made by the Speaker:
The SPEAKER. Based on discussions with the relevant committees,
the further mutual understandings contained in the final two
paragraphs of the ``Memorandum of Understanding Between Energy
and Commerce Committee and Financial Services Committee'' dated
January 30, 2001, shall no longer provide jurisdictional
guidance.
RULES OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
U.S. House of Representatives
112th Congress
First Session
Rule 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(a) The rules of the House are the rules of the Committee
on Financial Services (hereinafter in these rules referred to
as the ``Committee'') and its subcommittees so far as
applicable, except that a motion to recess from day to day, and
a motion to dispense with the first reading (in full) of a bill
or resolution, if printed copies are available, are privileged
motions in the Committee and shall be considered without
debate. A proposed investigative or oversight report shall be
considered as read if it has been available to the members of
the Committee for at least 24 hours (excluding Saturdays,
Sundays, or legal holidays except when the House is in session
on such day).
(b) Each subcommittee is a part of the Committee, and is
subject to the authority and direction of the Committee and to
its rules so far as applicable.
(c) The provisions of clause 2 of rule XI of the Rules of
the House are incorporated by reference as the rules of the
Committee to the extent applicable.
Rule 2
MEETINGS
Calling of Meetings
(a)(1) The Committee shall regularly meet on the first
Tuesday of each month when the House is in session.
(2) A regular meeting of the Committee may be dispensed
with if, in the judgment of the Chairman of the Committee
(hereinafter in these rules referred to as the ``Chair''),
there is no need for the meeting.
(3) Additional regular meetings and hearings of the
Committee may be called by the Chair, in accordance with clause
2(g)(3) of rule XI of the rules of the House.
(4) Special meetings shall be called and convened by the
Chair as provided in clause 2(c)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of
the House.
Notice for Meetings
(b)(1) The Chair shall notify each member of the Committee
of the agenda of each regular meeting of the Committee at least
three calendar days before the time of the meeting.
(2) The Chair shall provide to each member of the
Committee, at least three calendar days before the time of each
regular meeting for each measure or matter on the agenda a copy
of--
(A) the measure or materials relating to the matter
in question; and
(B) an explanation of the measure or matter to be
considered, which, in the case of an explanation of a
bill, resolution, or similar measure, shall include a
summary of the major provisions of the legislation, an
explanation of the relationship of the measure to
present law, and a summary of the need for the
legislation.
(3) At least 24 hours prior to the commencement of a
meeting for the markup of legislation, the Chair shall cause
the text of such legislation to be made publicly available in
electronic form.
(4) The provisions of this subsection may be waived by a
two- thirds vote of the Committee or by the Chair with the
concurrence of the ranking minority member.
Rule 3
MEETING AND HEARING PROCEDURES
In General
(a)(1) Meetings and hearings of the Committee shall be
called to order and presided over by the Chair or, in the
Chair's absence, by the member designated by the Chair as the
Vice Chair of the Committee, or by the ranking majority member
of the Committee present as Acting Chair.
(2) Meetings and hearings of the committee shall be open to
the public unless closed in accordance with clause 2(g) of rule
XI of the Rules of the House.
(3) Any meeting or hearing of the Committee that is open to
the public shall be open to coverage by television broadcast,
radio broadcast, and still photography in accordance with the
provisions of clause 4 of rule XI of the Rules of the House
(which are incorporated by reference as part of these rules).
Operation and use of any Committee operated broadcast system
shall be fair and nonpartisan and in accordance with clause
4(b) of rule XI and all other applicable rules of the Committee
and the House.
(4) Opening statements by members at the beginning of any
hearing or meeting of the Committee shall be limited to 5
minutes each for the Chair or ranking minority member, or their
respective designee, and 3 minutes each for all other members.
(5) To the extent feasible, members and witnesses may use
the Committee equipment for the purpose of presenting
information electronically during a meeting or hearing provided
the information is transmitted to the appropriate Committee
staff in an appropriate electronic format at least one business
day before the meeting or hearing so as to ensure display
capacity and quality. The content of all materials must relate
to the pending business of the Committee and conform to the
rules of the House. The confidentiality of the material will be
maintained by the technical staff until its official
presentation to the Committee members. For the purposes of
maintaining the official records of the committee, printed
copies of all materials presented, to the extent practicable,
must accompany the presentations.
(6) No person, other than a Member of Congress, Committee
staff, or an employee of a Member when that Member has an
amendment under consideration, may stand in or be seated at the
rostrum area of the Committee rooms unless the Chair determines
otherwise.
Quorum
(b)(1) For the purpose of taking testimony and receiving
evidence, two members of the Committee shall constitute a
quorum.
(2) A majority of the members of the Committee shall
constitute a quorum for the purposes of reporting any measure
or matter, of authorizing a subpoena, of closing a meeting or
hearing pursuant to clause 2(g) of rule XI of the rules of the
House (except as provided in clause 2(g)(2)(A) and (B)) or of
releasing executive session material pursuant to clause 2(k)(7)
of rule XI of the rules of the House.
(3) For the purpose of taking any action other than those
specified in paragraph (2) one-third of the members of the
Committee shall constitute a quorum.
Voting
(c)(1) No vote may be conducted on any measure or matter
pending before the Committee unless the requisite number of
members of the Committee is actually present for such purpose.
(2) A record vote of the Committee shall be provided on any
question before the Committee upon the request of one-fifth of
the members present.
(3) No vote by any member of the Committee on any measure
or matter may be cast by proxy.
(4) In addition to any other requirement of these rules or
the Rules of the House, including clause 2(e)(1)(B) of rule XI,
the Chair shall make the record of the votes on any question on
which a record vote is demanded publicly available for
inspection at the offices of the Committee and in electronic
form on the Committee's Web site not later than one business
day after such vote is taken. Such record shall include in
electronic form the text of the amendment, motion, order, or
other proposition, the name of each member voting for and each
member voting against such amendment, motion, order, or
proposition, and the names of those members of the committee
present but not voting. With respect to any record vote on any
motion to report or record vote on any amendment, a record of
such votes shall be included in the report of the Committee
showing the total number of votes cast for and against and the
names of those members of the committee present but not voting.
(5) Postponed Record Votes.--
(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), the Chairman may
postpone further proceedings when a record vote is
ordered on the question of approving any measure or
matter or adopting an amendment. The Chairman may
resume proceedings on a postponed request at any time,
but no later than the next meeting day.
(B) In exercising postponement authority under
subparagraph (A), the Chairman shall take all
reasonable steps necessary to notify members on the
resumption of proceedings on any postponed record vote;
(C) When proceedings resume on a postponed question,
not-withstanding any intervening order for the previous
question, an underlying proposition shall remain
subject to further debate or amendment to the same
extent as when the question was postponed.
Hearing Procedures
(d)(1)(A) The Chair shall make public announcement of the
date, place, and subject matter of any committee hearing at
least one week before the commencement of the hearing, unless
the Chair, with the concurrence of the ranking minority member,
or the Committee by majority vote with a quorum present for the
transaction of business, determines there is good cause to
begin the hearing sooner, in which case the Chair shall make
the announcement at the earliest possible date.
(B) Not less than three days before the commencement of a
hearing announced under this paragraph, the Chair shall provide
to the members of the Committee a concise summary of the
subject of the hearing, or, in the case of a hearing on a
measure or matter, a copy of the measure or materials relating
to the matter in question and a concise explanation of the
measure or matter to be considered. At the same time the Chair
provides the information required by the preceding sentence,
the Chair shall also provide to the members of the Committee a
final list consisting of the names of each witness who is to
appear before the Committee at that hearing. The witness list
may not be modified within 24 hours of a hearing, unless the
Chair, with the concurrence of the ranking minority member,
determines there is good cause for such modification.
(2) To the greatest extent practicable--
(A) each witness who is to appear before the
Committee shall file with the Committee two business
days in advance of the appearance sufficient copies
(including a copy in electronic form), as determined by
the Chair, of a written statement of proposed testimony
and shall limit the oral presentation to the Committee
to brief summary thereof; and
(B) each witness appearing in a non-governmental
capacity shall include with the written statement of
proposed testimony a curriculum vitae and a disclosure
of the amount and source (by agency and program) of any
Federal grant (or subgrant hereof) or contract (or
subcontract thereof) received during the current fiscal
year or either of the two preceding fiscal years. Such
disclosure statements, with appropriate redactions to
protect the privacy of the witness, shall be made
publicly available in electronic form not later than
one day after the witness appears.
(3) The requirements of paragraph (2)(A) may be modified or
waived by the Chair when the Chair determines it to be in the
best interest of the Committee.
(4) The five-minute rule shall be observed in the
interrogation of witnesses before the Committee until each
member of the Committee has had an opportunity to question the
witnesses. No member shall be recognized for a second period of
five minutes to interrogate witnesses until each member of the
Committee present has been recognized once for that purpose.
(5) Whenever any hearing is conducted by the Committee on
any measure or matter, the minority party members of the
Committee shall be entitled, upon the request of a majority of
them before the completion of the hearing, to call witnesses
with respect to that measure or matter during at least one day
of hearing thereon.
Subpoenas and Oaths
(e)(1) Pursuant to clause 2(m) of rule XI of the Rules of
the House, a subpoena may be authorized and issued by the
Committee or a subcommittee in the conduct of any investigation
or series of investigations or activities, only when authorized
by a majority of the members voting, a majority being present,
or pursuant to paragraph (2).
(2) The Chair, with the concurrence of the ranking minority
member, may authorize and issue subpoenas under such clause
during any period for which the House has adjourned for a
period in excess of three days when, in the opinion of the
Chair, authorization and issuance of the subpoena is necessary
to obtain the material or testimony set forth in the subpoena.
The Chair shall report to the members of the Committee on the
authorization and issuance of a subpoena during the recess
period as soon as practicable, but in no event later than one
week after service of such subpoena.
(3) Authorized subpoenas shall be signed by the Chair or by
any member designated by the Committee, and may be served by
any person designated by the Chair or such member.
(4) The Chair, or any member of the Committee designated by
the Chair, may administer oaths to witnesses before the
Committee.
Special Procedures
(f)(1)(A) Commemorative Medals and Coins.--It shall not be
in order for the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and
Technology to hold a hearing on any commemorative medal or
commemorative coin legislation unless the legislation is
cosponsored by at least two-thirds of the members of the House.
(B) It shall not be in order for the subcommittee to
approve a bill or measure authorizing commemorative coins for
consideration by the full Committee which does not conform with
the mintage restrictions established by section 5112 of title
31, United States Code.
(C) In considering legislation authorizing Congressional
gold medals, the subcommittee shall apply the following
standards--
(i) the recipient shall be a natural person;
(ii) the recipient shall have performed an
achievement that has an impact on American history and
culture that is likely to be recognized as a major
achievement in the recipient's field long after the
achievement;
(iii) the recipient shall not have received a medal
previously for the same or substantially the same
achievement;
(iv) the recipient shall be living or, if deceased,
shall have been deceased for not less than five years
and not more than twenty five years;
(v) the achievements were performed in the
recipient's field of endeavor, and represent either a
lifetime of continuous superior achievements or a
single achievement so significant that the recipient is
recognized and acclaimed by others in the same field,
as evidenced by the recipient having received the
highest honors in the field.
(2) Testimony of Certain Officials.--
(A) Notwithstanding subsection (a)(4), when the Chair
announces a hearing of the Committee for the purpose of
receiving--
(i) testimony from the Chairman of the
Federal Reserve Board pursuant to section 2B of
the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 221 et
seq.), or
(ii) testimony from the Chairman of the
Federal Reserve Board or a member of the
President's cabinet at the invitation of the
Chair, the Chair may, in consultation with the
ranking minority member, limit the number and
duration of opening statements to be delivered
at such hearing. The limitation shall be
included in the announcement made pursuant to
subsection (d)(1)(A), and shall provide that
the opening statements of all members of the
Committee shall be made a part of the hearing
record.
(B) Notwithstanding subsection (a)(4), at any hearing
of the Committee for the purpose of receiving testimony
(other than testimony described in clause (i) or (ii)
of subparagraph (A)), the Chair may, after consultation
with the ranking minority member, limit the duration of
opening statements to ten minutes, to be divided
between the Chair and Chair of the pertinent
subcommittee, or the Chair's designees, and ten
minutes, to be controlled by the ranking minority
member, or the ranking minority member's designees.
Following such time, the duration for opening
statements may be extended by agreement between the
Chairman and ranking minority member, to be divided at
the discretion of the Chair or ranking minority member.
The Chair shall provide that the opening statements for
all members of the Committee shall be made a part of
the hearing record.
(C) At any hearing of a subcommittee, the Chair of
the subcommittee may, in consultation with the ranking
minority member of the subcommittee, limit the duration
of opening statements to ten minutes, to be divided
between the Subcommittee Chair or Chair's designees and
ten minutes, to be controlled by the ranking minority
member of the Subcommittee or the ranking minority
member's designees. Following such time, the duration
for opening statements may be extended by agreement
between the Chair of the subcommittee and ranking
minority member of the subcommittee, to be divided at
the discretion of the Chair of the subcommittee or
ranking minority member of the subcommittee. The Chair
of the subcommittee shall ensure that opening
statements for all members shall be made a part of the
hearing record.
(D) If the Chair and ranking minority member acting
jointly determine that extraordinary circumstances
exist necessitating allowing members to make opening
statements, subparagraphs (B) or (C), as the case may
be, shall not apply to such hearing.
Rule 4
PROCEDURES FOR REPORTING MEASURES OR MATTERS
(a) No measure or matter shall be reported from the
Committee unless a majority of the Committee is actually
present.
(b) The Chair of the Committee shall report or cause to be
reported promptly to the House any measure approved by the
Committee and take necessary steps to bring a matter to a vote.
(c) The report of the Committee on a measure which has been
approved by the Committee shall be filed within seven calendar
days (exclusive of days on which the House is not in session)
after the day on which there has been filed with the clerk of
the Committee a written request, signed by a majority of the
members of the Committee, for the reporting of that measure
pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(b)(2) of rule XIII of
the Rules of the House.
(d) All reports printed by the Committee pursuant to a
legislative study or investigation and not approved by a
majority vote of the Committee shall contain the following
disclaimer on the cover of such report: ``This report has not
been officially adopted by the Committee on Financial Services
and may not necessarily reflect the views of its Members.''
(e) The Chair is directed to offer a motion under clause 1
of rule XXII of the Rules of the House whenever the Chair
considers it appropriate.
Rule 5
SUBCOMMITTEES
Establishment and Responsibilities of Subcommittees
(a)(1) There shall be six subcommittees of the Committee as
follows:
(A) Subcommittee on capital markets and government
sponsored enterprises.--The jurisdiction of the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises includes--
(i) securities, exchanges, and finance;
(ii) capital markets activities, including
business capital formation and venture capital;
(iii) activities involving futures, forwards,
options, and other types of derivative
instruments;
(iv) the Securities and Exchange Commission;
(v) secondary market organizations for home
mortgages, including the Federal National
Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation, and the Federal
Agricultural Mortgage Corporation;
(vi) the Federal Housing Finance Agency; and
(vii) the Federal Home Loan Banks.
(B) Subcommittee on domestic monetary policy and
technology.--The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on
Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology includes--
(i) financial aid to all sectors and elements
within the economy;
(ii) economic growth and stabilization;
(iii) defense production matters as contained
in the Defense Production Act of 1950, as
amended;
(iv) domestic monetary policy, and agencies
which directly or indirectly affect domestic
monetary policy, including the effect of such
policy and other financial actions on interest
rates, the allocation of credit, and the
structure and functioning of domestic financial
institutions;
(v) coins, coinage, currency, and medals,
including commemorative coins and medals, proof
and mint sets and other special coins, the
Coinage Act of 1965, gold and silver, including
the coinage thereof (but not the par value of
gold), gold medals, counterfeiting, currency
denominations and design, the distribution of
coins, and the operations of the Bureau of the
Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing;
and,
(vi) development of new or alternative forms
of currency.
(C) Subcommittee on financial institutions and
consumer credit.--The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee
on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
includes--
(i) all agencies, including the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the
Federal Reserve System, the Office of Thrift
Supervision, and the National Credit Union
Administration, which directly or indirectly
exercise supervisory or regulatory authority in
connection with, or provide deposit insurance
for, financial institutions, and the
establishment of interest rate ceilings on
deposits;
(ii) all matters related to the Bureau of
Consumer Financial Protection;
(iii) the chartering, branching, merger,
acquisition, consolidation, or conversion of
financial institutions;
(iv) consumer credit, including the provision
of consumer credit by insurance companies, and
further including those matters in the Consumer
Credit Protection Act dealing with truth in
lending, extortionate credit transactions,
restrictions on garnishments, fair credit
reporting and the use of credit information by
credit bureaus and credit providers, equal
credit opportunity, debt collection practices,
and electronic funds transfers;
(v) creditor remedies and debtor defenses,
Federal aspects of the Uniform Consumer Credit
Code, credit and debit cards, and the
preemption of State usury laws;
(vi) consumer access to financial services,
including the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and
the Community Reinvestment Act;
(vii) the terms and rules of disclosure of
financial services, including the
advertisement, promotion and pricing of
financial services, and availability of
government check cashing services;
(viii) deposit insurance; and
(ix) consumer access to savings accounts and
checking accounts in financial institutions,
including lifeline banking and other consumer
accounts.
(D) Subcommittee on insurance, housing and community
opportunity.--The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on
Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity includes--
(i) insurance generally; terrorism risk
insurance; private mortgage insurance;
government sponsored insurance programs,
including those offering protection against
crime, fire, flood (and related land use
controls), earthquake and other natural
hazards; the Federal Insurance Office;
(ii) housing (except programs administered by
the Department of Veterans Affairs), including
mortgage and loan insurance pursuant to the
National Housing Act; rural housing; housing
and homeless assistance programs; all
activities of the Government National Mortgage
Association; housing construction and design
and safety standards; housing-related energy
conservation; housing research and
demonstration programs; financial and technical
assistance for nonprofit housing sponsors;
housing counseling and technical assistance;
regulation of the housing industry (including
landlord/tenant relations); and real estate
lending including regulation of settlement
procedures;
(iii) community development and community and
neighborhood planning, training and research;
national urban growth policies; urban/rural
research and technologies; and regulation of
interstate land sales; and,
(iv) the qualifications for and designation
of Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities
(other than matters relating to tax benefits).
(E) Subcommittee on international monetary policy and
trade.--The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on
International Monetary Policy and Trade includes--
(i) multilateral development lending
institutions, including activities of the
National Advisory Council on International
Monetary and Financial Policies as related
thereto, and monetary and financial
developments as they relate to the activities
and objectives of such institutions;
(ii) international trade, including but not
limited to the activities of the Export-Import
Bank;
(iii) the International Monetary Fund, its
permanent and temporary agencies, and all
matters related thereto; and
(iv) international investment policies, both
as they relate to United States investments for
trade purposes by citizens of the United States
and investments made by all foreign entities in
the United States.
(F) Subcommittee on oversight and investigations.--
The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations includes--
(i) the oversight of all agencies,
departments, programs, and matters within the
jurisdiction of the Committee, including the
development of recommendations with regard to
the necessity or desirability of enacting,
changing, or repealing any legislation within
the jurisdiction of the Committee, and for
conducting investigations within such
jurisdiction; and
(ii) research and analysis regarding matters
within the jurisdiction of the Committee,
including the impact or probable impact of tax
policies affecting matters within the
jurisdiction of the Committee.
(2) In addition, each such subcommittee shall have specific
responsibility for such other measures or matters as the Chair
refers to it.
(3) Each subcommittee of the Committee shall review and
study, on a continuing basis, the application, administration,
execution, and effectiveness of those laws, or parts of laws,
the subject matter of which is within its general
responsibility.
Referral of Measures and Matters to Subcommittees
(b)(1) The Chair shall regularly refer to one or more
subcommittees such measures and matters as the Chair deems
appropriate given its jurisdiction and responsibilities. In
making such a referral, the Chair may designate a subcommittee
of primary jurisdiction and subcommittees of additional or
sequential jurisdiction.
(2) All other measures or matters shall be subject to
consideration by the full Committee.
(3) In referring any measure or matter to a subcommittee,
the Chair may specify a date by which the subcommittee shall
report thereon to the Committee.
(4) The Committee by motion may discharge a subcommittee
from consideration of any measure or matter referred to a
subcommittee of the Committee.
Composition of Subcommittees
(c)(1) Members shall be elected to each subcommittee and to
the positions of chair and ranking minority member thereof, in
accordance with the rules of the respective party caucuses. The
Chair of the Committee shall designate a member of the majority
party on each subcommittee as its vice chair.
(2) The Chair and ranking minority member of the Committee
shall be ex officio members with voting privileges of each
subcommittee of which they are not assigned as members and may
be counted for purposes of establishing a quorum in such
subcommittees.
(3) The subcommittees shall be comprised as follows:
(A) The Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises shall be comprised of
35 members, 20 elected by the majority caucus and 15
elected by the minority caucus.
(B) The Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and
Technology shall be comprised of 14 members, 8 elected
by the majority caucus and 6 elected by the minority
caucus.
(C) The Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and
Consumer Credit shall be comprised of 30 members, 17
elected by the majority caucus and 13 elected by the
minority caucus.
(D) The Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity shall be comprised of 18 members,
10 elected by the majority caucus and 8 elected by the
minority caucus.
(E) The Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy
and Trade shall be comprised of 14 members, 8 elected
by the majority caucus and 6 elected by the minority
caucus.
(F) The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
shall be comprised of 18 members, 10 elected by the
majority caucus and 8 elected by the minority caucus.
Subcommittee Meetings and Hearings
(d)(1) Each subcommittee of the Committee is authorized to
meet, hold hearings, receive testimony, mark up legislation,
and report to the full Committee on any measure or matter
referred to it, consistent with subsection (a).
(2) No subcommittee of the Committee may meet or hold a
hearing at the same time as a meeting or hearing of the
Committee.
(3) The chair of each subcommittee shall set hearing and
meeting dates only with the approval of the Chair with a view
toward assuring the availability of meeting rooms and avoiding
simultaneous scheduling of Committee and subcommittee meetings
or hearings.
Effect of a Vacancy
(e) Any vacancy in the membership of a subcommittee shall
not affect the power of the remaining members to execute the
functions of the subcommittee as long as the required quorum is
present.
Records
(f) Each subcommittee of the Committee shall provide the
full Committee with copies of such records of votes taken in
the subcommittee and such other records with respect to the
subcommittee as the Chair deems necessary for the Committee to
comply with all rules and regulations of the House.
Rule 6
STAFF
In General
(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
professional and other staff of the Committee shall be
appointed, and may be removed by the Chair, and shall work
under the general supervision and direction of the Chair.
(2) All professional and other staff provided to the
minority party members of the Committee shall be appointed, and
may be removed, by the ranking minority member of the
Committee, and shall work under the general supervision and
direction of such member.
(3) It is intended that the skills and experience of all
members of the Committee staff be available to all members of
the Committee.
Subcommittee Staff
(b) From funds made available for the appointment of staff,
the Chair of the Committee shall, pursuant to clause 6(d) of
rule X of the Rules of the House, ensure that sufficient staff
is made available so that each subcommittee can carry out its
responsibilities under the rules of the Committee and that the
minority party is treated fairly in the appointment of such
staff.
Compensation of Staff
(c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Chair shall
fix the compensation of all professional and other staff of the
Committee.
(2) The ranking minority member shall fix the compensation
of all professional and other staff provided to the minority
party members of the Committee.
Rule 7
BUDGET AND TRAVEL
Budget
(a)(1) The Chair, in consultation with other members of the
Committee, shall prepare for each Congress a budget providing
amounts for staff, necessary travel, investigation, and other
expenses of the Committee and its subcommittees.
(2) From the amount provided to the Committee in the
primary expense resolution adopted by the House of
Representatives, the Chair, after consultation with the ranking
minority member, shall designate an amount to be under the
direction of the ranking minority member for the compensation
of the minority staff, travel expenses of minority members and
staff, and minority office expenses. All expenses of minority
members and staff shall be paid for out of the amount so set
aside.
Travel
(b)(1) The Chair may authorize travel for any member and
any staff member of the Committee in connection with activities
or subject matters under the general jurisdiction of the
Committee. Before such authorization is granted, there shall be
submitted to the Chair in writing the following:
(A) The purpose of the travel.
(B) The dates during which the travel is to occur.
(C) The names of the States or countries to be
visited and the length of time to be spent in each.
(D) The names of members and staff of the Committee
for whom the authorization is sought.
(2) Members and staff of the Committee shall make a written
report to the Chair on any travel they have conducted under
this subsection, including a description of their itinerary,
expenses, and activities, and of pertinent information gained
as a result of such travel.
(3) Members and staff of the Committee performing
authorized travel on official business shall be governed by
applicable laws, resolutions, and regulations of the House and
of the Committee on House Administration.
Rule 8
COMMITTEE ADMINISTRATION
Records
(a)(1) There shall be a transcript made of each regular
meeting and hearing of the Committee, and the transcript may be
printed if the Chair decides it is appropriate or if a majority
of the members of the Committee requests such printing. Any
such transcripts shall be a substantially verbatim account of
remarks actually made during the proceedings, subject only to
technical, grammatical, and typographical corrections
authorized by the person making the remarks. Nothing in this
paragraph shall be construed to require that all such
transcripts be subject to correction and publication.
(2) The Committee shall keep a record of all actions of the
Committee and of its subcommittees. The record shall contain
all information required by clause 2(e)(1) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House and shall be available in electronic form
and for public inspection at reasonable times in the offices of
the Committee.
(3) All Committee hearings, records, data, charts, and
files shall be kept separate and distinct from the
congressional office records of the Chair, shall be the
property of the House, and all Members of the House shall have
access thereto as provided in clause 2(e)(2) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House.
(4) The records of the Committee at the National Archives
and Records Administration shall be made available for public
use in accordance with rule VII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives. The Chair shall notify the ranking minority
member of any decision, pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause
4(b) of the rule, to withhold a record otherwise available, and
the matter shall be presented to the Committee for a
determination on written request of any member of the
Committee.
Committee Publications on the Internet
(b) To the maximum extent feasible, the Committee shall
make its publications available in electronic form.
Audio and Video Coverage of Committee Hearings and Meetings
(c)(1) To the maximum extent feasible, the Committee shall
provide audio and video coverage of each hearing or meeting for
the transaction of business in a manner that allows the public
to easily listen to and view the proceedings; and,
(2) maintain the recordings of such coverage in a manner
that is easily accessible to the public.
APPENDIX 1
Applicable Provisions of Clauses 1, 2, and 4 of Rule XI and
Clauses 2 and 3 of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress
January 5, 2011
Rule XI: Procedures of Committees and Unfinished Business
Clauses 1 and 2: Rules for Standing Committees
In general
1. (a)(1)(A) The Rules of the House are the rules of its
committees and subcommittees so far as applicable.
(B) Each subcommittee is a part of its committee and is
subject to the authority and direction of that committee and to
its rules, so far as applicable.
(2)(A) In a committee or subcommittee--
(i) a motion to recess from day to day, or to recess
subject to the call of the Chair (within 24 hours),
shall be privileged; and
(ii) a motion to dispense with the first reading (in
full) of a bill or resolution shall be privileged if
printed copies are available.
(B) A motion accorded privilege under this subparagraph
shall be decided without debate.
(b)(1) Each committee may conduct at any time such
investigations and studies as it considers necessary or
appropriate in the exercise of its responsibilities under rule
X. Subject to the adoption of expense resolutions as required
by clause 6 of rule X, each committee may incur expenses,
including travel expenses, in connection with such
investigations and studies.
(2) A proposed investigative or oversight report shall be
considered as read in committee if it has been available to the
members for at least 24 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or
legal holidays except when the House is in session on such a
day).
(3) A report of an investigation or study conducted jointly
by more than one committee may be filed jointly, provided that
each of the committees complies independently with all
requirements for approval and filing of the report.
(4) After an adjournment sine die of the last regular
session of a Congress, an investigative or oversight report may
be filed with the Clerk at any time, provided that a member who
gives timely notice of intention to file supplemental,
minority, or additional views shall be entitled to not less
than seven calendar days in which to submit such views for
inclusion in the report.
(c) Each committee may have printed and bound such
testimony and other data as may be presented at hearings held
by the committee or its subcommittees. All costs of
stenographic services and transcripts in connection with a
meeting or hearing of a committee shall be paid from the
applicable accounts of the House described in clause 1(k)(1) of
rule X.
(d)(1) Not later than the 30th day after June 1 and
December 1, a committee shall submit to the House a semiannual
report on the activities of that committee.
(2) Such report shall include--
(A) separate sections summarizing the legislative and
oversight activities of that committee under this rule
and rule X during the applicable period;
(B) in the case of the first such report, a summary
of the oversight plans submitted by the committee under
clause 2(d) of rule X;
(C) a summary of the actions taken and
recommendations made with respect to the oversight
plans specified in subdivision (B);
(D) a summary of any additional oversight activities
undertaken by that committee and any recommendations
made or actions taken thereon; and
(E) a delineation of any hearings held pursuant to
clauses 2(n), (O), or (p) of this rule.
(3) After an adjournment sine die of a regular session of a
Congress, or after December 15, whichever occurs first, the
chair of a committee may file the second or fourth semiannual
report described in subparagraph (1) with the Clerk at any time
and without approval of the committee, provided that--
(A) a copy of the report has been available to each
member of the committee for at least seven calendar
days; and
(B) the report includes any supplemental, minority,
or additional views submitted by a member of the
committee.
Adoption of written rules
2. (a)(1) Each standing committee shall adopt written rules
governing its procedure. Such rules--
(A) shall be adopted in a meeting that is open to the
public unless the committee, in open session and with a
quorum present, determines by record vote that all or
part of the meeting on that day shall be closed to the
public;
(B) may not be inconsistent with the Rules of the
House or with those provisions of law having the force
and effect of Rules of the House; and
(C) shall in any event incorporate all of the
succeeding provisions of this clause to the extent
applicable.
(2) Each committee shall make its rules publicly available
in electronic form and submit such rules for publication in the
Congressional Record not later than 30 days after the chair of
the committee is elected in each odd-numbered year.
(3) A committee may adopt a rule providing that the chair
be directed to offer a motion under clause 1 of rule XXII
whenever the chair considers it appropriate.
Regular meeting days
(b) Each standing committee shall establish regular meeting
days for the conduct of its business, which shall be not less
frequent than monthly. Each such committee shall meet for the
consideration of a bill or resolution pending before the
committee or the transaction of other committee business on all
regular meeting days fixed by the committee unless otherwise
provided by written rule adopted by the committee.
Additional and special meetings
(c)(1) The chairman of each standing committee may call and
convene, as the chair considers necessary, additional and
special meetings of the committee for the consideration of a
bill or resolution pending before the committee or for the
conduct of other committee business, subject to such rules as
the committee may adopt. The committee shall meet for such
purpose under that call of the chairman.
(2) Three or more members of a standing committee may file
in the offices of the committee a written request that the
chair call a special meeting of the committee. Such request
shall specify the measure or matter to be considered.
Immediately upon the filing of the request, the clerk of the
committee shall notify the chair of the filing of the request.
If the chair does not call the requested special meeting within
three calendar days after the filing of the request (to be held
within seven calendar days after the filing of the request) a
majority of the members of the committee may file in the
offices of the committee their written notice that a special
meeting of the committee will be held. The written notice shall
specify the date and hour of the special meeting and the
measure or matter to be considered. The committee shall meet on
that date and hour. Immediately upon the filing of the notice,
the clerk of the committee shall notify all members of the
committee that such special meeting will be held and inform
them of its date and hour and the measure or matter to be
considered. Only the measure or matter specified in that notice
may be considered at that special meeting.
Temporary absence of chair
(d) A member of the majority party on each standing
committee or subcommittee thereof shall be designated by the
chair of the full committee as the vice chair of the committee
or subcommittee, as the case may be, and shall preside during
the absence of the chair from any meeting. If the chair and
vice chair of a committee or subcommittee are not present at
any meeting of the committee or subcommittee, the ranking
majority member who is present shall preside at that meeting.
Committee records
(e)(1)(A) Each committee shall keep a complete record of
all committee action which shall include--
(i) in the case of a meeting or hearing transcript, a
substantially verbatim account of remarks actually made
during the proceedings, subject only to technical,
grammatical, and typographical corrections authorized
by the person making the remarks involved; and
(ii) a record of the votes on any question on which a
record vote is demanded.
(B)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (B)(ii) and
subject to paragraph (k)(7), the result of each such record
vote shall be made available by the committee for inspection by
the public at reasonable times in its offices and also made
publicly available in electronic form within 48 hours of such
record vote. Information so available shall include a
description of the amendment, motion, order, or other
proposition, the name of each member voting for and each member
voting against such amendment, motion, order, or proposition,
and the names of those members of the committee present but not
voting.
(ii) The result of any record vote taken in executive
session in the Committee on Ethics may not be made available
for inspection by the public without an affirmative vote of a
majority of the members of the committee.
(2)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), all committee
hearings, records, data, charts, and files shall be kept
separate and distinct from the congressional office records of
the member serving as its chair. Such records shall be the
property of the House, and each Member, Delegate, and the
Resident Commissioner shall have access thereto.
(B) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, other
than members of the Committee on Ethics, may not have access to
the records of that committee respecting the conduct of a
Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
of the House without the specific prior permission of that
committee.
(3) Each committee shall include in its rules standards for
availability of records of the committee delivered to the
Archivist of the United States under rule VII. Such standards
shall specify procedures for orders of the committee under
clause 3(b)(3) and clause 4(b) of rule VII, including a
requirement that nonavailability of a record for a period
longer than the period otherwise applicable under that rule
shall be approved by vote of the committee.
(4) Each committee shall make its publications available in
electronic form to the maximum extent feasible.
(5) To the maximum extent practicable, each committee
shall--
(A) provide audio and video coverage of each hearing
or meeting for the transaction of business in a manner
that allows the public to easily listen to and view the
proceedings; and
(B) maintain the recordings of such coverage in a
manner that is easily accessible to the public.
(6) Not later than 24 hours after the adoption of any
amendment to a measure or matter considered by a committee, the
chair of such committee shall cause the text of each such
amendment to be made publicly available in electronic form.
Prohibition against proxy voting
(f) A vote by a member of a committee or subcommittee with
respect to any measure or matter may not be cast by proxy.
Open meetings and hearings
(g)(1) Each meeting for the transaction of business,
including the markup of legislation, by a standing committee or
subcommittee thereof (other than the Committee on Standards of
Official Conduct or its subcommittees) shall be open to the
public, including to radio, television, and still photography
coverage, except when the committee or subcommittee, in open
session and with a majority present, determines by record vote
that all or part of the remainder of the meeting on that day
shall be in executive session because disclosure of matters to
be considered would endanger national security, would
compromise sensitive law enforcement information, would tend to
defame, degrade, or incriminate any person, or otherwise would
violate a law or rule of the House. Persons, other than members
of the committee and such noncommittee Members, Delegates,
Resident Commissioner, congressional staff, or departmental
representatives as the committee may authorize, may not be
present at a business or markup session that is held in
executive session. This subparagraph does not apply to open
committee hearings, which are governed by clause 4(a)(1) of
rule X or by subparagraph (2).
(2)(A) Each hearing conducted by a committee or
subcommittee (other than the Committee on Ethics or its
subcommittees) shall be open to the public, including to radio,
television, and still photography coverage, except when the
committee or subcommittee, in open session and with a majority
present, determines by record vote that all or part of the
remainder of that hearing on that day shall be closed to the
public because disclosure of testimony, evidence, or other
matters to be considered would endanger national security,
would compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or
would violate a law or rule of the House.
(B) Notwithstanding the requirements of subdivision (A), in
the presence of the number of members required under the rules
of the committee for the purpose of taking testimony, a
majority of those present may--
(i) agree to close the hearing for the sole purpose
of discussing whether testimony or evidence to be
received would endanger national security, would
compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or
would violate clause 2(k)(5); or
(ii) agree to close the hearing as provided in clause
2(k)(5).
(C) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not be
excluded from nonparticipatory attendance at a hearing of a
committee or subcommittee (other than the Committee on Ethics
or its subcommittees) unless the House by majority vote
authorizes a particular committee or subcommittee, for purposes
of a particular series of hearings on a particular article of
legislation or on a particular subject of investigation, to
close its hearings to Members, Delegates, and the Resident
Commissioner by the same procedures specified in this
subparagraph for closing hearings to the public.
(D) The committee or subcommittee may vote by the same
procedure described in this subparagraph to close one
subsequent day of hearing, except that the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the
subcommittees thereof, may vote by the same procedure to close
up to five additional, consecutive days of hearings.
(3)(A) The chair of a committee shall announce the date,
place, and subject matter of--
(i) a committee hearing, which may not commence
earlier than one week after such notice; or
(ii) a committee meeting, which may not commence
earlier than the third day on which members have notice
thereof.
(B) A hearing or meeting may begin sooner than specified in
subdivision (A) in either of the following circumstances (in
which case the chair shall make the announcement specified in
subdivision (A) at the earliest possible time):
(i) the chair of the committee, with the concurrence
of the ranking minority member, determines that there
is good cause; or
(ii) the committee so determines by majority vote in
the presence of the number of members required under
the rules of the committee for the transaction of
business.
(C) An announcement made under this subparagraph shall be
published promptly in the Daily Digest and made publicly
available in electronic form.
(D) This subparagraph and subparagraph (4) shall not apply
to the Committee on Rules.
(4) At least 24 hours prior to the commencement of a
meeting for the markup of legislation, or at the time of an
announcement under subparagraph (3)(B) made within 24 hours
before such meeting, the chair of the committee shall cause the
text of such legislation to be made publicly available in
electronic form.
(5) Each committee shall, to the greatest extent
practicable, require witnesses who appear before it to submit
in advance written statements of proposed testimony and to
limit their initial presentations to the committee to brief
summaries thereof. In the case of a witness appearing in a
nongovernmental capacity, a written statement of proposed
testimony shall include a curriculum vitae and a disclosure of
the amount and source (by agency and program) of each Federal
grant (or subgrant thereof) or contract (or subcontract
thereof) received during the current fiscal year or either of
the two previous fiscal years by the witness or by an entity
represented by the witness. Such statements, with appropriate
redactions to protect the privacy of the witness, shall be made
publicly available in electronic form not later than one day
after the witness appears.
(6)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B), a point of
order does not lie with respect to a measure reported by a
committee on the ground that hearings on such measure were not
conducted in accordance with this clause.
(B) A point of order on the ground described in subdivision
(A) may be made by a member of the committee that reported the
measure if such point of order was timely made and improperly
disposed of in the committee.
(7) This paragraph does not apply to hearings of the
Committee on Appropriations under clause 4(a)(1) of rule X.
Quorum requirements
(h)(1) A measure or recommendation may not be reported by a
committee unless a majority of the committee is actually
present.
(2) Each committee may fix the number of its members to
constitute a quorum for taking testimony and receiving
evidence, which may not be less than two.
(3) Each committee (other than the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on the Budget, and the Committee
on Ways and Means) may fix the number of its members to
constitute a quorum for taking any action other than one for
which the presence of a majority of the committee is otherwise
required, which may not be less than one-third of the members.
(4)(A) Each committee may adopt a rule authorizing the
chairman of a committee or subcommittee--
(i) to postpone further proceedings when a record
vote is ordered on the question of approving a measure
or matter or on adopting an amendment; and
(ii) to resume proceedings on a postponed question at
any time after reasonable notice.
(B) A rule adopted pursuant to this subparagraph shall
provide that when proceedings resume on a postponed question,
notwithstanding any intervening order for the previous
question, an underlying proposition shall remain subject to
further debate or amendment to the same extent as when the
question was postponed.
Limitation on committee sittings
(i) A committee may not sit during a joint session of the
House and Senate or during a recess when a joint meeting of the
House and Senate is in progress.
Calling and questioning of witnesses
(j)(1) Whenever a hearing is conducted by a committee on a
measure or matter, the minority members of the committee shall
be entitled, upon request to the chair by a majority of them
before the completion of the hearing, to call witnesses
selected by the minority to testify with respect to that
measure or matter during at least one day of hearing thereon.
(2)(A) Subject to subdivisions (B) and (C), each committee
shall apply the five minute rule during the questioning of
witnesses in a hearing until such time as each member of the
committee who so desires has had an opportunity to question
each witness.
(B) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting a
specified number of its members to question a witness for
longer than five minutes. The time for extended questioning of
a witness under this subdivision shall be equal for the
majority party and the minority party and may not exceed one
hour in the aggregate.
(C) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting
committee staff for its majority and minority party members to
question a witness for equal specified periods. The time for
extended questioning of a witness under this subdivision shall
be equal for the majority party and the minority party and may
not exceed one hour in the aggregate.
Hearing procedures
(k)(1) The chair at a hearing shall announce in an opening
statement the subject of the hearing.
(2) A copy of the committee rules and of this clause shall
be made available to each witness on request.
(3) Witnesses at hearings may be accompanied by their own
counsel for the purpose of advising them concerning their
constitutional rights.
(4) The chair may punish breaches of order and decorum, and
of professional ethics on the part of counsel, by censure and
exclusion from the hearings; and the committee may cite the
offender to the House for contempt.
(5) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the committee
that the evidence or testimony at a hearing may tend to defame,
degrade, or incriminate any person, or it is asserted by a
witness that the evidence or testimony that the witness would
give at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate
the witness--
(A) notwithstanding paragraph (g)(2), such testimony
or evidence shall be presented in executive session if,
in the presence of the number of members required under
the rules of the committee for the purpose of taking
testimony, the committee determines by vote of a
majority of those present that such evidence or
testimony may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate
any person; and
(B) the committee shall proceed to receive such
testimony in open session only if the committee, a
majority being present, determines that such evidence
or testimony will not tend to defame, degrade, or
incriminate any person. In either case the committee
shall afford such person an opportunity voluntarily to
appear as a witness, and receive and dispose of
requests from such person to subpoena additional
witnesses.
(6) Except as provided in subparagraph (5), the chairman
shall receive and the committee shall dispose of requests to
subpoena additional witnesses.
(7) Evidence or testimony taken in executive session, and
proceedings conducted in executive session, may be released or
used in public sessions only when authorized by the committee,
a majority being present.
(8) In the discretion of the committee, witnesses may
submit brief and pertinent sworn statements in writing for
inclusion in the record. The committee is the sole judge of the
pertinence of testimony and evidence adduced at its hearing.
(9) A witness may obtain a transcript copy of the testimony
of such witness given at a public session or, if given at an
executive session, when authorized by the committee.
Supplemental, minority, or additional views
(l) If at the time of approval of a measure or matter by a
committee (other than the Committee on Rules) a member of the
committee gives notice of intention to file supplemental,
minority, or additional views for inclusion in the report to
the House thereon, that member shall be entitled to not less
than two additional calendar days after the day of such notice
(excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except when
the House is in session on such a day) to file such views, in
writing and signed by that member, with the clerk of the
committee.
Power to sit and act; subpoena power
(m)(1) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions
and duties under this rule and rule X (including any matters
referred to it under clause 2 of rule XII), a committee or
subcommittee is authorized (subject to subparagraph (3)(A))--
(A) to sit and act at such times and places within
the United States, whether the House is in session, has
recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold such hearings
as it considers necessary; and
(B) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the
attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the
production of such books, records, correspondence,
memoranda, papers, and documents as it considers
necessary.
(2) The chair of the committee, or a member designated by
the chair, may administer oaths to witnesses.
(3)(A)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (A)(ii), a
subpoena may be authorized and issued by a committee or
subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) in the conduct of an
investigation or series of investigations or activities only
when authorized by the committee or subcommittee, a majority
being present. The power to authorize and issue subpoenas under
subparagraph (1)(B) may be delegated to the chair of the
committee under such rules and under such limitations as the
committee may prescribe. Authorized subpoenas shall be signed
by the chair of the committee or by a member designated by the
committee.
(ii) In the case of a subcommittee of the Committee on
Ethics, a subpoena may be authorized and issued only by an
affirmative vote of a majority of its members.
(B) A subpoena duces tecum may specify terms of return
other than at a meeting or hearing of the committee or
subcommittee authorizing the subpoena.
(C) Compliance with a subpoena issued by a committee or
subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as
authorized or directed by the House.
(n)(1) Each standing committee, or a subcommittee thereof,
shall hold at least one hearing during each 120-day period
following the establishment of the committee on the topic of
waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in Government programs
which that committee may authorize.
(2) A hearing described in subparagraph (1) shall include a
focus on the most egregious instances of waste, fraud, abuse,
or mismanagement as documented by any report the committee has
received from a Federal Office of the Inspector General or the
Comptroller General of the United States.
(o) Each committee, or a subcommittee thereof, shall hold
at least one hearing in any session in which the committee has
received disclaimers of agency financial statements from
auditors of any Federal agency that the committee may authorize
to hear testimony on such disclaimers from representatives of
any such agency.
(p) Each standing committee, or a subcommittee thereof,
shall hold at least one hearing on issues raised by reports
issued by the Comptroller General of the United States
indicating that Federal programs or operations that the
committee may authorize are at high risk for waste, fraud, and
mismanagement, known as the `high-risk list' or the `high-risk
series'.
Clause 4: Audio and visual coverage of committee proceedings
4. (a) The purpose of this clause is to provide a means, in
conformity with acceptable standards of dignity, propriety, and
decorum, by which committee hearings or committee meetings that
are open to the public may be covered by audio and visual
means--
(1) for the education, enlightenment, and information
of the general public, on the basis of accurate and
impartial news coverage, regarding the operations,
procedures, and practices of the House as a legislative
and representative body, and regarding the measures,
public issues, and other matters before the House and
its committees, the consideration thereof, and the
action taken thereon; and
(2) for the development of the perspective and
understanding of the general public with respect to the
role and function of the House under the Constitution
as an institution of the Federal Government.
(b) In addition, it is the intent of this clause that radio
and television tapes and television film of any coverage under
this clause may not be used, or made available for use, as
partisan political campaign material to promote or oppose the
candidacy of any person for elective public office.
(c) It is, further, the intent of this clause that the
general conduct of each meeting (whether of a hearing or
otherwise) covered under authority of this clause by audio or
visual means, and the personal behavior of the committee
members and staff, other Government officials and personnel,
witnesses, television, radio, and press media personnel, and
the general public at the hearing or other meeting, shall be in
strict conformity with and observance of the acceptable
standards of dignity, propriety, courtesy, and decorum
traditionally observed by the House in its operations, and may
not be such as to--
(1) distort the objects and purposes of the hearing
or other meeting or the activities of committee members
in connection with that hearing or meeting or in
connection with the general work of the committee or of
the House; or
(2) cast discredit or dishonor on the House, the
committee, or a Member, Delegate, or Resident
Commissioner or bring the House, the committee, or a
Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner into
disrepute.
(d) The coverage of committee hearings and meetings by
audio and visual means shall be permitted and conducted only in
strict conformity with the purposes, provisions, and
requirements of this clause.
(e) Whenever a hearing or meeting conducted by a committee
or subcommittee is open to the public, those proceedings shall
be open to coverage by audio and visual means. A committee or
subcommittee chair may not limit the number of television or
still cameras to fewer than two representatives from each
medium (except for legitimate space or safety considerations,
in which case pool coverage shall be authorized).
(f) Each committee shall adopt written rules to govern its
implementation of this clause. Such rules shall contain
provisions to the following effect:
(1) If audio or visual coverage of the hearing or
meeting is to be presented to the public as live
coverage, that coverage shall be conducted and
presented without commercial sponsorship.
(2) The allocation among the television media of the
positions or the number of television cameras permitted
by a committee or subcommittee chair in a hearing or
meeting room shall be in accordance with fair and
equitable procedures devised by the Executive Committee
of the Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.
(3) Television cameras shall be placed so as not to
obstruct in any way the space between a witness giving
evidence or testimony and any member of the committee
or the visibility of that witness and that member to
each other.
(4) Television cameras shall operate from fixed
positions but may not be placed in positions that
obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of the hearing or
meeting by the other media.
(5) Equipment necessary for coverage by the
television and radio media may not be installed in, or
removed from, the hearing or meeting room while the
committee is in session.
(6)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (B),
floodlights, spotlights, strobe lights, and flashguns
may not be used in providing any method of coverage of
the hearing or meeting.
(B) The television media may install additional
lighting in a hearing or meeting room, without cost to
the Government, in order to raise the ambient lighting
level in a hearing or meeting room to the lowest level
necessary to provide adequate television coverage of a
hearing or meeting at the current state of the art of
television coverage.
(7) If requests are made by more of the media than
will be permitted by a committee or subcommittee chair
for coverage of a hearing or meeting by still
photography, that coverage shall be permitted on the
basis of a fair and equitable pool arrangement devised
by the Standing Committee of Press Photographers.
(8) Photographers may not position themselves between
the witness table and the members of the committee at
any time during the course of a hearing or meeting.
(9) Photographers may not place themselves in
positions that obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of
the hearing by the other media.
(10) Personnel providing coverage by the television
and radio media shall be currently accredited to the
Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.
(11) Personnel providing coverage by still
photography shall be currently accredited to the Press
Photographers' Gallery.
(12) Personnel providing coverage by the television
and radio media and by still photography shall conduct
themselves and their coverage activities in an orderly
and unobtrusive manner.
Rule XIII: Calendars and Committee Reports
Clause 2: Filing and printing of reports
2. (a)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), all
reports of committees (other than those filed from the floor)
shall be delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to
the proper calendar under the direction of the Speaker in
accordance with clause 1. The title or subject of each report
shall be entered on the Journal and printed in the
Congressional Record.
(2) A bill or resolution reported adversely (other than
those filed as privileged) shall be laid on the table unless a
committee to which the bill or resolution was referred requests
at the time of the report its referral to an appropriate
calendar under clause 1 or unless, within three days
thereafter, a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner makes
such a request.
(b)(1) It shall be the duty of the chair of each committee
to report or cause to be reported promptly to the House a
measure or matter approved by the committee and to take or
cause to be taken steps necessary to bring the measure or
matter to a vote.
(2) In any event, the report of a committee on a measure
that has been approved by the committee shall be filed within
seven calendar days (exclusive of days on which the House is
not in session) after the day on which a written request for
the filing of the report, signed by a majority of the members
of the committee, has been filed with the clerk of the
committee. The clerk of the committee shall immediately notify
the chair of the filing of such a request. This subparagraph
does not apply to a report of the Committee on Rules with
respect to a rule, joint rule, or order of business of the
House, or to the reporting of a resolution of inquiry addressed
to the head of an executive department.
(c) All supplemental, minority, or additional views filed
under clause 2(l) of rule XI by one or more members of a
committee shall be included in, and shall be a part of, the
report filed by the committee with respect to a measure or
matter. When time guaranteed by clause 2(l) of rule XI has
expired (or, if sooner, when all separate views have been
received), the committee may arrange to file its report with
the Clerk not later than one hour after the expiration of such
time. This clause and provisions of clause 2(l) of rule XI do
not preclude the immediate filing or printing of a committee
report in the absence of a timely request for the opportunity
to file supplemental, minority, or additional views as provided
in clause 2(l) of rule XI.
Clause 3: Content of reports
3. (a)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), the
report of a committee on a measure or matter shall be printed
in a single volume that--
(A) shall include all supplemental, minority, or
additional views that have been submitted by the time
of the filing of the report; and
(B) shall bear on its cover a recital that any such
supplemental, minority, or additional views (and any
material submitted under paragraph (c)(3)) are included
as part of the report.
(2) A committee may file a supplemental report for the
correction of a technical error in its previous report on a
measure or matter. A supplemental report only correcting errors
in the depiction of record votes under paragraph (b) may be
filed under this subparagraph and shall not be subject to the
requirement in clause 4 or clause 6 concerning the availability
of reports.
(b) With respect to each record vote on a motion to report
a measure or matter of a public nature, and on any amendment
offered to the measure or matter, the total number of votes
cast for and against, and the names of members voting for and
against, shall be included in the committee report. The
preceding sentence does not apply to votes taken in executive
session by the Committee on Ethics.
(c) The report of a committee on a measure that has been
approved by the committee shall include, separately set out and
clearly identified, the following:
(1) Oversight findings and recommendations under
clause 2(b)(1) of rule X.
(2) The statement required by section 308(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, except that an
estimate of new budget authority shall include, when
practicable, a comparison of the total estimated
funding level for the relevant programs to the
appropriate levels under current law.
(3) An estimate and comparison prepared by the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office under
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 if
timely submitted to the committee before the filing of
the report.
(4) A statement of general performance goals and
objectives, including outcome-related goals and
objectives, for which the measure authorizes funding.
(d) Each report of a committee on a public bill or public
joint resolution shall contain the following:
(1)(A) An estimate by the committee of the costs that
would be incurred in carrying out the bill or joint
resolution in the fiscal year in which it is reported
and in each of the five fiscal years following that
fiscal year (or for the authorized duration of any
program authorized by the bill or joint resolution if
less than five years);
(B) a comparison of the estimate of costs described
in subdivision (A) made by the committee with any
estimate of such costs made by a Government agency and
submitted to such committee; and
(C) when practicable, a comparison of the total
estimated funding level for the relevant programs with
the appropriate levels under current law.
(2)(A) In subparagraph (1) the term ``Government
agency'' includes any department, agency,
establishment, wholly owned Government corporation, or
instrumentality of the Federal Government or the
government of the District of Columbia.
(B) Subparagraph (1) does not apply to the Committee
on Appropriations, the Committee on House
Administration, the Committee on Rules, or the
Committee on Ethics, and does not apply when a cost
estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been included in
the report under paragraph (c)(3).
(e)(1) Whenever a committee reports a bill or joint
resolution proposing to repeal or amend a statute or part
thereof, it shall include in its report or in an accompanying
document--
(A) the text of a statute or part thereof that is
proposed to be repealed; and
(B) a comparative print of any part of the bill or
joint resolution proposing to amend the statute and of
the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended,
showing by appropriate typographical devices the
omissions and insertions proposed.
(2) If a committee reports a bill or joint resolution
proposing to repeal or amend a statute or part thereof with a
recommendation that the bill or joint resolution be amended,
the comparative print required by subparagraph (1) shall
reflect the changes in existing law proposed to be made by the
bill or joint resolution as proposed to be amended.
(f)(1) A report of the Committee on Appropriations on a
general appropriation bill shall include--
(A) a concise statement describing the effect of any
provision of the accompanying bill that directly or
indirectly changes the application of existing law; and
(B) a list of all appropriations contained in the
bill for expenditures not currently authorized by law
for the period concerned (excepting classified
intelligence or national security programs, projects,
or activities), along with a statement of the last year
for which such expenditures were authorized, the level
of expenditures authorized for that year, the actual
level of expenditures for that year, and the level of
appropriations in the bill for such expenditures.
(2) Whenever the Committee on Appropriations reports a bill
or joint resolution including matter specified in clause
1(b)(2) or (3) of rule X, it shall include--
(A) in the bill or joint resolution, separate
headings for ``Rescissions'' and ``Transfers of
Unexpended Balances''; and
(B) in the report of the committee, a separate
section listing such rescissions and transfers.
(g) Whenever the Committee on Rules reports a resolution
proposing to repeal or amend a standing rule of the House, it
shall include in its report or in an accompanying document--
(1) the text of any rule or part thereof that is
proposed to be repealed; and
(2) a comparative print of any part of the resolution
proposing to amend the rule and of the rule or part
thereof proposed to be amended, showing by appropriate
typographical devices the omissions and insertions
proposed.
(h)(1) It shall not be in order to consider a bill or joint
resolution reported by the Committee on Ways and Means that
proposes to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 unless--
(A) the report includes a tax complexity analysis
prepared by the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue
Taxation in accordance with section 4022(b) of the
Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act
of 1998; or
(B) the chair of the Committee on Ways and Means
causes such a tax complexity analysis to be printed in
the Congressional Record before consideration of the
bill or joint resolution.
(2)(A) It shall not be in order to consider a bill or joint
resolution reported by the Committee on Ways and Means that
proposes to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 unless--
(i) the report includes a macro-economic impact
analysis:
(ii) the report includes a statement from the Joint
Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation explaining why a
macroeconomic impact analysis is not calculable; or
(iii) the chair of the Committee on Ways and Means
causes a macroeconomic impact analysis to be printed in
the Congressional Record before consideration of the
bill or joint resolution.
(B) In subdivision (A), the term ``macroeconomic impact
analysis'' means--
(i) an estimate prepared by the Joint Committee on
Internal Revenue Taxation of the changes in economic
output, employment, capital stock, and tax revenues
expected to result from enactment of the proposal; and
(ii) a statement from the Joint Committee on Internal
Revenue Taxation identifying the critical assumptions
and the source of data underlying that estimate.
MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
ONE HUNDRED AND TWELFTH CONGRESS
COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
(Ratio: 34-27)
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, Chairman
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, Ranking MemberNSARLING, Texas, Vice
MAXINE WATERS, California Chairman
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York PETER T. KING, New York
LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina RON PAUL, Texas
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
BRAD SHERMAN, California WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts GARY G. MILLER, California
RUBEN HINOJOSA, Texas SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri Virginia
CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey
JOE BACA, California RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina JOHN CAMPBELL, California
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota
AL GREEN, Texas THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri KEVIN McCARTHY, California
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota BILL POSEY, Florida
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado MICHAEL G. FITZPATRICK,
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana Pennsylvania
ANDRE CARSON, Indiana LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
JOHN C. CARNEY, Jr., Delaware SEAN P. DUFFY, Wisconsin
NAN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
JAMES B. RENACCI, Ohio
ROBERT HURT, Virginia
ROBERT J. DOLD, Illinois
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona
MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York
FRANCISCO ``QUICO'' CANSECO, Texas
STEVE STIVERS, Ohio
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee\1\
SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
(Ratio: 20-15)
SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey,
Chairman
MAXINE WATERS, California, Ranking MemberD SCHWEIKERT, Arizona, Vice
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York Chairman
BRAD SHERMAN, California PETER T. KING, New York
RUBEN HINOJOSA, Texas EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin JEB HENSARLING, Texas
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana JOHN CAMPBELL, California
ANDRE CARSON, Indiana THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut KEVIN McCARTHY, California
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
AL GREEN, Texas BILL POSEY, Florida
KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota MICHAEL G. FITZPATRICK,
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officionnsylvania
NAN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
ROBERT HURT, Virginia
ROBERT J. DOLD, Illinois
MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York
STEVE STIVERS, Ohio
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology
(Ratio: 8-6)
RON PAUL, Texas, Chairman
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri, Ranking MemberLTER B. JONES, North Carolina,
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York Vice Chairman
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
AL GREEN, Texas PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
(Ratio: 17-13)
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
Virginia, Chairman
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Ranking Member. RENACCI, Ohio, Vice
LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois Chairman
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
RUBEN HINOJOSA, Texas WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina
CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York JEB HENSARLING, Texas
JOE BACA, California PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia KEVIN McCARTHY, California
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
JOHN CARNEY, Jr., Delaware BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioAN P. DUFFY, Wisconsin
FRANCISCO ``QUICO'' CANSECO, Texas
MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity
(Ratio: 10-8)
JUDY BIGGERT, Chairman
LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois, Ranking Member HURT, Virginia, Vice
MAXINE WATERS, California Chairman
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York GARY G. MILLER, California
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri Virginia
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey
BRAD SHERMAN, California PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioAN P. DUFFY, Wisconsin
ROBERT J. DOLD, Illinois
STEVE STIVERS, Ohio
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
(Ratio: 8-6)
GARY G. MILLER, California,
Chairman
CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York, Ranking MemberT J. DOLD, Illinois, Vice
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin Chairman
ANDRE CARSON, Indiana RON PAUL, Texas
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado JOHN CAMPBELL, California
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
(Ratio: 10-8)
RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas, Chairman
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts, Ranking MemberITZPATRICK,
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts Pennsylvania, Vice Chairman
MAXINE WATERS, California PETER T. KING, New York
JOE BACA, California MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota BILL POSEY, Florida
JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut NAN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
JOHN C. CARNEY, Jr., Delaware JAMES B. RENACCI, Ohio
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioANCISCO ``QUICO'' CANSECO, Texas
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
MEMBERSHIP NOTES
------
1Mr. Fincher was elected to the Committee on May 11, 2011,
filling a vacancy created by the resignation of Mr. Marchant on March
15, 2011. Mr. Marchant had ranked immediately after Ms. Bachmann.
The following members are on leave from the Committee on Financial
Services: Mr. Dreier, ranking immediately before Mr. Bachus; and Mr.
Sessions, ranking immediately after Dr. Paul.
COMMITTEE STAFF
Majority Staff
Larry C. Lavender
Chief of Staff
Warren Tryon
Deputy Chief of Staff
James H. Clinger
Chief Counsel
Jeffrey W. Emerson
Deputy Chief of Staff--
Communications
Natalie N. McGarry
Parliamentarian / Senior Counsel
Terisa L. Allison, Editor
Steve F. Arauz, Assistant Systems
Administrator
Nicole C. Austin, Professional
Staff
Norman R. Bishop, Staff Assistant
Susan Mitchell Blavin, Counsel
Michael Borden, Senior Counsel
Chara R. Bray, Press Assistant
E. Chase Burgess, Staff Assistant
Anthony J. Cimino, Senior
Professional Staff
Joseph R. Clark, Counsel
John W. Cole, Counsel
Andrew Duke, Professional Staff
Kevin R. Edgar, Senior Counsel
Mark D. Epley, Senior Counsel
Paul-Martin Foss, Professional
Staff
Emily J. Frumberg, Staff Assistant
Angela S. Gambo, Administrative
Assistant
Marisol Garibay, Communications
Director
Jason M. Goggins, Counsel
Lesli Gooch, Professional Staff
Margaret E. Henson, Clerk
Tallman Johnson, Senior
Professional Staff
Clinton Columbus Jones III,
General Counsel
Rosemary E. Keech, Executive Staff
Assistant
Thomas L. Krebs, Senior Counsel
Kenneth G. Leonczyk, Jr., Counsel
W. Walton Liles, Counsel
Jonathan E. Madison, Staff
Assistant
Samuel C. Mahler, Staff Assistant
Kylin B. McCardle, Professional
Staff
Francisco A. Medina, Senior
Counsel
Joe Pinder, Senior Professional
Staff
Aaron A. Ranck, Senior
Professional Staff
James Kimble V. Ratliff III,
Professional Staff
Clifford Roberti, Professional
Staff
Gisele G. Roget, Senior Analyst
Chris Russell, Professional Staff
Edward G. Skala, Senior
Professional Staff
Caleb J. Smith, Director of New
Media
Aaron T. Sporck, Professional
Staff
Michael Staley, Policy Advisor
Alexander H. Teel, Professional
Staff
Kim Trimble, Systems Administrator
Anna Bartlett Wright, Staff
Assistant
Minority Staff
Jeanne M. Roslanowick
Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Michael T. Beresik
Deputy Staff Director
Meredith C. Connelly, Senior
Professional Staff Member
Kristofor S. Erickson, Senior
Professional Staff Member
Alfred J. Forman, Jr., Systems
Administrator
Bruno Freitas, Professional Staff
Member
Maria E. Giesta, Professional
Staff Member
Harry D. Gural, Communications
Director
Erika Jeffers, Senior Counsel
Kellie Larkin, General Counsel and
Legislative Director
Gail W. Laster, Deputy Chief
Counsel
Patricia A. Lord, Senior
Professional Staff Member
Marcos F. Manosalvas, Staff
Associate
Kathryn J. Marks, Senior Counsel
Dominique M. McCoy, Senior Counsel
Daniel P. McGlinchey, Senior
Professional Staff Member
Eric S. Orner, Deputy
Communications Director
Kirk Schwarzbach, Professional
Staff Member
David A. Smith, Chief Economist
Lawranne Stewart, Deputy Chief
Counsel
Adrianne G. Threatt, Senior
Counsel
LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES
From June 1, 2011 through November 30, 2011 of the first
session of the 112th Congress, 119 bills were referred to the
Committee on Financial Services. The full Committee reported to
the House or was discharged from the further consideration of
12 measures. During this period, the Committee did not consider
any conference reports. One measure regarding matters within
the Committee's jurisdiction was enacted into law.
The following is a summary of the legislative and oversight
activities of the Committee on Financial Services from January
5, 2011 to November 30, 2011 of the 112th Congress, including a
summary of the activities taken by the Committee during this
period to implement its Oversight Plan for the 112th Congress.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
(Ratio: 34-27)
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, Chairman
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, Ranking MemberNSARLING, Texas, Vice
MAXINE WATERS, California Chairman
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York PETER T. KING, New York
LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina RON PAUL, Texas
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
BRAD SHERMAN, California WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts GARY G. MILLER, California
RUBEN HINOJOSA, Texas SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri Virginia
CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey
JOE BACA, California RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina JOHN CAMPBELL, California
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota
AL GREEN, Texas THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri KEVIN McCARTHY, California
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota BILL POSEY, Florida
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado MICHAEL G. FITZPATRICK,
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana Pennsylvania
ANDRE CARSON, Indiana LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
JOHN C. CARNEY, Jr., Delaware SEAN P. DUFFY, Wisconsin
NAN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
JAMES B. RENACCI, Ohio
ROBERT HURT, Virginia
ROBERT J. DOLD, Illinois
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona
MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York
FRANCISCO ``QUICO'' CANSECO, Texas
STEVE STIVERS, Ohio
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER,
Tennessee1
COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES
Full Committee Legislative Activities
CHURCH PLAN INVESTMENT CLARIFICATION ACT
(H.R. 33)
Summary
H.R. 33, the Church Plan Investment Clarification Act,
would make a technical correction to Public Law 108-359, which
prevents church pension plans from investing in collective
trusts. The bill would allow church pension plans to invest in
collective trusts by broadening an exemption in the current
law. In 2003, Congress attempted to achieve this result, but
omitted a necessary exemption from the Securities Act of 1933
to provide parallel treatment for church plans with exemptions
in the Investment Company Act of 1940 and the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. Without this correction, collective
trusts will not accept investments from church pension plans.
Legislative History
H.R. 33 was introduced by Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert on
January 5, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has no cosponsors.
On March 10, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission's
Operations, Activities, Challenges and FY 2012 Budget
Request.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Robert Cook, Director, Division of
Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC);
Ms. Meredith Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance,
SEC; Mr. Robert Khuzami, Director, Division of Enforcement,
SEC; Ms. Eileen Rominger, Director, Division of Investment
Management, SEC; and Mr. Carlo di Florio, Director, Office of
Compliance Inspections and Examinations, SEC. During the
hearing, Chairman Biggert asked Ms. Meredith Cross, the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Director of Corporation
Finance, to comment on the need for legislation to modify the
treatment of church pension plan investments in collective
trusts.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to
the full Committee by a voice vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on July 1,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-131).
On July 18, 2011, the House agreed to a motion to suspend
the rules and pass H.R. 33, as amended, by a record vote of 310
yeas and 1 nay.
FHA REFINANCE PROGRAM TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 830)
Summary
H.R. 830, the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act, would
rescind all unobligated balances made available for the program
by Title I of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (12
U.S.C. 5230) that have been allocated for use under the FHA
Refinance Program (pursuant to Mortgagee Letter 2010-23 of the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development). The bill would
also terminate the program and void the Mortgagee Letter
pursuant to which it was implemented, with concessions made for
current participants in the program.
Legislative History
On February 28, 2011, H.R. 830 was introduced by
Representative Robert Dold and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a legislative hearing on H.R.
830 and received testimony from the following witnesses: The
Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector General for the
Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The Honorable David
Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and Commissioner of
the Federal Housing Administration; The Honorable Mercedes
Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community Planning and
Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);
Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); and
Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in Housing Policy, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress.
On March 3, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 33 yeas and 22 nays. The Committee Report was
filed on March 7, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-25).
On March 9, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 150, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 830 under a structured rule, by a
record vote of 240 yeas and 180 nays. On March 10, 2011, the
House considered H.R. 830 and passed the bill, with amendments,
by a record vote of 256 yeas and 171 nays.
EMERGENCY MORTGAGE RELIEF PROGRAM TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 836)
Summary
H.R. 836, the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program Termination
Act, would rescind all unobligated balances made available for
the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program under section 1496(a) of
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(P.L. 111-203), which was signed into law on July 21, 2010, and
terminate the program. The bill also calls for a study by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to identify
best practices for how existing mortgage assistance programs
can be applied to veterans, active duty military personnel, and
their relatives.
Legislative History
On February 28, 2011, H.R. 836 was introduced by
Representative Jeb Hensarling and was referred to the Committee
on Financial Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a legislative hearing on H.R.
830 and received testimony from the following witnesses: The
Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector General for the
Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The Honorable David
Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and Commissioner of
the Federal Housing Administration; The Honorable Mercedes
Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community Planning and
Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);
Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); and
Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in Housing Policy, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress.
On March 3, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 33 yeas and 22 nays. The Committee Report was
filed on March 7, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-26).
On March 9, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 151, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 836 under a structured rule, by
voice vote. On March 11, 2011, the House considered H.R. 836
and passed the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 242
yeas and 177 nays.
HAMP TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 839)
Summary
H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act, would terminate the
authority of the Treasury Department to provide any new
assistance to homeowners under the Home Affordable Modification
Program (HAMP) authorized under Title I of the Emergency
Economic Stabilization Act (12 U.S.C. 5230), while preserving
any assistance already provided to HAMP participants on a
permanent or trial basis. The bill also provides for a study by
the Treasury Department to identify best practices for how
existing mortgage assistance programs can be applied to
veterans, active duty military personnel, and their relatives.
Legislative History
On February 28, 2011, H.R. 839 was introduced by
Representative Patrick McHenry and was referred to the
Committee on Financial Services. The bill has eight cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a legislative hearing on H.R.
830 and received testimony from the following witnesses: The
Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector General for the
Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The Honorable David
Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and Commissioner of
the Federal Housing Administration; The Honorable Mercedes
Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community Planning and
Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);
Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); and
Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in Housing Policy, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress.
On March 9, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 32 yeas and 23 nays. The Committee Report (Part
1) was filed on March 11, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-31) and Part 2 of
the Committee Report was filed on March 14, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-
31 Part 2).
On March 16, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 170, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 839 under a structured rule, by a
record vote of 241 yeas and 180 nays. On March 29, 2011, the
House considered H.R. 839 and passed the bill, with amendments,
by a record vote of 252 yeas and 170 nays, with 1 member voting
present.
NSP TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 861)
Summary
H.R. 861, the NSP Termination Act, would rescind all
unobligated balances made available for the Neighborhood
Stabilization Program (NSP) authorized by the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203;
124 Stat. 2209; 42 U.S.C. 5301 note) and terminate the program.
Legislative History
On March 1, 2011, H.R. 861 was introduced by Representative
Gary Miller and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has four cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a legislative hearing on H.R.
830 and received testimony from the following witnesses: The
Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector General for the
Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The Honorable David
Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and Commissioner of
the Federal Housing Administration; The Honorable Mercedes
Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community Planning and
Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);
Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); and
Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in Housing Policy, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress.
On March 3, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 31 yeas and 24 nays. The Committee Report (Part
1) was filed on March 11, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-32), and Part 2 of
the Committee Report was filed on March 14, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-
32 Part 2).
On March 16, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 170, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 861 under a structured rule, by a
record vote of 241 yeas and 180 nays. On March 16, 2011, the
House considered H.R. 861 and passed the bill, with amendments,
by a record vote of 242 yeas and 182 nays.
THE UNITED STATES COVERED BONDS ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 940)
Summary
H.R. 940, the United States Covered Bonds Act of 2011,
would establish the statutory framework necessary to start a
covered bonds market in the United States. The bill would
provide legal certainty for covered bonds in three ways:
specifying the categories of eligible issuers and eligible
cover-pool assets; mandating an asset coverage test for cover
pools and audits by an independent asset monitor; and
clarifying applicable securities and tax matters. H.R. 940
creates a separate resolution process for covered bond
programs. The bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury, in
consultation with applicable prudential regulators, to serve as
the primary regulator of the covered bonds market.
Legislative History
H.R. 940 was introduced by Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott Garrett on
March 8, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services and the Committee on Ways and Means. The bill has one
cosponsor.
On March 11, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R. 940
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Create a Covered Bond
Market in the United States.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Scott Stengel,
Partner, King & Spalding LLP, on behalf of the U.S. Covered
Bond Council; Mr. Bert Ely, Ely & Company, Inc.; Mr. Tim Skeet,
Amias Berman & Co., on behalf of the International Capital
Market Association; Mr. Ralph Daloisio, Managing Director,
Natixis, on behalf of the American Securitization Forum; and
Mr. Stephen G. Andrews, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Bank of Alameda.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to
the full Committee by voice vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 940, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by a record vote of 44 yeas, 7 nays and 3 present.
BURDENSOME DATA COLLECTION RELIEF ACT
(H.R. 1062)
Summary
H.R. 1062, the Burdensome Data Collection Relief Act,
repeals Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203), which requires
all publicly traded companies to calculate and disclose for
each filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission the
median annual total compensation of all employees of the
company excluding the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), disclose
the annual total compensation of the CEO, and calculate and
disclose a ratio comparing those two numbers.
Legislative History
H.R. 1062 was introduced by Representative Nan Hayworth on
March 14, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has seven cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on a draft
version of H.R. 1062 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and Market
Certainty.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A. Bertsch, President and CEO,
Society of Corporate Secretaries & Governance Professionals;
Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director, American Securitization
Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief Operating Officer, The
Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild, Senior Advisor, Grant
Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director, Chatham Financial on
behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users; and Mr.
Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 20 yeas and 12 nays.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 33 yeas and 21 nays. The Committee Report was
filed on July 12, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-142).
SMALL COMPANY CAPITAL FORMATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1070)
Summary
H.R. 1070, the Small Company Capital Formation Act, raises
the offering threshold for companies exempted from registration
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under
Regulation A from $5 million--the threshold set in the early
1990s--to $50 million. Raising the offering threshold helps
small companies gain access to capital markets without the
costs and delays associated with the full-scale securities
registration process. H.R. 1070 provides the SEC with the
authority to increase the threshold and requires the SEC to re-
examine the threshold every two years and report to Congress on
its decisions regarding adjustment of the threshold.
Legislative History
H.R. 1070 was introduced by Representative David Schweikert
on March 14, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has seventeen cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on a draft
version of H.R. 1070 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and Market
Certainty.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A. Bertsch, President and CEO,
Society of Corporate Secretaries & Governance Professionals;
Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director, American Securitization
Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief Operating Officer, The
Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild, Senior Advisor, Grant
Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director, Chatham Financial on
behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users; and Mr.
Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to
the full Committee by voice vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on
September 14, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-206).
On November 2, 2011, the House agreed to a motion to
suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1070, as amended, by a record
vote of 421 yeas and 1 nay.
SMALL BUSINESS CAPITAL ACCESS AND JOB PRESERVATION ACT
(H.R. 1082)
Summary
H.R. 1082, the Small Business Capital Access and Job
Preservation Act, exempts advisers to private equity funds that
have not borrowed and do not have outstanding a principal
amount in excess of twice their funded capital commitments from
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registration
requirements as mandated by Title IV of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act)
(Public Law 111-203).
Legislative History
H.R. 1082 was introduced by Representative Robert Hurt on
March 15, 2011 and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has nine cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R. 1082
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Promote Job Creation,
Capital Formation, and Market Certainty.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A.
Bertsch, President and CEO, Society of Corporate Secretaries &
Governance Professionals; Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director,
American Securitization Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief
Operating Officer, The Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild,
Senior Advisor, Grant Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director,
Chatham Financial on behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives
End-Users; and Mr. Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special
Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 19 yeas and 13 nays.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on July 12,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-143).
THE RESPONSIBLE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS ACT
(H.R. 1121)
Summary
H.R. 1121, the Responsible Consumer Financial Protection
Regulations Act of 2011, would amend Section 1011 of the Dodd-
Frank Act Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (P.L.
111-203), by replacing the Director of the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) with a five-person Commission. The
CFPB Commission would be empowered to prescribe regulations and
issue orders to implement laws within the CFPB's jurisdiction.
One of the five seats on the CFPB Commission would be filled by
the Vice Chairman for Supervision of the Federal Reserve
System. Each of the four remaining members of the Commission
would be appointed by the President; no more than two of those
four Commissioners may be from the same political party.
Although the Chair of the Commission would fulfill the
executive and administrative functions of the CFPB, the Chair's
discretion would be bounded by policies set by the whole
Commission.
Legislative History
On March 16, 2011, H.R. 1121 was introduced by Chairman
Spencer Bachus and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 35 cosponsors.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a legislative hearing on
H.R. 1121 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Improve the
Structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Ms. Leslie R. Andersen, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Bank of Bennington on behalf of the American Bankers
Association; Ms. Lynette W. Smith, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Washington Gas Light FCU on behalf of the
National Association of Federal Credit Unions; Mr. Jess Sharp,
Executive Director, Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Hilary Shelton, Director, NAACP
Washington Bureau and Senior VP for Advocacy and Policy, NAACP;
Mr. Noah H. Wilcox, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Grand Rapids State Bank on behalf of the Independent Community
Bankers of America; Mr. Rod Staatz, President and Chief
Executive Officer, SECU of Maryland on behalf of the Credit
Union National Association; Mr. Richard Hunt, President,
Consumer Bankers Association; and Prof. Adam J. Levitin,
Georgetown University Law Center.
On May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit met in open session and ordered the bill
favorably reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 13
yeas and 7 nays.
On May 12, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a record vote of 33 yeas and 24 nays. The Committee Report
(Part 1) was filed on June 16, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-107), and
Part 2 of the Committee Report was filed on July 19, 2011 (H.
Rept. 112-107, Part 2).
On July 21, 2011, the House considered the Committee Print
of H.R. 1315, which included the text of H.R. 1121 and H.R.
1667, and passed the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of
241 yeas and 173 nays.
EQUITY IN GOVERNMENT COMPENSATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1221)
Summary
H.R. 1221 would suspend the current compensation packages
for all of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's senior executives and
establish a compensation system for the GSEs' executive
officers consistent with the compensation and benefits provided
under the Financial Institution Reform, Recovery, and
Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA). The bill requires the GSEs'
regulator--the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)--to adjust
the salaries of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's nonsupervisory
employees to conform to the General Schedule, a statutory pay
system that pays employees based on surveys of non-federal pay
for similar work. And H.R. 1221 expresses the sense of the
Congress that the 2010 and 2011 pay packages for Fannie Mae's
and Freddie Mac's senior executives were excessive and that the
money should be returned to the Treasury to reduce the national
debt.
Legislative History
H.R. 1221 was introduced by Chairman Spencer Bachus on
March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
The bill has six cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R. 1221
entitled ``Legislative Hearing on Immediate Steps to Protect
Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting Director of the Federal
Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), The Hon. John H. Dalton,
President of the Housing Policy Council, Financial Services
Roundtable; Mr. Christopher Papagianis, Managing Director,
Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto, Resident Fellow, American
Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob Nielsen, Chairman of the Board,
National Association of Home Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps,
President, National Association of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 27 yeas and
6 nays.
On November 15, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to
the House by a record vote of 52 yeas and 4 nays.
FLOOD INSURANCE REFORM ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1309)
Summary
H.R. 1309, the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011, would
reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) through
September 30, 2016, and amend the National Flood Insurance Act
to ensure the immediate and near-term fiscal and administrative
health of the NFIP. The bill would also ensure the NFIP's
continued viability by encouraging broader participation in the
program, increasing financial accountability, eliminating
unnecessary rate subsidies, and updating the program to meet
the needs of the 21st century. The key provisions of H.R. 1309
include: (1) a five-year reauthorization of the NFIP; (2) a
three-year delay in the mandatory purchase requirement for
certain properties in newly designated Special Flood Hazard
Areas (SFHAs); (3) a phase-in of full-risk, actuarial rates for
areas newly designated as Special Flood Hazard; (4) a
reinstatement of the Technical Mapping Advisory Council; and
(5) an emphasis on greater private sector participation in
providing flood insurance coverage.
Legislative History
On April 1, 2011, H.R. 1309 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity Chairman Judy
Biggert and referred to the Committee on Financial Services.
The bill has nineteen cosponsors.
On March 11, 2011 and April 1, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity held legislative
hearings entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Reform the
National Flood Insurance Program,'' on a discussion draft of
H.R. 1309. On March 11, 2011, the Subcommittee received written
testimony from Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency
Management Agency and the following witnesses testified: Orice
Williams Brown, Managing Director, Government Accountability
Office (GAO); Sally McConkey, Vice Chair, Association of State
Flood Plain Managers and Manager, Coordinated Hazard Assessment
and Mapping Program, Illinois State Water Survey; Sandra G.
Parrillo, Chair, National Association of Mutual Insurance
Companies and President and CEO of Providence Mutual; Spencer
Houldin, Chair, Government Affairs Committee, Independent
Insurance Agents and Brokers of America and President, Ericson
Insurance Services; Steve Ellis, Vice President, Taxpayers for
Common Sense, on behalf of the SmarterSafer Coalition; Donna
Jallick, Vice President, Harleysville Insurance; Barry
Rutenberg, First Vice Chairman, National Association of Home
Builders; Frank Nutter, President, Reinsurance Association of
America; Terry Sullivan, Sullivan Realty, Inc., on behalf of
The National Association of Realtors; and Maurice Veissi,
President-Elect, National Association of Realtors, and
Principal, Veissi & Associates. On April, 1, 2011, The
Honorable Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), was the only witness.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity met in open session and ordered the
bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full Committee by
voice vote.
On May 12, 2011, the Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a recorded vote of 54 yeas and 0 nays.
On July 12, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1309 and passed
the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 406 yeas and 22
nays.
THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION SAFETY AND SOUNDNESS IMPROVEMENT ACT
OF 2011
(H.R. 1315)
Summary
H.R. 1315, the Consumer Financial Protection Safety and
Soundness Improvement Act of 2011, would amend Section 1023 of
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(Dodd-Frank Act) (P.L. 111-203) to streamline the Financial
Stability Oversight Council's (FSOC's) review and oversight of
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rules and
regulations that may undermine the safety and soundness of U.S.
financial institutions. The bill would make three major
changes: (1) it would lower the threshold required to set aside
regulations from a two-thirds vote of the FSOC's voting
membership to a simple majority, excluding the CFPB Director;
(2) it would clarify that the FSOC must set aside any CFPB
regulation that is inconsistent with the safe and sound
operations of U.S. financial institutions; and (3) it would
eliminate the 45-day time limit for the FSOC to review and vote
on regulations.
Legislative History
On April 1, 2011, H.R. 1315 was introduced by
Representative Sean Duffy and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 4 cosponsors.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a legislative hearing on
H.R. 1315 entitled Legislative Proposals to Improve the
Structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Ms. Leslie R. Andersen, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Bank of Bennington on behalf of the American Bankers
Association; Ms. Lynette W. Smith, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Washington Gas Light FCU on behalf of the
National Association of Federal Credit Unions; Mr. Jess Sharp,
Executive Director, Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Hilary Shelton, Director, NAACP
Washington Bureau and Senior VP for Advocacy and Policy, NAACP;
Mr. Noah H. Wilcox, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Grand Rapids State Bank on behalf of the Independent Community
Bankers of America; Mr. Rod Staatz, President and Chief
Executive Officer, SECU of Maryland on behalf of the Credit
Union National Association; Mr. Richard Hunt, President,
Consumer Bankers Association; and Prof. Adam J. Levitin,
Georgetown University Law Center.
On May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit met in open session and ordered the bill,
as amended, favorably reported to the full Committee by a
record vote of 13 yeas and 9 nays.
On May 12, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a record vote of 35 yeas and 22 nays. The Committee Report
(Part 1) was filed on May 25, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-89), and Part
2 of the Committee Report was filed on July 19, 2011 (H. Rept.
112-89, Part 2).
On July 21, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1315 and passed
the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 241 yeas and 173
nays.
ASSET-BACKED MARKET STABILIZATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1539)
Summary
H.R. 1539, the Asset-Backed Market Stabilization Act of
2011, would repeal Section 939G of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203), thereby
reinstating SEC Rule 436(g). Under the Securities Act, the
written consent of an ``expert''--which includes any person who
prepared or certified a portion of a statement or prospectus
filed with the SEC--must be included in the filing, and the
consenting expert is subject to liability for misstatements in
the prepared or certified portion of the registration statement
or prospectus. Rule 436(g) exempted ``nationally recognized
statistical rating organizations'' (NRSROs) from being
considered ``experts'' if their ratings were included in a
registration statement or prospectus. Rule 436(g)'s repeal in
the Dodd-Frank Act prompted NRSROs to refuse to consent to the
inclusion of their ratings in statements and prospectuses,
causing dislocation in the asset-backed securities market.
Legislative History
H.R. 1539 was introduced by Representative Steve Stivers on
April 14, 2011 and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has three cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on
a draft version of H.R. 1539 entitled ``Legislative Proposals
to Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and Market
Certainty.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A. Bertsch, President and CEO,
Society of Corporate Secretaries & Governance Professionals;
Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director, American Securitization
Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief Operating Officer, The
Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild, Senior Advisor, Grant
Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director, Chatham Financial on
behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users; and Mr.
Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 18 yeas and 14 nays.
On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by 31 yeas
and 19 nays. The Committee Report was filed on August 12, 2011
(H. Rept. 112-196).
TO FACILITATE IMPLEMENTATION OF TITLE VII OF THE DODD-FRANK WALL STREET
REFORM AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, PROMOTE REGULATORY COORDINATION,
AND AVOID MARKET DISRUPTION
(H.R. 1573)
Summary
H.R. 1573, To facilitate implementation of Title VII of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,
promote regulatory coordination, and avoid market disruption,
would extend the statutory deadline for certain provisions of
Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act from July 2011 to September 30,
2012. The legislation provides additional time for the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) to write and vet the rules to
implement the derivatives title, conduct cost-benefit analysis,
consider the interdependence and cumulative impact of the
rules, and determine the appropriate sequencing of effective
dates. The legislation realigns the United States with the G20
agreement to move to reporting and central clearing by December
2012, reducing the likelihood of divergence in international
regulatory regimes and mitigating negative consequences to the
competitive position of U.S. markets and market participants.
H.R. 1573 maintains the current timeframe for the SEC and CFTC
to issue final rules defining key terms such as swap, swap
dealer, security-based swap dealer, major swap participant,
major security-based swap participant and eligible contract
participant, and for requiring record retention and regulatory
reporting for swaps. The bill provides for interim authority to
designate swap data repositories for the purposes of receiving
the data. H.R. 1573 requires the SEC and CFTC to hold public
hearings to take testimony and comment on proposed rules before
they are made final, and factor those comments into cost-
benefit analysis and the timing of effective dates. Finally,
H.R. 1573 provides the SEC and CFTC authority to exempt certain
persons from registration and/or other regulatory requirements
if they are subject to comparable supervision by another
regulatory authority, if there are information-sharing
arrangements in effect between the Commissions and that
regulatory authority, and if it is in the public interest.
Legislative History
On April 15, 2011, H.R. 1573 was introduced by
Representatives Lucas, Bachus, Conaway and Garrett, and was
referred to the House Financial Services and House Agriculture
Committees. The bill has twenty-two cosponsors.
On February 15, 2011, the Committee held an oversight
hearing on the implementation of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank
Act entitled, ``Assessing the Regulatory, Economic and Market
Implications of the Dodd-Frank Derivatives Title.'' Witnesses
included: The Honorable Mary Schapiro, Chairman, U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission; The Honorable Gary Gensler,
Chairman, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission; The
Honorable Daniel K. Tarullo, Member, Federal Reserve Board of
Governors; Mr. Craig Reiners, Director of Commodity Risk
Management, MillerCoors, on behalf of the Coalition for
Derivatives End-Users; Mr. Donald F. Donahue, Chairman & Chief
Executive Officer, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation
(DTCC); Mr. Terry Duffy, Executive Chairman, CME Group; Mr. Don
Thompson, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel,
JPMorgan Chase, on behalf of the Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association (SIFMA); Mr. Jamie Cawley, Chief
Executive Officer, Javelin, on behalf of the Swaps and
Derivatives Market Association (SDMA); and Mr. Christopher
Giancarlo, Executive Vice President, Corporate Development, GFI
Group Inc.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on
related derivatives legislation where Mr. Luke Zubrod,
Director, Chatham Financial, testified on behalf of the
Coalition for Derivatives End-Users on the need to extend title
VII's statutory deadlines for rulemaking to allow regulators
sufficient time to incorporate recommendations, craft
thoughtful rules, and conduct adequate cost-benefit analyses.
On May 24, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a record vote of 30 yeas and 24 nays.
THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION TRANSFER CLARIFICATION ACT
(H.R. 1667)
Summary
H.R. 1667, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
Transfer Clarification Act, would amend Section 1062 of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(Dodd-Frank Act) (P.L. 111-203). The Dodd-Frank Act shifts
consumer protection functions to the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) from the Federal Reserve, the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA), the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). H.R. 1667
would delay any further transfer of powers until the later of
the following: (1) July 21, 2011; or (2) the date on which the
Director of the CFPB is confirmed by the Senate.
Legislative History
On May 2, 2011, H.R. 1667 was introduced by Subcommittee on
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Chairman Shelley
Moore Capito and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 14 cosponsors.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a legislative hearing on
H.R. 1667 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Improve the
Structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Ms. Leslie R. Andersen, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Bank of Bennington on behalf of the American Bankers
Association; Ms. Lynette W. Smith, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Washington Gas Light FCU on behalf of the
National Association of Federal Credit Unions; Mr. Jess Sharp,
Executive Director, Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Hilary Shelton, Director, NAACP
Washington Bureau and Senior VP for Advocacy and Policy, NAACP;
Mr. Noah H. Wilcox, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Grand Rapids State Bank on behalf of the Independent Community
Bankers of America; Mr. Rod Staatz, President and Chief
Executive Officer, SECU of Maryland on behalf of the Credit
Union National Association; Mr. Richard Hunt, President,
Consumer Bankers Association; and Prof. Adam J. Levitin,
Georgetown University Law Center.
On May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit met in open session and ordered the bill
favorably reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 13
yeas and 8 nays.
On May 12, 2011, the full Committee held a markup and
ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a record
vote of 32 yeas and 26 nays.
The Committee Report, Part 1, was filed on May 27, 2011 (H.
Rept. 112-93), and Part 2 was filed on July 19, 2011 (H. Rept.
112-93, Part 2).
On July 14, 2011, the Rules Committee issued a Committee
Print of H.R. 1315, which included the text of H.R. 1121 and
H.R. 1667.
On July 21, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1315 and passed
the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 241 yeas and 173
nays.
CJ'S HOME PROTECTION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1751)
Summary
H.R. 1751, CJ's Home Protection Act of 2011, would amend
the Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act
of 1974 by requiring the installation of National Oceanic &
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather radios in all
manufactured homes made or sold in the United States. The
installation standard for these weather radios--which would
broadcast severe weather warnings and civil emergency messages
(including tornado and flood warnings), AMBER alerts for child
abductions, and chemical spill notifications--would be
established by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) upon recommendation of the Manufactured Housing Consensus
Committee, an advisory committee which was created by the 1974
Act.
Legislative History
On May 5, 2011, H.R. 1751 was introduced by Chairman
Spencer Bachus and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has four cosponsors.
On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by voice
vote. The Committee Report was filed on August 1, 2011 (H.
Rept. 112-191).
TO AMEND THE SECURITIES LAWS TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN THRESHOLDS FOR
SHAREHOLDER REGISTRATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
(H.R. 1965)
Summary
H.R. 1965 raises the threshold for mandatory registration
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act)
from 500 shareholders to 2,000 shareholders for banks and bank
holding companies. The bill would also modify the threshold for
deregistration under Sections 12(g) and 15(d) of the Exchange
Act for a bank or a bank holding company from 300 to 1,200
shareholders.
Legislative History
On May 24, 2011, H.R. 1965 was introduced by Representative
James Himes and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 18 cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R.
1965 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC; Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief
Executive Officer, SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams,
Chairman and President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry
Organization; Mr. A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas
Securities Department on behalf of the North American
Securities Administrators; and Ms. Dana Mauriello, President,
ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote.
On November 2, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1965 under
suspension of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by a
record vote of 420 yeas and 2 nays.
TO INSTRUCT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION TO STUDY THE IMPACT OF INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION
FAILURES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
(H.R. 2056)
Summary
H.R. 2056, a bill to instruct the Inspector General of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to study the
impact of insured depository institution failures, would
require the FDIC's Inspector General to study issues raised by
bank failures in states that have had more than ten such
failures since 2008. The study would cover the following
subjects: (1) the use and effect of shared loss agreements; (2)
the significance of paper losses; (3) the success of FDIC field
examiners in implementing FDIC guidelines regarding workouts of
commercial real estate; (4) the application and impact of
consent orders and cease and desist orders; (5) the impact of
FDIC policies on raising capital; and (6) the FDIC's
involvement in private equity investment. The bill would also
instruct the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study:
(1) the causes of bank failures in states with 10 or more
failures since 2008; (2) the procyclical impact of fair value
accounting standards; (3) the causes and potential solutions
for the cycle of loan write downs, raising capital, and
failures; and (4) the impact of bank failures upon the
community.
Legislative History
On May 31, 2011, H.R. 2056 was introduced by Representative
Lynn Westmoreland and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 13 cosponsors.
On July 8, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a hearing on H.R. 2056 entitled
``Legislative Proposals Regarding Bank Examination Practices.''
The Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: Mr. James H. McKillop, President and CEO,
Independent Bankers Bank of Florida on behalf of the
Independent Community Bankers of America; Mr. Michael Whalen,
President and CEO, Heart of America Group; and Professor Simon
Johnson, The Ronald A. Kurtz, Professor of Entrepreneurship at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sloan School of
Management; Mr. George French, Deputy Director, Division of
Risk Management Supervision of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation; and Ms. Jennifer Kelly, Senior Deputy Comptroller
for Mid-Size/Community Bank Supervision of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency.
On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on July 26,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-182).
On July 28, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2056 under
suspension of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by
voice vote.
SECURING AMERICAN JOBS THROUGH EXPORTS ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2072)
Summary
H.R. 2072, the Securing American Jobs Through Exports Act
of 2011, would amend the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 by
extending the authority of the Export-Import Bank of the United
States (the Bank) for four years, from 2011 to 2015. Key
provisions of H.R. 2072 include: (1) a four-year
reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank charter; (2) a
gradual increase in the Bank's financing authority; (3) a
requirement that the Bank establish clear and comprehensive
guidelines regarding the type and amount of content in a good
or service eligible for Bank financing; (4) authorization for
the Bank to use up to $20 million of its surplus, subject to
appropriations, to upgrade its information technology system;
and (5) a number of new transparency and accountability
requirements for the Bank.
Legislative History
H.R. 2072 was introduced by Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade Chairman Gary Miller on June 1, 2011,
and referred to the Committee on Financial Services. The bill
has nine cosponsors.
On May 24, 2011, the Subcommittee on International Monetary
Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``Legislative
Proposals on Securing American Jobs Through Exports: Export-
Import Bank Reauthorization.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Fred Hochberg,
Chairman and President, the Export-Import Bank of the United
States; Ms. Donna K. Alexander, Chief Executive Officer,
Bankers' Association for Finance and Trade--International
Financial Services Association; Ms. Thea Lee, Deputy Chief of
Staff, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations; Mr. Osvaldo Luis Gratacos, Inspector General for
the Export-Import Bank; Mr. John Hardy, President, Coalition
for Employment Through Exports; and Dr. Matthew Slaughter,
Associate Dean for the MBA Program, Signals Company Professor
of Management, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College.
On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on International Monetary
Policy and Trade met in open session and ordered the bill, as
amended, favorably reported to the full Committee by a voice
vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by a voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on
September 8, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-201).
PRIVATE COMPANY FLEXIBILITY AND GROWTH ACT
(H.R. 2167)
Summary
H.R. 2167, the Private Company Flexibility and Growth Act,
would raise the threshold for mandatory registration under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) from 500
shareholders to 1,000 shareholders for all companies;
shareholders who received securities under employee
compensation plans would not count towards the threshold.
Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act requires issuers to
register equity securities with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) if those securities are held by 500 or more
holders of record and the company has total assets of more than
$10 million. After a company registers under 12(g), it must
comply with the Exchange Act's reporting requirements, which
include filing annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports
on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and proxy statements
on Schedule 14A. The shareholder threshold has not been
adjusted since it was adopted in 1964 and has become an
impediment to capital formation for small startup companies.
These companies often remain private to maintain greater
flexibility and control, and to avoid the increased costs
associated with becoming a public company. To attract employees
and conserve capital for research and development, startup
companies often award their employees stock options in place of
higher salaries. If the company succeeds and those options
vest, the holders of those options become equity holders, and
they are counted against the registration threshold. Because
private companies are taking longer to go public than they have
in the past, employees' stock options are increasingly vesting
before the companies go public. Small private companies may
thus find themselves subject to the same reporting requirements
as listed companies.
Legislative History
On June 14, 2011, H.R. 2167 was introduced by
Representative David Schweikert and referred to the Committee
on Financial Services. The bill has 27 cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R.
2167 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC; Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief
Executive Officer, SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams,
Chairman and President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry
Organization; Mr. A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas
Securities Department on behalf of the North American
Securities Administrators; and Ms. Dana Mauriello, President,
ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered H.R. 2167, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 2167, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote.
SEC REGULATORY ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
(H.R. 2308)
Summary
H.R. 2308, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act, would
direct the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to follow
President Obama's Executive Order No. 13563, which requires
that government agencies conduct cost-benefit analyses to
ensure that the benefits of any rulemaking outweigh the costs.
Because the SEC is an independent agency, it is not required to
follow the Executive Order. The bill would require the SEC to
clearly identify the problem that a proposed regulation is
intended to address and to assess the significance of that
problem before it issues a rule. The legislation would require
the SEC's Chief Economist to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of
potential rules to ensure that the burden on economic growth
and job creation that would result from proposed regulations
does not outweigh the benefits of those regulations. H.R. 2308
would also require the SEC to periodically review regulations
and orders in effect before the date of enactment to determine
whether these regulations are outdated, ineffective,
insufficient, or unduly burdensome. The bill would require the
SEC to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal these regulations
and orders in accordance with its review.
Legislative History
On June 23, 2011, H.R. 2308 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
Chairman Scott Garrett and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 17 cosponsors.
On September 15, 2011, the full Committee held a
legislative hearing on H.R. 2308 entitled, ``Fixing the
Watchdog: Legislative Proposals to Improve and Enhance the
Securities and Exchange Commission.'' The Committee received
testimony from the following witnesses: The Honorable Mary
Schapiro, Chairman, SEC; Mr. Shubh Saumya, Partner and Managing
Director, Boston Consulting Group; The Honorable Paul Atkins,
Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, and Former
Commissioner, SEC; Mr. Stephen D. Crimmins, Partner, K&L Gates
LLP, and Former Deputy Chief Litigation Counsel, Division of
Enforcement, SEC; Mr. Jonathan G. ``Jack'' Katz, Former
Secretary, SEC, on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; The
Honorable Harvey Pitt, Chief Executive Officer, Kalorama
Partners, LLC, and Former Chairman, SEC; and Mr. J.W. Verret,
Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of
Law.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 19 yeas and 15 nays.
NATIONAL BASEBALL HALL OF FAME COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT
(H.R. 2527)
Summary
H.R. 2527, the National Baseball Hall of Fame Commemorative
Coin Act, would direct the Treasury Secretary in 2015 to issue
no more than 50,000 $5 gold coins, 400,000 $1 silver coins, and
750,000 half-dollar ``clad'' coins in recognition of the
National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, NY. Surcharges
on coin sales would be paid to the National Baseball Hall of
Fame to finance its operations, after it raises funds from non-
government sources equal to or greater than the surcharges
collected. The obverse design of the coin would be chosen
through a juried, compensated competition, and would represent
the game of baseball and its place in American sports and
American life. The reverse would depict a baseball as used by
Major League Baseball. The bill contains a ``Sense of
Congress'' calling for the coins to be minted with a convex
reverse and a concave obverse. The program would be operated at
no cost to the taxpayer and would be budget-neutral.
Legislative History
On July 14, 2011, H.R. 2527 was introduced by
Representative Richard Hanna and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 296 cosponsors.
On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 2167, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote.
On October 26, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2527 under
suspension of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by a
record vote of 416 yeas and 3 nays.
SWAP EXECUTION FACILITY CLARIFICATION ACT
(H.R. 2586)
Summary
H.R. 2586, the Swap Execution Facility Clarification Act,
would direct the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)
and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to promulgate swap
execution facility (SEF) rules that would effectuate Congress's
intent that SEFs serve as an alternative to exchanges and
provide an execution facility for illiquid or thinly-traded
swaps.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act (P.L. 111-203) requires that cleared swaps be executed
either on exchanges or on SEFs regulated by either the CFTC or
the SEC. The drafters of the Dodd-Frank Act intended for SEFs
to serve as an alternative to exchanges by providing an
execution facility for illiquid or thinly-traded swaps. The
CFTC's and SEC's proposed rules for SEFs, however, fail to
provide the flexibility necessary to execute illiquid or
thinly-traded swaps, and market participants have pointed out
that the proposed rules are overly prescriptive and would
inhibit the execution of swap trades. H.R. 2586 directs the
CFTC and SEC to promulgate SEF rules that would effectuate
Congress's intent that SEFs serve as an alternative to
exchanges and provide an execution facility for illiquid or
thinly-traded swaps. H.R. 2586 prohibits the CFTC and the SEC
from requiring a SEF to have a minimum number of participants
receive bids or offers. The bill would prohibit the CFTC and
SEC from requiring SEFs to display or delay bids or offers for
a specific time period, which would permit the immediate
execution of matched trades. The bill prohibits the CFTC or SEC
from writing rules that allow only voice-based and hybrid
trading models for the execution of block trades, thereby
permitting market participants to continue using any means of
interstate commerce to conduct swap transactions. Finally, the
bill would prohibit the CFTC and SEC from requiring SEFs that
operate multiple trading systems to force those systems to
interact with each other to execute swap transactions. The bill
would also allow market participants to use any means of
interstate commerce to execute swap transactions.
Legislative History
On July 19, 2011, H.R. 2586 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
Chairman Scott Garrett and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services and the Committee on Agriculture. The bill
has seven cosponsors.
On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R.
2586 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring Certainty to the
Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Keith
Bailey, Managing Director, Fixed Income, Currencies and
Commodities, Barclays Capital, on behalf of the Institute of
International Bankers; Mr. Shawn Bernardo, Senior Managing
Director, Tullett Prebon, on behalf of the Wholesale Market
Brokers' Association Americas; Ms. Brenda Boultwood, Chief Risk
Officer and Senior Vice President, CE Risk Management Division
Office, Constellation Energy, on behalf of the Coalition of
Derivatives End-Users; Mr. James Cawley, CEO, Javelin Capital
Markets LLC; Mr. Kent Mason, Davis & Harman LLP, on behalf of
the American Benefits Council and the Committee on the
Investment of Employee Benefit Assets; and Mr. Conrad Voldstad,
Chief Executive Officer, International Swaps and Derivatives
Association.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee by
voice vote.
On November 30, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by
voice vote.
BUSINESS RISK MITIGATION AND PRICE STABILIZATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2682)
Summary
On July 28, 2011, Representative Michael Grimm introduced
H.R. 2682, which would exempt end-users from the margin and
capital requirements under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act. The
diversion of capital from job creation and the drag on economic
growth resulting from the imposition of margin requirements on
end-users was frequently raised during Congressional debates on
the Dodd-Frank Act. A colloquy among the chairmen of the four
committees with primary jurisdiction over Title VII clarified
congressional intent that the Dodd-Frank Act did not grant
regulators the authority to impose margin requirements for end-
user transactions.
Legislative History
On April 15, 2011, Representative Michael Grimm originally
introduced an end-user exemption bill, H.R. 1610, the Business
Risk Mitigation and Price Stabilization Act of 2011, a draft of
which was discussed at a legislative hearing on March 16, 2011
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Promote Job Creation,
Capital Formation, and Market Certainty.''
On May 3, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee by a
vote of 19-13.
On July 28, 2011, Representative Michael Grimm introduced a
new bill, H.R. 2682, providing for an end user exemption. H.R.
2682 was referred to the Committee on Financial Services. The
bill has four cosponsors.
On November 30, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by
voice vote.
TO EXEMPT INTER-AFFILIATE SWAPS FROM CERTAIN REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
PUT IN PLACE BY THE DODD-FRANK WALL STREET REFORM AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION ACT
(H.R. 2779)
Summary
H.R. 2779, a bill to exempt inter-affiliate swaps from
certain regulatory requirements put in place by the Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, would exempt
inter-affiliate trades from the margin, clearing, and reporting
requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act. Inter-affiliate swaps are
swaps executed between entities under common corporate
ownership. Inter-affiliate swaps allow corporate groups with
subsidiaries and affiliates to better manage risk by
transferring the risk of its affiliates to a single affiliate
and then executing swaps through that affiliate. Inter-
affiliate swaps do not pose a systemic risk because they do not
create additional counterparty exposures or increase the
interconnectedness between parties outside the corporate group.
Despite the differences between inter-affiliate swaps and swaps
between unrelated parties, the Dodd-Frank Act did not
distinguish between such swaps. H.R. 2779 would reduce the
costs of hedging for corporate groups by exempting inter-
affiliate trades from the margin, clearing and reporting
requirements.
Legislative History
On August 1, 2011, H.R. 2779 was introduced by
Representative Steve Stivers and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services and the Committee on Agriculture. The bill
has two cosponsors.
On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R.
2779 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring Certainty to the
Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Keith
Bailey, Managing Director, Fixed Income, Currencies and
Commodities, Barclays Capital, on behalf of the Institute of
International Bankers; Mr. Shawn Bernardo, Senior Managing
Director, Tullett Prebon, on behalf of the Wholesale Market
Brokers' Association Americas; Ms. Brenda Boultwood, Chief Risk
Officer and Senior Vice President, CE Risk Management Division
Office, Constellation Energy, on behalf of the Coalition of
Derivatives End-Users; Mr. James Cawley, CEO, Javelin Capital
Markets LLC; Mr. Kent Mason, Davis & Harman LLP, on behalf of
the American Benefits Council and the Committee on the
Investment of Employee Benefit Assets; and Mr. Conrad Voldstad,
Chief Executive Officer, International Swaps and Derivatives
Association.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee by a
record vote of 23 yeas, 6 nays and 1 present.
On November 30, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by
a record vote of 53 yeas and 0 nays.
ENTREPRENEUR ACCESS TO CAPITAL ACT
(H.R. 2930)
Summary
H.R. 2930, the ``Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act,''
would create a new registration exemption from the Securities
Act of 1933 for securities issued through internet platforms,
also known as ``crowdfunding.'' To qualify for this new
exemption, the issuer's offering cannot exceed $1 million,
unless the issuer provides investors with audited financial
statements, in which case the offering amount may not exceed $2
million. An individual's investment must be equal to or less
than the lesser of $10,000 or 10 percent of the investor's
annual income. By exempting such offerings from registration
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and
preempting state registration laws, H.R. 2930 will enable
entrepreneurs to more easily access capital from potential
investors across the United States to grow their business and
create jobs.
H.R. 2930 would require issuers and intermediaries to
fulfill a number of requirements in order to avail themselves
of this new exemption. These requirements, which include
notices to the SEC about the offerings and parties to the
offerings that will be shared with the States, are designed to
reduce the risk of fraud in these offerings and thereby protect
investors. The legislation also would allow for an unlimited
number of investors to invest via a crowdfunding offering and
preempts state securities registration laws. However, the
legislation does not restrict the States' ability to discover
and stop and prosecute fraudulent offerings.
Legislative History
On September 14, 2011, H.R. 2930 was introduced by
Representative Patrick McHenry and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has five cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R.
2930 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC;
Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief Executive Officer,
SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams, Chairman and
President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the American
Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry Organization; Mr.
A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas Securities Department
on behalf of the North American Securities Administrators; and
Ms. Dana Mauriello, President, ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered H.R. 2930 favorably reported to the full Committee by a
record vote of 18 yeas and 14 nays.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on October
31, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-262).
On November 3, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2930 and
passed the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 407 yeas
and 17 nays.
ACCESS TO CAPITAL FOR JOB CREATORS ACT
(H.R. 2940)
Summary
H.R. 2940, the ``Access to Capital for Job Creators Act,''
would make the exemption under the Securities and Exchange
Commission's (SEC) Regulation D Rule 506 available to issuers
even if the securities are marketed through a general
solicitation or advertising so long as the purchasers are
``accredited investors.'' The legislation would allow companies
greater access to accredited investors and to new sources of
capital to grow and create jobs, without putting less
sophisticated investors at risk. To ensure that only accredited
investors purchase the securities, H.R. 2940 requires the SEC
to write rules on how an issuer would verify that the
purchasers of securities are accredited investors.
The Securities Act of 1933 requires that any offer to sell
securities must either be registered with the SEC or meet an
exemption. Regulation D Rule 506 is an exemption that allows
companies to raise capital as long as they do not market their
securities through general solicitations or advertising. This
prohibition on general solicitation and advertising has been
interpreted to mean that potential investors must have an
existing relationship with the company before they can be
notified that unregistered securities are available for
purchase. Requiring potential investors to have an existing
relationship with the company significantly limits the pool of
potential investors and severely hampers the ability of small
companies to raise capital and create jobs.
Legislative History
On September 15, 2011, H.R. 2940 was introduced by
Representative Kevin McCarthy and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing on H.R.
2940 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC;
Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief Executive Officer,
SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams, Chairman and
President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the American
Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry Organization; Mr.
A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas Securities Department
on behalf of the North American Securities Administrators; and
Ms. Dana Mauriello, President, ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered H.R. 2940, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on October
31, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-263).
On November 3, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2940 and
passed the bill by a record vote of 413 yeas and 11 nays.
A BILL TO AMEND THE ABRAHAM LINCOLN COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT TO ADJUST
HOW SURCHARGES ARE DISTRIBUTED
(H.R. 3512)
Summary
H.R. 3512 revises Section 7 of the Abraham Lincoln
Commemorative Coin Act to allow distribution of the surcharges
collected on the sales of the coin, which was available for
purchase from the U.S. Mint in 2009. The coin was issued to
commemorate the bicentennial of President Lincoln's birth,
during that bicentennial year. The specified recipient of the
surcharges was the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission.
Following the bicentennial, the Commission was changed to a
foundation to continue education about President Lincoln over
the longer term, necessitating the change in the name of the
recipient organization. Additionally, Title 31, Section 5134(f)
of the United States Code allows the recipient no more than two
years from the end of the coin program--in this case, until the
end of 2011--to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Secretary of the Treasury that it has raised private funds
equal to or greater than the surcharge funds, before
disbursement can take place. The Foundation raised about $2
million in private funds, and thus would not by itself be able
to collect the surcharges even with a name change, so the bill
divides the remaining surcharges equally between the Abraham
Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum, Ford's Theatre, and
President Lincoln's Cottage on the grounds of the Soldier's
Home in Washington, D.C., all of which are associated with the
President and were sites of bicentennial events. These three
organizations will each be responsible for demonstrating it has
raised private matching funds equal to or greater than the
amount it would receive, before funds can be disbursed. The
Lincoln coin program, like all other commemorative coin
programs, operated at no cost to the taxpayer and the
surcharges were collected only from those who purchased the
coin.
Legislative History
On November 29, 2011, H.R. 3512 was introduced by
Representative Jerrold Nadler and was referred to the Committee
on Financial Services. The bill has no cosponsors.
On November 30, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by
voice vote.
SEC MODERNIZATION ACT
Summary
The SEC Modernization Act of 2011 would modernize the
Securities and Exchange Commission by (1) consolidating
duplicative offices; (2) promoting coordination amongst
employees; (3) making managerial and ethics reforms; and (4)
ensuring that the inspector general and ombudsman are truly
independent. After the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act is fully implemented, the SEC Chairman
will have twenty-four direct reports, making it even more
difficult for the Chairman to effectively manage the agency.
The SEC Modernization Act would enable the SEC to better
accomplish its mission of protecting investors, maintaining
fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitating capital
formation by incorporating recommendations from the Boston
Consulting Group's report issued pursuant to Section 967 of the
Dodd-Frank Act as well as recommendations by the Government
Accountability Office and the SEC's Inspector General.
Legislative History
On September 15, 2011, the full Committee held a
legislative hearing on the discussion draft of the SEC
Modernization Act of 2011 entitled ``Fixing the Watchdog:
Legislative Proposals to Improve and Enhance the Securities and
Exchange Commission.'' The Committee received testimony from
the following witnesses: The Honorable Mary Schapiro, Chairman,
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Mr. Shubh Saumya,
Partner and Managing Director, Boston Consulting Group; The
Honorable Paul Atkins, Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise
Institute, and Former Commissioner, U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission; Mr. Stephen D. Crimmins, Partner, K&L
Gates LLP, and Former Deputy Chief Litigation Counsel, Division
of Enforcement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Mr.
Jonathan G. ``Jack'' Katz, Former Secretary, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission, on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce; The Honorable Harvey Pitt, Chief Executive Officer,
Kalorama Partners, LLC, and Former Chairman, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission; and Mr. J.W. Verret, Assistant
Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law.
Full Committee Oversight Activities
ECONOMIC RECOVERY
On January 26, 2011, the Committee on Financial Services
held a hearing entitled ``Promoting Economic Recovery and Job
Creation: The Road Forward.'' The purpose of this hearing was
to provide leading economists, academics, business owners and
citizens an opportunity to share their views about the barriers
to economic growth, and to discuss macroeconomic issues and
trends facing the country and affecting job creation. Witnesses
discussed the effectiveness of the Federal Reserve's
``quantitative easing'' policy; the impact of regulatory
uncertainty on job growth; and the consequences of federal
housing policy on the economy. Witnesses also shared their
views on the effect the national debt and budget deficit will
have on the long-term health of the economy. The witnesses for
this hearing included: Dr. William Poole of the University of
Delaware; Professor John B. Taylor of Stanford University; Dr.
Donald Kohn of the Brookings Institute; Professor Hal S. Scott
of Harvard Law School; Mr. Eric Hoffman of Hoffman Media, LLC;
Mr. Charles Maddy, III of Summit Financial Group; Mr. Andrew
Bursky of Atlas Holdings, LLC; and Mr. Ken Brody of Taconic
Capital.
DERIVATIVES
On February 15, 2011, the Committee on Financial Services
held a hearing entitled ``Assessing the Regulatory, Economic
and Market Implications of the Dodd-Frank Derivatives Title.''
This hearing reviewed Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act from the
perspectives of both the federal regulators and market
participants. Among the issues discussed were implementation
timeline concerns, proposed rulemakings, and the impact on
various market participants, including non-financial companies
that use derivatives contracts to hedge against legitimate
business risks. The Committee received testimony from the
following witnesses: The Honorable Mary Schapiro, Chairman,
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; The Honorable Gary
Gensler, Chairman, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission;
The Honorable Daniel K. Tarullo, Member, Federal Reserve Board
of Governors; Craig Reiners, Director of Commodity Risk
Management, MillerCoors, on behalf of the Coalition for
Derivatives End-Users; Donald F. Donahue, Chairman & Chief
Executive Officer, the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation
(DTCC); Terry Duffy, Executive Chairman, the CME Group; Don
Thompson, Managing Director and Associate General Counsel,
JPMorgan, on behalf of the Securities Industry and Financial
Markets Association (SIFMA); Jamie Cawley, Chief Executive
Officer, Javelin, on behalf of the Swaps and Derivatives Market
Association (SDMA); and Christopher Giancarlo, Executive Vice
President, Corporate development, the GFI Group Inc.
THE FINAL REPORT OF THE FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION
On February 16, 2011, the Committee on Financial Services
held a hearing entitled ``The Final Report of the Financial
Crisis Inquiry Commission.'' This hearing was held pursuant to
Section 5 of the ``Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009''
(Public Law 111-21), which required the Committee to hold a
hearing on the contents of the final report of the Financial
Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) within 120 days of its
issuance. The FCIC was created by Congress in 2009 ``to examine
the causes, domestic and global, of the current financial and
economic crisis in the United States.'' The Commission issued
its final report on January 27, 2011, accompanied by dissenting
views filed by individual Commissioners. The hearing focused on
the findings of the Commission's final report and the
commissioners' assessments of the efficacy of the reforms
contained in the Dodd-Frank Act. In addition, the hearing
examined the reasons for the Commission's inability to reach
consensus in its findings with regard to the causes of the
financial crisis. The Committee received testimony from the
following witnesses: The Honorable Phil Angelides, Chairman of
the FCIC; The Honorable Bill Thomas, Vice Chairman of the FCIC;
and four other FCIC members: Dr. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, The
Honorable Brooksley Born, Mr. Peter Wallison, and Mr. Byron
Georgiou.
OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
On March 1, 2011, the Committee on Financial Services held
a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD).'' The hearing focused on the proposed
budget for HUD for fiscal year 2012. HUD Secretary Shaun
Donovan was the only witness. Secretary Donovan's testimony
outlined the Administration's proposal to increase HUD's budget
by $747 million (1.6 percent) over fiscal year 2010, to a total
of $47.8 billion for fiscal year 2012. As noted by the
Committee, if adopted, the Administration's fiscal year 2012
budget request for HUD would result in a funding increase for
HUD of $6.3 billion (15 percent) since President Obama took
office.
MORTGAGE REFORM
On March 1, 2011, the Committee on Financial Services held
a hearing entitled ``Mortgage Finance Reform: An Examination of
the Obama Administration's Report to Congress.'' The Secretary
of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, was the only witness.
Secretary Geithner presented the Administration's views on the
future of America's housing finance system, including options
for reforming the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) and
reducing government support of the mortgage market.
OVERSIGHT AND RESTRUCTURING OF THE SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
On September 15, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Fixing the Watchdog: Legislative Proposals to
Improve and Enhance the Securities and Exchange Commission.''
The hearing examined the recommendations set forth in the
report of the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) on needed reforms
at the SEC, which report was mandated by Section 967 of the
Dodd-Frank Act, and examined two legislative proposals. The
first proposal was a discussion draft entitled the ``SEC
Modernization Act,'' which would reshape the SEC's managerial
and operational structure; amend provisions of the Dodd-Frank
Act regarding the creation of new SEC offices; and limit the
use of the SEC Reserve Fund created in Section 991 of the Dodd-
Frank Act to only technology investments. The second proposal
was H.R. 2308, the ``SEC Regulatory Accountability Act,'' which
would amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to require the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), before promulgating a
regulation or issuing any order, to: (1) identify the nature
and significance of the problem that the proposed regulation is
designed to address in order to assess whether any new
regulation is warranted; (2) use the Office of the Chief
Economist to assess the costs and benefits of the intended
regulation and adopt it only on a determination that its
benefits justify the costs; and (3) ensure that any regulation
is accessible, consistent, written in plain language, and easy
to understand. The Committee received testimony from the
following witnesses: The Honorable Mary Schapiro, Chairman,
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Mr. Shubh Saumya,
Partner and Managing Director, Boston Consulting Group; The
Honorable Paul Atkins, Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise
Institute, and Former Commissioner, U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission; Mr. Stephen D. Crimmins, Partner, K&L
Gates LLP, and Former Deputy Chief Litigation Counsel, Division
of Enforcement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Mr.
Jonathan G. ``Jack'' Katz, Former Secretary, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission, on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce; The Honorable Harvey Pitt, Chief Executive Officer,
Kalorama Partners, LLC, and Former Chairman, U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission; and Mr. J.W. Verret, Assistant
Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law.
THE DODD-FRANK WALL STREET REFORM AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION ACT
On June 16, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Financial Regulatory Reform: The International
Context.'' During this hearing, the Committee examined the
international implications of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act for the United States financial
services industry and the United Stated economy. Specifically,
the Committee considered four aspects of United States
regulation that may affect the ability of United States
financial institutions to compete against their foreign
counterparts and impede economic recovery in the United States:
capital and liquidity requirements, regulation and oversight of
``systemically significant financial institutions,''
derivatives regulation, and the regulation of proprietary
trading. The Committee received testimony from the following
witnesses: The Honorable Sheila C. Bair, Chairman of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; The Honorable Lael
Brainard, Under Secretary of the Treasury for International
Affairs; The Honorable Gary Gensler, Chairman of the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission; The Honorable Mary Schapiro,
Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission; The
Honorable Daniel K. Tarullo, Governor, Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System; Mr. John Walsh, Acting Comptroller
of the Currency, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency; Mr.
Stephen O'Connor, Managing Director, Morgan Stanley, and
Chairman, International Swaps and Derivatives Association, on
behalf of the International Swaps & Derivatives Association;
Mr. Timothy Ryan, President & CEO of the Securities Industry
and Financial Markets Association; Professor Hal S. Scott,
Nomura Professor and Director of the Program on International
Financial Systems, Harvard Law School; Mr. Barry L. Zubrow,
Executive Vice President and Chief Risk Officer, JPMorgan Chase
& Co.; and Mr. Damon A. Silvers, Associate General Counsel,
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations.
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, RURAL HOUSING SERVICE, NATIONAL
REINVESTMENT CORPORATION
On June 3, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of HUD's HOME Program.'' This was the first in a
series of hearings on allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse
within the HOME program. At this hearing, the Committee
examined HUD's policies and procedures for monitoring the
performance of the HOME program. HUD's Office of Inspector
General performed internal audits of HUD's management of the
HOME program in September 2009 and November 2010 which
documented problems in HUD's ability to track HOME funds and
activities. The Committee received testimony from the following
witnesses: the Honorable Mercedes Marquez, HUD Assistant
Secretary for Community Planning and Development; and Mr. James
Heist, HUD Assistant Inspector General for Audit.
LAW ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS TO SECURE PRIVATE FINANCIAL INFORMATION
On June 29, 2011, the full Committee held a field hearing
in Hoover, Alabama, entitled ``Hacked Off: Helping Law
Enforcement Protect Private Financial Information.'' The
purpose of the hearing was to examine threats computer hackers
pose to individuals, businesses, financial institutions and
government agencies; the methods that hackers employ to breach
information technology systems; and the efforts of law
enforcement to foil or arrest hackers. The Committee also
examined the work of the National Computer Forensics Institute
(NCFI), where state and local law enforcement officers,
prosecutors and judges are trained in ways to detect, prosecute
and try cases involving computer-based evidence. The Committee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. A. T.
Smith, Assistant Director, United States Secret Service; Mr.
Randall I. Hillman, Executive Director, Alabama District
Attorneys Association; Mr. Gary Warner, Director of Research,
Computer Forensics, University of Alabama Birmingham; and Mr.
Douglas ``Clay'' Hammac, Investigator, Shelby County Sheriff's
Office, Columbiana, Alabama.
MONETARY POLICY AND THE STATE OF THE ECONOMY
On March 2, 2011, the Committee on Financial Services held
a hearing entitled ``Monetary Policy and the State of the
Economy,'' to receive the Federal Reserve Board's semi-annual
report on monetary policy and the state of the economy. The
Honorable Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Board, was the sole witness.
On July 13, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy.'' The
purpose of this hearing was to receive the semi-annual report
to Congress on monetary policy and the state of the economy,
delivered by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, who was
the only witness.
FINANCIAL STABILITY OVERSIGHT COUNCIL
On October 6, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``The Annual Report of the Financial Stability
Oversight Council.'' At this hearing, the Committee received
the Financial Stability Oversight Council's (FSOC) Annual
Report and the Secretary of the Treasury's testimony on the
report. The hearing focused on the FSOC's efforts to implement
regulatory reforms and identify emerging threats to the
nation's financial stability. The Honorable Timothy Geithner,
Secretary of the Treasury, was the sole witness.
Full Committee Hearings Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-1................. Promoting Economic January 26, 2011
Recovery and Job
Creation: The Road
Forward.
112-5................. Assessing the Regulatory, February 15, 2011
Economic and Market
Implications of the Dodd-
Frank Derivatives Title.
112-6................. The Final Report of the February 16, 2011
Financial Crisis Inquiry
Commission.
112-9................. Mortgage Finance Reform: March 1, 2011
An Examination of the
Obama Administration's
Report to Congress.
112-10................ Oversight of the March 1, 2011
Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD).
112-11................ Monetary Policy and the March 2, 2011
State of the Economy.
112-36................ Oversight of HUD's HOME June 3, 2011
Program.
112-39................ Financial Regulatory June 16, 2011
Reform: The International
Context.
112-43................ Hacked Off: Helping Law June 29, 2011
Enforcement Protect
Private Financial
Information (Field
Hearing).
112-46................ Monetary Policy and the July 13, 2011
State of the Economy.
112-62................ Fixing the Watchdog: September 15, 2011
Legislative Proposals to
Improve and Enhance the
Securities and Exchange
Commission.
112-70................ The Annual Report of the October 6, 2011
Financial Stability
Oversight Council.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
(Ratio: 20-15)
SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey,
Chairman
MAXINE WATERS, California, Ranking Member SCHWEIKERT, Arizona, Vice
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York Chairman
BRAD SHERMAN, California PETER T. KING, New York
RUBEN HINOJOSA, Texas EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin JEB HENSARLING, Texas
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana JOHN CAMPBELL, California
ANDRE CARSON, Indiana THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut KEVIN McCARTHY, California
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
AL GREEN, Texas BILL POSEY, Florida
KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota MICHAEL G. FITZPATRICK,
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officio nsylvania
NAN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
ROBERT HURT, Virginia
ROBERT J. DOLD, Illinois
MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York
STEVE STIVERS, Ohio
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee Legislative Activities
FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY FOR
TAXPAYERS ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 31)
Summary
H.R. 31, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Accountability and
Transparency for Taxpayers Act of 2011, would expand the
reporting requirements and enhance the authority of the Federal
Housing Finance Agency's (FHFA's) Office of Inspector General.
H.R. 31 would require the FHFA Inspector General to report
quarterly to Congress on the status of the conservatorships of
the Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, including the extent of taxpayer liabilities, the
GSEs' investment and foreclosure mitigation strategies, and
management and personnel matters at the GSEs. H.R. 31 would
require that these reports be publicly available. H.R. 31 would
also grant the Inspector General additional law enforcement and
personnel-hiring authorities.
Legislative History
H.R. 31 was introduced by Representative Judy Biggert on
January 5, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 19 cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 31 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on Immediate
Steps to Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout of Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting Director of
the Federal Housing Finance Agency; The Hon. John H. Dalton,
President of the Housing Policy Council, Financial Services
Roundtable; Mr. Christopher Papagianis, Managing Director,
Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto, Resident Fellow, American
Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob Nielsen, Chairman of the Board,
National Association of Home Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps,
President, National Association of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a voice vote.
CHURCH PLAN INVESTMENT CLARIFICATION ACT
(H.R. 33)
Summary
H.R. 33, the Church Plan Investment Clarification Act,
would make a technical correction to Public Law 108-359, which
prevents church pension plans from investing in collective
trusts. The bill would allow church pension plans to invest in
collective trusts by broadening an exemption in the current
law. In 2003, Congress attempted to achieve this result, but
omitted a necessary exemption from the Securities Act of 1933
to provide parallel treatment for church plans with exemptions
in the Investment Company Act of 1940 and the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. Without this correction, collective
trusts will not accept investments from church pension plans.
Legislative History
H.R. 33 was introduced by Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert on
January 5, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has no cosponsors.
On March 10, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission's
Operations, Activities, Challenges and FY 2012 Budget
Request.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Robert Cook, Director, Division of
Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC);
Ms. Meredith Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance,
SEC; Mr. Robert Khuzami, Director, Division of Enforcement,
SEC; Ms. Eileen Rominger, Director, Division of Investment
Management, SEC; and Mr. Carlo di Florio, Director, Office of
Compliance Inspections and Examinations, SEC. During the
hearing, Chairman Biggert asked Ms. Meredith Cross, the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Director of Corporation
Finance, to comment on the need for legislation to modify the
treatment of church pension plan investments in collective
trusts.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a voice vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on July 1,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-131).
On July 18, 2011, the House agreed to a motion to suspend
the rules and pass H.R. 33, as amended, by a record vote of 310
yeas and 1 nay.
FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 463)
Summary
H.R. 463, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Transparency Act
of 2011, would make the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
applicable to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac while they are in
federal conservatorship or receivership. FOIA is the federal
law that grants the public access to information or documents
controlled by the U.S. government. Members of the public may
make FOIA requests for the records of any government agency.
Yet despite their public charters and their management by the
federal government, neither Fannie Mae nor Freddie Mac is
considered a federal agency for purposes of FOIA. Without this
legislation, the public cannot access the GSEs' records, even
though they are overseen directly by the federal government.
Legislative History
On January 26, 2011, H.R. 463 was introduced by
Representative Jason Chaffetz and was referred to the Committee
on Financial Services. The bill has eleven cosponsors.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 463 entitled ``Transparency, Transition and
Taxpayer Protection: More Steps to End the GSE Bailout.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. Edward J. DeMarco, Acting Director, Federal Housing Finance
Agency; Dr. Anthony Sanders, Mercatus Center Senior Scholar and
Distinguished Professor of Real Estate Finance, George Mason
University; Mr. David John, Senior Research Fellow in
Retirement Security and Financial Institutions, The Heritage
Foundation; Dr. Sheila Crowley, President, National Low Income
Housing Coalition; and Mr. Kelly William Cobb, Government
Affairs Manager, Americans for Tax Reform.
On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
THE UNITED STATES COVERED BONDS ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 940)
Summary
H.R. 940, the United States Covered Bonds Act of 2011,
would establish the statutory framework necessary to start a
covered bonds market in the United States. The bill would
provide legal certainty for covered bonds in three ways:
specifying the categories of eligible issuers and eligible
cover-pool assets; mandating an asset coverage test for cover
pools and audits by an independent asset monitor; and
clarifying applicable securities and tax matters. H.R. 940
creates a separate resolution process for covered bond
programs. The bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury, in
consultation with applicable prudential regulators, to serve as
the primary regulator of the covered bonds market.
Legislative History
H.R. 940 was introduced by Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott Garrett on
March 8, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services and the Committee on Ways and Means. The bill has one
cosponsor.
On March 11, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R.
940 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Create a Covered Bond
Market in the United States.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Scott Stengel,
Partner, King & Spalding LLP, on behalf of the U.S. Covered
Bond Council; Mr. Bert Ely, Ely & Company, Inc.; Mr. Tim Skeet,
Amias Berman & Co., on behalf of the International Capital
Market Association; Mr. Ralph Daloisio, Managing Director,
Natixis, on behalf of the American Securitization Forum; and
Mr. Stephen G. Andrews, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Bank of Alameda.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by voice vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 940, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by a record vote of 44 yeas, 7 nays and 3 present.
BURDENSOME DATA COLLECTION RELIEF ACT
(H.R. 1062)
Summary
H.R. 1062, the Burdensome Data Collection Relief Act,
repeals Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203), which requires
all publicly traded companies to calculate and disclose for
each filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission the
median annual total compensation of all employees of the
company excluding the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), disclose
the annual total compensation of the CEO, and calculate and
disclose a ratio comparing those two numbers.
Legislative History
H.R. 1062 was introduced by Representative Nan Hayworth on
March 14, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has seven cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on a
draft version of H.R. 1062 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and Market
Certainty.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A. Bertsch, President and CEO,
Society of Corporate Secretaries & Governance Professionals;
Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director, American Securitization
Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief Operating Officer, The
Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild, Senior Advisor, Grant
Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director, Chatham Financial on
behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users; and Mr.
Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 20 yeas and 12 nays.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 33 yeas and 21 nays. The Committee Report was
filed on July 12, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-142).
SMALL COMPANY CAPITAL FORMATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1070)
Summary
H.R. 1070, the Small Company Capital Formation Act, raises
the offering threshold for companies exempted from registration
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under
Regulation A from $5 million--the threshold set in the early
1990s--to $50 million. Raising the offering threshold helps
small companies gain access to capital markets without the
costs and delays associated with the full-scale securities
registration process. H.R. 1070 provides the SEC with the
authority to increase the threshold and requires the SEC to re-
examine the threshold every two years and report to Congress on
its decisions regarding adjustment of the threshold.
Legislative History
H.R. 1070 was introduced by Representative David Schweikert
on March 14, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has seventeen cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on a
draft version of H.R. 1070 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and Market
Certainty.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A. Bertsch, President and CEO,
Society of Corporate Secretaries & Governance Professionals;
Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director, American Securitization
Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief Operating Officer, The
Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild, Senior Advisor, Grant
Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director, Chatham Financial on
behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users; and Mr.
Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by voice vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on
September 14, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-206).
On November 2, 2011, the House agreed to a motion to
suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1070, as amended, by a record
vote of 421 yeas and 1 nay.
SMALL BUSINESS CAPITAL ACCESS AND JOB PRESERVATION ACT
(H.R. 1082)
Summary
H.R. 1082, the Small Business Capital Access and Job
Preservation Act, exempts advisers to private equity funds that
have not borrowed and do not have outstanding a principal
amount in excess of twice their funded capital commitments from
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registration
requirements as mandated by Title IV of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act)
(Public Law 111-203).
Legislative History
H.R. 1082 was introduced by Representative Robert Hurt on
March 15, 2011 and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has nine cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R.
1082 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Promote Job Creation,
Capital Formation, and Market Certainty.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A.
Bertsch, President and CEO, Society of Corporate Secretaries &
Governance Professionals; Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director,
American Securitization Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief
Operating Officer, The Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild,
Senior Advisor, Grant Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director,
Chatham Financial on behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives
End-Users; and Mr. Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special
Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 19 yeas and 13 nays.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on July 12,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-143).
EQUITY IN GOVERNMENT COMPENSATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1221)
Summary
H.R. 1221 would suspend the current compensation packages
for all of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's senior executives and
establish a compensation system for the GSEs' executive
officers consistent with the compensation and benefits provided
under the Financial Institution Reform, Recovery, and
Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA). The bill requires the GSEs'
regulator--the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)--to adjust
the salaries of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's nonsupervisory
employees to conform to the General Schedule, a statutory pay
system that pays employees based on surveys of non-federal pay
for similar work. And H.R. 1221 expresses the sense of the
Congress that the 2010 and 2011 pay packages for Fannie Mae's
and Freddie Mac's senior executives were excessive and that the
money should be returned to the Treasury to reduce the national
debt.
Legislative History
H.R. 1221 was introduced by Chairman Spencer Bachus on
March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
The bill has six cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R.
1221 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on Immediate Steps to
Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting Director of the
Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), The Hon. John H. Dalton,
President of the Housing Policy Council, Financial Services
Roundtable; Mr. Christopher Papagianis, Managing Director,
Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto, Resident Fellow, American
Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob Nielsen, Chairman of the Board,
National Association of Home Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps,
President, National Association of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 27 yeas and
6 nays.
On November 15, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to
the House by a record vote of 52 yeas and 4 nays.
GSE SUBSIDY ELIMINATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1222)
Summary
H.R. 1222, the GSE Subsidy Elimination Act of 2011, would
mandate that the Federal Housing Finance Agency gradually
require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase the fees they
charge for guaranteeing payments of principal and interest on
mortgages that they securitize. H.R. 1222 also directs the FHFA
to consider the conditions of the financial market in raising
the GSEs' guarantee fees to ensure that its actions do not
disrupt a housing recovery.
Legislative History
H.R. 1222 was introduced by Representative Randy Neugebauer
on March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has six cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1222 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on
Immediate Steps to Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco,
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA);
The Hon. John H. Dalton, President of the Housing Policy
Council, Financial Services Roundtable; Mr. Christopher
Papagianis, Managing Director, Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto,
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob
Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, National Association of Home
Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps, President, National Association
of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 25 yeas and 9 nays.
GSE CREDIT RISK EQUITABLE TREATMENT ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1223)
Summary
H.R. 1223, the GSE Credit Risk Equitable Treatment Act of
2011, would clarify that a GSE loan purchase or asset-backed
security issuance would not affect the status of the underlying
assets. The bill is designed to ensure that mortgages held or
securitized by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and asset-backed
securities issued by them are treated similarly as other
mortgages and asset-backed securities for purposes of the
credit risk retention requirements in Section 941 of the Dodd-
Frank Act.
Legislative History
H.R. 1223 was introduced by Representative Scott Garrett on
March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has three cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1223 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on
Immediate Steps to Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco,
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA),
The Hon. John H. Dalton, President of the Housing Policy
Council, Financial Services Roundtable; Mr. Christopher
Papagianis, Managing Director, Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto,
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob
Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, National Association of Home
Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps, President, National Association
of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 34 yeas and
0 nays.
GSE PORTFOLIO RISK REDUCTION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1224)
Summary
H.R. 1224, the GSE Portfolio Risk Reduction Act of 2011,
would accelerate and formalize the reductions in the size of
the portfolios of the Government Sponsored Enterprises, by
setting annual limits on the maximum size of each GSE's
retained portfolio, ratcheting the limits down over five years
until they reached a sustainable level. In the first year, the
GSEs would have their portfolios capped at no more than $700
billion, declining to $600 billion for year two, $475 billion
for year three, $350 billion for year four, and finally to $250
billion in year five.
Legislative History
H.R. 1224 was introduced by Representative Jeb Hensarling
on March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has five cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1224 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on
Immediate Steps to Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco,
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA);
The Hon. John H. Dalton, President of the Housing Policy
Council, Financial Services Roundtable; Mr. Christopher
Papagianis, Managing Director, Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto,
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob
Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, National Association of Home
Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps, President, National Association
of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported by a record vote of 20 yeas and 14 nays.
GSE DEBT ISSUANCE APPROVAL ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1225)
Summary
H.R. 1225, the GSE Debt Issuance Approval Act of 2011,
would require the Treasury Department to approve any new debt
issuances by the GSEs. If the Treasury Department chooses to
approve a debt issuance, it must explain and justify its
decision to Congress and the Federal Housing Finance Agency
(FHFA) within 7 days.
Legislative History
H.R. 1225 was introduced by Representative Stevan Pearce on
March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has five cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1225 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on
Immediate Steps to Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco,
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA);
The Hon. John H. Dalton, President of the Housing Policy
Council, Financial Services Roundtable; Mr. Christopher
Papagianis, Managing Director, Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto,
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob
Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, National Association of Home
Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps, President, National Association
of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 18 yeas, 0 nays and 1
present.
GSE MISSION IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1226)
Summary
H.R. 1226, the GSE Mission Improvement Act of 2011, would
repeal the GSEs' affordable housing goals. Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, as GSEs, were vested with unique, governmentally-
derived advantages. Given their dominant role in the mortgage
market, Congress has required them to set minimum percentage-
of-business goals for mortgage purchases. These affordable
housing (or lending) goals have been designed to promote
higher-risk as well as low-income lending and lending in
underserved geographic areas.
Legislative History
H.R. 1226 was introduced by Representative Ed Royce on
March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has five cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1226 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on
Immediate Steps to Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco,
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA);
The Hon. John H. Dalton, President of the Housing Policy
Council, Financial Services Roundtable; Mr. Christopher
Papagianis, Managing Director, Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto,
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob
Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, National Association of Home
Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps, President, National Association
of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported by voice vote.
GSE RISK AND ACTIVITIES LIMITATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1227)
Summary
H.R. 1227, the GSE Risk and Activities Limitation Act of
2011, would prohibit the Government Sponsored Enterprises
(GSEs) from offering, undertaking, transacting, conducting or
engaging in any new business activities while in
conservatorship or receivership. By preventing Fannie Mae or
Freddie Mac from initiating new projects, as defined by Federal
Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) regulation, Congress would be
limiting their size and market dominance. Under current law,
the FHFA Director must pre-approve a proposed GSE activity or
product to determine whether it is in the public interest and
consistent with the safety and soundness of the Enterprise or
the financial system.
Legislative History
H.R. 1227 was introduced by Representative David Schweikert
on March 29, 2011 and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has six cosponsors.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1227 entitled ``Legislative Hearing on
Immediate Steps to Protect Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout
of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco,
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA);
The Hon. John H. Dalton, President of the Housing Policy
Council, Financial Services Roundtable; Mr. Christopher
Papagianis, Managing Director, Economics21; Mr. Edward Pinto,
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Mr. Bob
Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, National Association of Home
Builders; and Mr. Ron Phipps, President, National Association
of Realtors.
On April 5, 2011 and April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by voice vote.
ASSET-BACKED MARKET STABILIZATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1539)
Summary
H.R. 1539, the Asset-Backed Market Stabilization Act of
2011, would repeal Section 939G of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203), thereby
reinstating SEC Rule 436(g). Under the Securities Act, the
written consent of an ``expert''--which includes any person who
prepared or certified a portion of a statement or prospectus
filed with the SEC--must be included in the filing, and the
consenting expert is subject to liability for misstatements in
the prepared or certified portion of the registration statement
or prospectus. Rule 436(g) exempted ``nationally recognized
statistical rating organizations'' (NRSROs) from being
considered ``experts'' if their ratings were included in a
registration statement or prospectus. Rule 436(g)'s repeal in
the Dodd-Frank Act prompted NRSROs to refuse to consent to the
inclusion of their ratings in statements and prospectuses,
causing dislocation in the asset-backed securities market.
Legislative History
H.R. 1539 was introduced by Representative Steve Stivers on
April 14, 2011 and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has three cosponsors.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 1539 entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and
Market Certainty.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
the following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A. Bertsch, President and
CEO, Society of Corporate Secretaries & Governance
Professionals; Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director, American
Securitization Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief Operating
Officer, The Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild, Senior
Advisor, Grant Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director,
Chatham Financial on behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives
End-Users; and Mr. Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special
Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 18 yeas and 14 nays.
On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by 31 yeas
and 19 nays. The Committee Report was filed on August 12, 2011
(H. Rept. 112-196).
BUSINESS RISK MITIGATION AND PRICE STABILIZATION ACT
(H.R. 1610)
Summary
H.R. 1610, the Business Risk Mitigation and Price
Stabilization Act, would exempt non-financial end-users of
derivatives products from having to post margin as required
under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203).
Legislative History
H.R. 1610 was introduced by Representative Michael Grimm on
April 15, 2011 and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services and the Committee on Agriculture. The bill has ten
cosponsors.
On February 15, 2011, the Committee held an oversight
hearing on the implementation of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank
Act entitled, ``Assessing the Regulatory, Economic and Market
Implications of the Dodd-Frank Derivatives Title.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
The Honorable Mary Schapiro, Chairman, U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission; The Honorable Gary Gensler, Chairman, U.S.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission; The Honorable Daniel K.
Tarullo, Member, Federal Reserve Board of Governors; Mr. Craig
Reiners, Director of Commodity Risk Management, MillerCoors, on
behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users; Mr. Donald
F. Donahue, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The Depository
Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC); Mr. Terry Duffy, Executive
Chairman, CME Group; Mr. Don Thompson, Managing Director and
Associate General Counsel, JPMorgan Chase, on behalf of the
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA);
Mr. Jamie Cawley, Chief Executive Officer, Javelin, on behalf
of the Swaps and Derivatives Market Association (SDMA); and Mr.
Christopher Giancarlo, Executive Vice President, Corporate
Development, GFI Group Inc.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on the draft version of H.R. 1610 entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Promote Job Creation, Capital
Formation, and Market Certainty.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Kenneth A. Bertsch,
President and CEO, Society of Corporate Secretaries &
Governance Professionals; Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director,
American Securitization Forum; Ms. Pam Hendrickson, Chief
Operating Officer, The Riverside Company; Mr. David Weild,
Senior Advisor, Grant Thornton, LLP; Mr. Luke Zubrod, Director,
Chatham Financial on behalf of the Coalition for Derivatives
End-Users; and Mr. Damon Silvers, Policy Director and Special
Counsel, AFL-CIO.
On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 19 yeas and
13 nays.
THE COMMUNITIES FIRST ACT
(H.R. 1697)
Summary
H.R. 1697, the Communities First Act, would reduce
regulatory, paperwork, and tax burdens on small banks. The bill
would revise regulatory requirements for community banks by (1)
amending the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to permit certain
insured depository institutions to submit a short-form report
of condition; (2) amending the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to exempt
certain small-sized depository institutions from the annual
management assessment of internal controls requirements; (3)
amending the Truth in Lending Act to exempt from escrow or
impound account requirements any loan secured by a first lien
on a consumer's principal dwelling, if the loan is held by a
creditor with assets of $10 billion or less; and (4) amending
the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to exempt certain financial
institutions from furnishing a mandatory annual privacy notice.
The bill would also amend the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 to direct the Securities and Exchange Commission: (1) to
ensure that information, documents, and reports accurately and
appropriately reflect the business model of a registered
security issuer; (2) to approve any new or amended generally
accepted accounting principle only if it would have no negative
economic impact on certain small-sized insured depository
institutions; and (3) to increase the shareholder registration
threshold for certain banks and bank holding companies.
The bill would also amend the Dodd-Frank Act: (1) to
authorize the Financial Stability Oversight Council to set
aside a final regulation prescribed by the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) if the Council decides that it would
be inconsistent with the safe and sound operation of U.S.
financial institutions, or could have a disproportionate
negative impact on a subset of the banking industry; and (2) to
repeal the authority of the Federal Reserve Board to delegate
to the CFPB its authority to examine persons for compliance
with federal consumer financial laws.
For the purposes of capital calculation, the bill
authorizes specified institutions: (1) to amortize losses or
write-downs on a quarterly basis over a 10-year period; and (2)
to average, over a five-year period, the appraised value of any
real estate securing a loan held by the institution.
Legislative History
On May 3, 2011, H.R. 1697 was introduced by Representative
Blaine Luetkemeyer and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 55 cosponsors.
On November 16, 2011, the Subcommittees on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit and Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a joint legislative
hearing on H.R. 1697 entitled ``H.R. 1697, The Communities
First Act.'' The Subcommittees received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Salvatore Marranca, President and
Chief Executive Officer, Cattaraugus County Bank on behalf of
the Independent Community Bankers Association; Mr. O. William
Cheney, President and Chief Executive Officer, Credit Union
National Association; Mr. John A. Klebba, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Legends Bank, on behalf of the Missouri
Bankers Association; Mr. Fred Becker, Jr., President and Chief
Executive Officer, National Association of Federal Credit
Unions; Mr. Arthur E. Wilmarth, Jr., Professor of Law, George
Washington University, Executive Director, Center for Law,
Economics and Finance; Mr. Damon Silvers, Director, Policy and
Special Counsel, American Federation of Labor and Congress of
Industrial Organizations; and Mr. Adam J. Levitin, Professor of
Law, Georgetown University Law Center.
SWAPS BAILOUT PREVENTION ACT
(H.R. 1838)
Summary
H.R. 1838, the Swaps Bailout Prevention Act, would repeal
Section 716 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (Public Law 111-203). Section 716 prohibits
``federal assistance''--defined as ``the use of any advances
from any Federal Reserve credit facility or discount window
[or] Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance or
guarantees''--to ``swaps entities,'' which include swap dealers
and major swap participants, securities and futures exchanges,
swap-execution facilities, and clearing organizations. This
provision, known as the swap desk ``push out'' or ``spin off''
provision, forces financial institutions that have swap desks
to move them into an affiliate to preserve their access to
Federal Reserve credit facilities and federal deposit
insurance. Although the provision allows banks to continue
dealing in swaps related to interest rates, foreign currency,
and swaps permitted under the National Bank Act, it prohibits
them from engaging in swaps related to commodities, equities,
and credit.
Legislative History
On May 11, 2011, H.R. 1838 was introduced by Representative
Nan Hayworth and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services and the Committee on Agriculture. The bill has no
cosponsors.
On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
H.R. 1838 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring Certainty
to the Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Keith
Bailey, Managing Director, Fixed Income, Currencies and
Commodities, Barclays Capital, on behalf of the Institute of
International Bankers; Mr. Shawn Bernardo, Senior Managing
Director, Tullett Prebon, on behalf of the Wholesale Market
Brokers' Association Americas; Ms. Brenda Boultwood, Chief Risk
Officer and Senior Vice President, CE Risk Management Division
Office, Constellation Energy, on behalf of the Coalition of
Derivatives End-Users; Mr. James Cawley, CEO, Javelin Capital
Markets LLC; Mr. Kent Mason, Davis & Harman LLP, on behalf of
the American Benefits Council and the Committee on the
Investment of Employee Benefit Assets; and Mr. Conrad Voldstad,
Chief Executive Officer, International Swaps and Derivatives
Association.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 1838, as amended, favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 19 yeas and 14 nays.
TO AMEND THE SECURITIES LAWS TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN THRESHOLDS FOR
SHAREHOLDER REGISTRATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
(H.R. 1965)
Summary
H.R. 1965 raises the threshold for mandatory registration
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act)
from 500 shareholders to 2,000 shareholders for banks and bank
holding companies. The bill would also modify the threshold for
deregistration under Sections 12(g) and 15(d) of the Exchange
Act for a bank or a bank holding company from 300 to 1,200
shareholders.
Legislative History
On May 24, 2011, H.R. 1965 was introduced by Representative
James Himes and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 18 cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
H.R. 1965 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC; Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief
Executive Officer, SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams,
Chairman and President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry
Organization; Mr. A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas
Securities Department on behalf of the North American
Securities Administrators; and Ms. Dana Mauriello, President,
ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
full Committee by voice vote.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote.
On November 2, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1965 under
suspension of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by a
record vote of 420 yeas and 2 nays.
PRIVATE COMPANY FLEXIBILITY AND GROWTH ACT
(H.R. 2167)
Summary
H.R. 2167, the Private Company Flexibility and Growth Act,
would raise the threshold for mandatory registration under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) from 500
shareholders to 1,000 shareholders for all companies;
shareholders who received securities under employee
compensation plans would not count towards the threshold.
Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act requires issuers to
register equity securities with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) if those securities are held by 500 or more
holders of record and the company has total assets of more than
$10 million. After a company registers under 12(g), it must
comply with the Exchange Act's reporting requirements, which
include filing annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports
on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and proxy statements
on Schedule 14A. The shareholder threshold has not been
adjusted since it was adopted in 1964 and has become an
impediment to capital formation for small startup companies.
These companies often remain private to maintain greater
flexibility and control, and to avoid the increased costs
associated with becoming a public company. To attract employees
and conserve capital for research and development, startup
companies often award their employees stock options in place of
higher salaries. If the company succeeds and those options
vest, the holders of those options become equity holders, and
they are counted against the registration threshold. Because
private companies are taking longer to go public than they have
in the past, employees' stock options are increasingly vesting
before the companies go public. Small private companies may
thus find themselves subject to the same reporting requirements
as listed companies.
Legislative History
On June 14, 2011, H.R. 2167 was introduced by
Representative David Schweikert and referred to the Committee
on Financial Services. The bill has 27 cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
H.R. 2167 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC; Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief
Executive Officer, SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams,
Chairman and President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry
Organization; Mr. A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas
Securities Department on behalf of the North American
Securities Administrators; and Ms. Dana Mauriello, President,
ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 2167, as amended, favorably reported to the
full Committee by voice vote.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 2167, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote.
SEC REGULATORY ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
(H.R. 2308)
Summary
H.R. 2308, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act, would
direct the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to follow
President Obama's Executive Order No. 13563, which requires
that government agencies conduct cost-benefit analyses to
ensure that the benefits of any rulemaking outweigh the costs.
Because the SEC is an independent agency, it is not required to
follow the Executive Order. The bill would require the SEC to
clearly identify the problem that a proposed regulation is
intended to address and to assess the significance of that
problem before it issues a rule. The legislation would require
the SEC's Chief Economist to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of
potential rules to ensure that the burden on economic growth
and job creation that would result from proposed regulations
does not outweigh the benefits of those regulations. H.R. 2308
would also require the SEC to periodically review regulations
and orders in effect before the date of enactment to determine
whether these regulations are outdated, ineffective,
insufficient, or unduly burdensome. The bill would require the
SEC to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal these regulations
and orders in accordance with its review.
Legislative History
On June 23, 2011, H.R. 2308 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
Chairman Scott Garrett and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 17 cosponsors.
On September 15, 2011, the full Committee held a
legislative hearing on H.R. 2308 entitled, ``Fixing the
Watchdog: Legislative Proposals to Improve and Enhance the
Securities and Exchange Commission.'' The Committee received
testimony from the following witnesses: The Honorable Mary
Schapiro, Chairman, SEC; Mr. Shubh Saumya, Partner and Managing
Director, Boston Consulting Group; The Honorable Paul Atkins,
Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, and Former
Commissioner, SEC; Mr. Stephen D. Crimmins, Partner, K&L Gates
LLP, and Former Deputy Chief Litigation Counsel, Division of
Enforcement, SEC; Mr. Jonathan G. ``Jack'' Katz, Former
Secretary, SEC, on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; The
Honorable Harvey Pitt, Chief Executive Officer, Kalorama
Partners, LLC, and Former Chairman, SEC; and Mr. J.W. Verret,
Assistant Professor of Law, George Mason University School of
Law.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 19 yeas and 15 nays.
GSE LEGAL FEE REDUCTION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2428)
Summary
H.R. 2428, the GSE Legal Fee Reduction Act of 2011, would
limit the indemnification of former executives of the
government sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
(GSEs) and set standards for advancing indemnification
payments. Under the bill, the Federal Housing Finance Agency
(FHFA) would have the authority to set criteria for
indemnification and may require executives or directors to post
bond as a condition of receiving indemnification advances. FHFA
would be required to prohibit the GSEs from using Treasury
funds to satisfy any settlement, judgment, order, or penalty.
Legislative History
On July 6, 2011, H.R. 2428 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer and
referred to the Committee on Financial Services. The bill has
five cosponsors.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 2428 entitled
``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps
to End the GSE Bailout.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting
Director of the FHFA; Dr. Anthony Sanders, Mercatus Center
Senior Scholar and Distinguished Professor of Real Estate
Finance, George Mason University; Mr. David John, Senior
Research Fellow in Retirement Security and Financial
Institutions, The Heritage Foundation; Dr. Sheila Crowley,
President, National Low Income Housing Coalition; and Mr. Kelly
William Cobb, Government Affairs Manager, Americans for Tax
Reform.
FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC TAXPAYER PAYBACK ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2436)
Summary
H.R. 2436, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Taxpayer Payback
Act of 2011, would prohibit any reduction in the dividend rate
paid to the Secretary of the Treasury on the senior preferred
stock of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The bill would codify the
September 2008 agreement between the Treasury Department and
the government sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
(GSEs), thus guaranteeing that taxpayers' investment in Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac will be repaid.
As part of the government takeover of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, the Treasury Department provided both firms with
capital in return for senior preferred stock that pays a 10
percent quarterly dividend to the Treasury. Although the
dividend may be changed at any time by agreement between the
Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and Treasury Department,
the 10 percent dividend was designed to guarantee that
taxpayers would be fully repaid and that Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac would not be reincorporated after their conservatorship as
private companies with public charters and missions. Some
critics of the 10 percent dividend have argued that it forces
the GSEs to borrow even more from the Treasury Department to
repay what it has already borrowed plus the dividend, and thus
serves no purpose.
Legislative History
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2436 was introduced by Representative
Donald Manzullo and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has four cosponsors.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 2436 entitled
``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps
to End the GSE Bailout.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting
Director of the FHFA; Dr. Anthony Sanders, Mercatus Center
Senior Scholar and Distinguished Professor of Real Estate
Finance, George Mason University; Mr. David John, Senior
Research Fellow in Retirement Security and Financial
Institutions, The Heritage Foundation; Dr. Sheila Crowley,
President, National Low Income Housing Coalition; and Mr. Kelly
William Cobb, Government Affairs Manager, Americans for Tax
Reform.
On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered H.R. 2436 favorably reported to the full Committee by
voice vote.
REMOVING GSES CHARTERS DURING RECEIVERSHIP ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2439)
Summary
H.R. 2439, the Removing GSEs Charters During Receivership
Act of 2011, would authorize the Federal Housing Finance Agency
(FHFA) to revoke the charters of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
and require the FHFA to revoke the charter when a successor,
limited-life entity is dissolved. The bill would also require
the Director of the FHFA to submit a report to Congress
analyzing the economic impact of privatizing the secondary
mortgage market and detailing the costs of maintaining a
government guarantee. The bill would also require the Director
of the FHFA to make quarterly determinations for five years
regarding whether $250 billion of residential mortgage loans
were sold and securitized in the private, secondary mortgage
market.
Legislative History
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2439 was introduced by Representative
Steve Stivers and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 2439 entitled
``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps
to End the GSE Bailout.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting
Director of the FHFA; Dr. Anthony Sanders, Mercatus Center
Senior Scholar and Distinguished Professor of Real Estate
Finance, George Mason University; Mr. David John, Senior
Research Fellow in Retirement Security and Financial
Institutions, The Heritage Foundation; Dr. Sheila Crowley,
President, National Low Income Housing Coalition; and Mr. Kelly
William Cobb, Government Affairs Manager, Americans for Tax
Reform.
On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
MARKET TRANSPARENCY AND TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2440)
Summary
H.R. 2440, the Market Transparency and Taxpayer Protection
Act of 2011, would direct Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to report
to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) on the assets they
own within 180 days of the bill's enactment. The bill would
also require the FHFA to identify the government sponsored
enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) assets that are
not critical to the GSEs' missions, and direct the FHFA's
director to establish annual plans for the GSEs to sell or
dispose of these assets. The bill would also give the GSEs
three years to dispose of these assets, and require the FHFA to
report annually to Congress on the disposition of these assets.
Legislative History
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2440 was introduced by Representative
Robert Hurt and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has three cosponsors.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 2440 entitled
``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps
to End the GSE Bailout.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting
Director of the FHFA; Dr. Anthony Sanders, Mercatus Center
Senior Scholar and Distinguished Professor of Real Estate
Finance, George Mason University; Mr. David John, Senior
Research Fellow in Retirement Security and Financial
Institutions, The Heritage Foundation; Dr. Sheila Crowley,
President, National Low Income Housing Coalition; and Mr. Kelly
William Cobb, Government Affairs Manager, Americans for Tax
Reform.
On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
HOUSING TRUST FUND ELIMINATION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2441)
Summary
H.R. 2441, the Housing Trust Fund Elimination Act of 2011,
would abolish the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Created as
part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA),
the Affordable Housing Trust Fund was intended to serve as a
permanent off-budget source of revenue dedicated to building,
preserving, and rehabilitating housing for extremely and very
low-income families. However, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund
has never been capitalized. The cost of the Affordable Housing
Trust Fund was estimated to be more than $4.5 billion over 5
years, and it was to have been funded by Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac. When the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) placed the
government sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
(GSEs) into conservatorship in September 2008, FHFA suspended
the GSEs' contributions to the Housing Trust Fund.
Legislative History
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2441 was introduced by Representative
Edward Royce and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 2441 entitled
``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps
to End the GSE Bailout.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting
Director of the FHFA; Dr. Anthony Sanders, Mercatus Center
Senior Scholar and Distinguished Professor of Real Estate
Finance, George Mason University; Mr. David John, Senior
Research Fellow in Retirement Security and Financial
Institutions, The Heritage Foundation; Dr. Sheila Crowley,
President, National Low Income Housing Coalition; and Mr. Kelly
William Cobb, Government Affairs Manager, Americans for Tax
Reform.
On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered H.R. 2441, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 18 yeas and 14 nays.
CAP THE GSE BAILOUT ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2462)
Summary
H.R. 2462, the Cap the GSE Bailout Act of 2011, would limit
outlays to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to the larger of the net
amounts Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have received from the
Treasury Department from 2010 to 2012 or $200 billion.
In September 2008, when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were
placed into conservatorship, the Treasury Department entered
into an agreement to purchase up to $100 billion in senior
preferred stock of each of the government sponsored enterprises
(GSEs). In February 2009, the Treasury Department increased
this level to up to $200 billion for each of the GSEs. In
December 2009, the Treasury Department announced that it had
raised the total limit for each GSE to the greater of $200
billion or $200 billion plus any additional payments made in
calendar years 2010 through 2012, less any surplus amount as of
December 31, 2012. H.R. 2462 codifies the December 2009
agreement. H.R. 2462 would cap the GSE bailout to provide
certainty that government assistance is limited and will end.
Legislative History
On July 8, 2011, H.R. 2462 was introduced by Representative
Michael Fitzpatrick and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has three cosponsors.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 2462 entitled
``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps
to End the GSE Bailout.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting
Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency; Dr. Anthony
Sanders, Mercatus Center Senior Scholar and Distinguished
Professor of Real Estate Finance, George Mason University; Mr.
David John, Senior Research Fellow in Retirement Security and
Financial Institutions, The Heritage Foundation; Dr. Sheila
Crowley, President, National Low Income Housing Coalition; and
Mr. Kelly William Cobb, Government Affairs Manager, Americans
for Tax Reform.
On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered H.R. 2462, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
SWAP EXECUTION FACILITY CLARIFICATION ACT
(H.R. 2586)
Summary
H.R. 2586, the Swap Execution Facility Clarification Act,
would direct the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)
and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to promulgate swap
execution facility (SEF) rules that would effectuate Congress's
intent that SEFs serve as an alternative to exchanges and
provide an execution facility for illiquid or thinly-traded
swaps.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act (P.L. 111-203) requires that cleared swaps be executed
either on exchanges or on SEFs regulated by either the CFTC or
the SEC. The drafters of the Dodd-Frank Act intended for SEFs
to serve as an alternative to exchanges by providing an
execution facility for illiquid or thinly-traded swaps. The
CFTC's and SEC's proposed rules for SEFs, however, fail to
provide the flexibility necessary to execute illiquid or
thinly-traded swaps, and market participants have pointed out
that the proposed rules are overly prescriptive and would
inhibit the execution of swap trades. H.R. 2586 would prohibit
the CFTC and the SEC from requiring SEFs to have a minimum
number of participants receive bids or offers; to have market
participants request or receive more than one quote; to display
or delay bids or offers for a specific time period; and to
allow only voice-based and hybrid trading models for the
execution of block trades. The bill would also allow market
participants to use any means of interstate commerce to execute
swap transactions.
Legislative History
On July 19, 2011, H.R. 2586 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
Chairman Scott Garrett and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services and the Committee on Agriculture. The bill
has seven cosponsors.
On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
H.R. 2586 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring Certainty
to the Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Keith
Bailey, Managing Director, Fixed Income, Currencies and
Commodities, Barclays Capital, on behalf of the Institute of
International Bankers; Mr. Shawn Bernardo, Senior Managing
Director, Tullett Prebon, on behalf of the Wholesale Market
Brokers' Association Americas; Ms. Brenda Boultwood, Chief Risk
Officer and Senior Vice President, CE Risk Management Division
Office, Constellation Energy, on behalf of the Coalition of
Derivatives End-Users; Mr. James Cawley, CEO, Javelin Capital
Markets LLC; Mr. Kent Mason, Davis & Harman LLP, on behalf of
the American Benefits Council and the Committee on the
Investment of Employee Benefit Assets; and Mr. Conrad Voldstad,
Chief Executive Officer, International Swaps and Derivatives
Association.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee
by voice vote.
On November 30, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by
voice vote.
TO EXEMPT INTER-AFFILIATE SWAPS FROM CERTAIN REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
PUT IN PLACE BY THE DODD-FRANK WALL STREET REFORM AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION ACT
(H.R. 2779)
Summary
H.R. 2779, a bill to exempt inter-affiliate swaps from
certain regulatory requirements put in place by the Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, would exempt
inter-affiliate trades from the margin, clearing, and reporting
requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act. Inter-affiliate swaps are
swaps executed between entities under common corporate
ownership. Inter-affiliate swaps allow corporate groups with
subsidiaries and affiliates to better manage risk by
transferring the risk of its affiliates to a single affiliate
and then executing swaps through that affiliate. Inter-
affiliate swaps do not pose a systemic risk because they do not
create additional counterparty exposures or increase the
interconnectedness between parties outside the corporate group.
Despite the differences between inter-affiliate swaps and swaps
between unrelated parties, the Dodd-Frank Act did not
distinguish between such swaps. H.R. 2779 would reduce the
costs of hedging for corporate groups by exempting inter-
affiliate trades from the margin, clearing and reporting
requirements.
Legislative History
On August 1, 2011, H.R. 2779 was introduced by
Representative Steve Stivers and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services and the Committee on Agriculture. The bill
has two cosponsors.
On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
H.R. 2779 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring Certainty
to the Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Keith
Bailey, Managing Director, Fixed Income, Currencies and
Commodities, Barclays Capital, on behalf of the Institute of
International Bankers; Mr. Shawn Bernardo, Senior Managing
Director, Tullett Prebon, on behalf of the Wholesale Market
Brokers' Association Americas; Ms. Brenda Boultwood, Chief Risk
Officer and Senior Vice President, CE Risk Management Division
Office, Constellation Energy, on behalf of the Coalition of
Derivatives End-Users; Mr. James Cawley, CEO, Javelin Capital
Markets LLC; Mr. Kent Mason, Davis & Harman LLP, on behalf of
the American Benefits Council and the Committee on the
Investment of Employee Benefit Assets; and Mr. Conrad Voldstad,
Chief Executive Officer, International Swaps and Derivatives
Association.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee
by a record vote of 23 yeas, 6 nays and 1 present.
On November 30, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by
a record vote of 53 yeas and 0 nays.
ENTREPRENEUR ACCESS TO CAPITAL ACT
(H.R. 2930)
Summary
H.R. 2930, the ``Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act,''
would create a new registration exemption from the Securities
Act of 1933 for securities issued through internet platforms,
also known as ``crowdfunding.'' To qualify for this new
exemption, the issuer's offering cannot exceed $1 million,
unless the issuer provides investors with audited financial
statements, in which case the offering amount may not exceed $2
million. An individual's investment must be equal to or less
than the lesser of $10,000 or 10 percent of the investor's
annual income. By exempting such offerings from registration
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and
preempting state registration laws, H.R. 2930 will enable
entrepreneurs to more easily access capital from potential
investors across the United States to grow their business and
create jobs.
H.R. 2930 would require issuers and intermediaries to
fulfill a number of requirements in order to avail themselves
of this new exemption. These requirements, which include
notices to the SEC about the offerings and parties to the
offerings that will be shared with the States, are designed to
reduce the risk of fraud in these offerings and thereby protect
investors. The legislation also would allow for an unlimited
number of investors to invest via a crowdfunding offering and
preempts state securities registration laws. However, the
legislation does not restrict the States' ability to discover
and stop and prosecute fraudulent offerings.
Legislative History
On September 14, 2011, H.R. 2930 was introduced by
Representative Patrick McHenry and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has five cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
H.R. 2930 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC; Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief
Executive Officer, SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams,
Chairman and President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry
Organization; Mr. A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas
Securities Department on behalf of the North American
Securities Administrators; and Ms. Dana Mauriello, President,
ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 2930 favorably reported to the full Committee
by a record vote of 18 yeas and 14 nays.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on October
31, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-262).
On November 3, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2930 and
passed the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 407 yeas
and 17 nays.
ACCESS TO CAPITAL FOR JOB CREATORS ACT
(H.R. 2940)
Summary
H.R. 2940, the ``Access to Capital for Job Creators Act,''
would make the exemption under the Securities and Exchange
Commission's (SEC) Regulation D Rule 506 available to issuers
even if the securities are marketed through a general
solicitation or advertising so long as the purchasers are
``accredited investors.'' The legislation would allow companies
greater access to accredited investors and to new sources of
capital to grow and create jobs, without putting less
sophisticated investors at risk. To ensure that only accredited
investors purchase the securities, H.R. 2940 requires the SEC
to write rules on how an issuer would verify that the
purchasers of securities are accredited investors.
The Securities Act of 1933 requires that any offer to sell
securities must either be registered with the SEC or meet an
exemption. Regulation D Rule 506 is an exemption that allows
companies to raise capital as long as they do not market their
securities through general solicitations or advertising. This
prohibition on general solicitation and advertising has been
interpreted to mean that potential investors must have an
existing relationship with the company before they can be
notified that unregistered securities are available for
purchase. Requiring potential investors to have an existing
relationship with the company significantly limits the pool of
potential investors and severely hampers the ability of small
companies to raise capital and create jobs.
Legislative History
On September 15, 2011, H.R. 2940 was introduced by
Representative Kevin McCarthy and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
H.R. 2940 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Meredith
Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance, SEC; Mr.
Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC; Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief
Executive Officer, SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams,
Chairman and President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry
Organization; Mr. A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas
Securities Department on behalf of the North American
Securities Administrators; and Ms. Dana Mauriello, President,
ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered H.R. 2940, as amended, favorably reported to the
full Committee by voice vote.
On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on October
31, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-263).
On November 3, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2940 and
passed the bill by a record vote of 413 yeas and 11 nays.
RETIREMENT INCOME PROTECTION ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 3045)
Summary
H.R. 3045, the Retirement Income Protection Act of 2011,
would ensure that swap dealers and Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1978 (ERISA) benefit plans can engage in swap
transactions without swap dealers becoming ``fiduciaries'' to
ERISA plans.
Employee benefit plans subject to the ERISA regularly
engage in swap transactions to hedge against market risks,
reduce volatility, and make funding obligations more
predictable. Under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act, an ERISA
employee benefit plan is deemed a ``special entity,'' and
requires certain business conduct standards when transacting
with swap dealers. Specifically, swap dealers have a duty to
act in the ``best interests'' of special entities if they act
as an advisor to the special entity. Because ERISA prohibits
transactions between fiduciaries and ERISA plan sponsors, Title
VII could forbid swap dealers from entering into swaps with
ERISA plans, which would make it impossible for ERISA plans to
engage in swap transactions.
H.R. 3045 would amend ERISA so that registered swap dealers
or security-based swap dealers will not be considered
fiduciaries to employee benefit plans by performing acts or
services for that plan, and would remove employee benefit plans
from the definition of ``special entity'' in Title VII of the
Dodd-Frank Act. The bill would clarify the definition of
``investment advisor'' by setting a standard for an entity to
be ``independent'' and therefore able to serve as an advisor to
a special entity. H.R. 3045 would also make clear that the duty
of the swap dealer to act in the ``best interests'' of a
special entity does not create a fiduciary duty.
Legislative History
On September 23, 2011, H.R. 3045 was introduced by
Representative Francisco ``Quico'' Canseco and referred to the
Committee on Financial Services, the Committee on Agriculture,
and the Committee on Education and the Workforce. The bill has
one cosponsor.
On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 3045 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring
Certainty to the Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. Keith Bailey, Managing Director, Fixed Income, Currencies
and Commodities, Barclays Capital, on behalf of the Institute
of International Bankers; Mr. Shawn Bernardo, Senior Managing
Director, Tullett Prebon, on behalf of the Wholesale Market
Brokers' Association Americas; Ms. Brenda Boultwood, Chief Risk
Officer and Senior Vice President, CE Risk Management Division
Office, Constellation Energy, on behalf of the Coalition of
Derivatives End-Users; Mr. James Cawley, CEO, Javelin Capital
Markets LLC; Mr. Kent Mason, Davis & Harman LLP, on behalf of
the American Benefits Council and the Committee on the
Investment of Employee Benefit Assets; and Mr. Conrad Voldstad,
Chief Executive Officer, International Swaps and Derivatives
Association.
On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee
by a record vote of 19 yeas and 14 nays.
SMALL COMPANY JOB GROWTH AND REGULATORY RELIEF ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 3213)
Summary
H.R. 3213, the Small Company Job Growth and Regulatory
Relief Act of 2011, would expand the exemption from Section
404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that the
auditor of a publicly-held company attest to and report on
management's assessment of its internal controls. In 2007, the
SEC provided ``smaller reporting companies'' with exemptions
from (or alternatives to) Section 404(b). A ``public'' company
qualifies as a ``smaller reporting company'' if its market
capitalization is less than $75 million, or--if its market
capitalization cannot be determined--less than $50 million in
revenue.
H.R. 3213 would increase the market capitalization
threshold for a full 404(b) exemption from $75 million to $350
million.
Legislative History
On October 14, 2011, H.R. 3213 was introduced by
Representative Stephen Fincher and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 17 cosponsors.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a draft version of H.R. 3213 entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Facilitate Small Business Capital Formation and
Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Ms. Meredith Cross, Director, Division of
Corporation Finance, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission;
Mr. Vincent Molinari, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, GATE
Technologies LLC;
Mr. Barry E. Silbert, Founder and Chief Executive Officer,
SecondMarket, Inc.; Mr. Matthew H. Williams, Chairman and
President, Gothenburg State Bank, on behalf of the American
Bankers Association; Mr. William D. Waddill, Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., on behalf of the Biotechnology Industry Organization; Mr.
A. Heath Abshure, Commissioner, Arkansas Securities Department
on behalf of the North American Securities Administrators; and
Ms. Dana Mauriello, President, ProFounder.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered the draft version of H.R. 3213, as amended,
favorably reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 18
yeas and 14 nays.
INVESTMENT ADVISER OVERSIGHT ACT
Summary
A discussion draft offered by Chairman Spencer Bachus, the
Investment Adviser Oversight Act, would adopt one of the three
options presented to Congress by the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) to improve the SEC's ability to examine
registered investment advisers. The three options were
presented to Congress as part of a study mandated by Section
914 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, which required the SEC to study ``the need for
enhanced examination and enforcement resources for investment
advisers'' and report its findings to the House Financial
Services and Senate Banking Committees.
The discussion draft would amend the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940 (Advisers Act) to provide for the creation of
national investment adviser associations (NIAAs), registered
with and overseen by the SEC. Investment advisers that conduct
business with retail customers would have to become members of
a registered NIAA. The SEC would have the authority to approve
the registration of any NIAA, and the SEC would be required to
determine whether an NIAA has the capacity to carry out the
purposes of the Advisers Act and to enforce compliance by its
members and their employees with the Advisers Act, the SEC's
rules under the Act, and the NIAA's rules before the investment
advisers association can register as a NIAA.
Legislative History
On September 13, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on the discussion draft, entitled ``Ensuring
Appropriate Regulatory Oversight of Broker-Dealers and
Legislative Proposals to Improve Investment Oversight.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. William E. Dwyer III, Chairman, Financial Services
Institute; Mr. Ken Ehinger, President and Chief Executive
Officer, M Holdings Securities, Inc., on behalf of the
Association for Advanced Life Underwriting; Mr. Terry Headley,
President, National Association of Insurance and Financial
Advisors; Mr. Steven D. Irwin, Commissioner, Pennsylvania
Securities Commission, on behalf of the North American
Securities Administrators Association; Mr. Richard G. Ketchum,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority; Ms. Barbara Roper, Director of Investor
Protection, Consumer Federation of America; Mr. John G. Taft,
Chief Executive Officer, RBC Wealth Management, on behalf of
the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association; and
Mr. David Tittsworth, Executive Director/Executive Vice
President, Investment Adviser Association.
PRIVATE MORTGAGE MARKET INVESTMENT ACT
Summary
A discussion draft offered by Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott
Garrett would establish uniform standards that lay the
foundation for a new securitization market that would replace
the secondary-mortgage market now dominated by the government
sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The
discussion draft's uniform securitization standards would
foster transparency and legal certainty, which would attract
investors to the U.S. mortgage market without creating a
government guarantee that puts taxpayers at risk for bailing
out investors in the multi-trillion dollar mortgage market.
Legislative History
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``H.R. , the Private Mortgage Market
Investment Act.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Edward J. DeMarco, Acting Director,
Federal Housing Finance Administration; Mr. Tom Deutsch,
Director, American Securitization Forum; Mr. Martin Hughes,
President and Chief Executive Officer, Redwood Trust, Inc.; Ms.
Janneke Ratcliffe, Executive Director, Center for Community
Capital, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; and Mr.
Peter Wallison, Arthur Burns Fellow in Financial Policy
Studies, American Enterprise Institute.
Subcommittee Oversight Activities
GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES
On February 9, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``GSE Reform: Immediate Steps to Protect Taxpayers and
End the Bailout.'' The hearing examined proposals for reforming
the housing finance system and reducing the role of government
in subsidizing the mortgage market. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Mark Calabria,
Director of Financial Regulation Studies, Cato Institute; Mr.
Anthony Randazzo, Director, Economic Research, Reason
Foundation; Mr. Alex Pollock, Resident Fellow, American
Enterprise Institute; and Ms. Sarah Wartell, Executive Vice
President, Center for American Progress.
SECURITIZATION AND RISK RETENTION
On April 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Understanding the Implications and Consequences of the
Proposed Rule on Risk Retention.'' The hearing focused on the
proposed rule to implement Section 941 issued by the Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Federal Reserve Board, the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Housing Finance
Agency, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in
March 2011, particularly its implications for the availability
of affordable mortgage credit and the impact the proposed rule
would have on other asset classes that did not contribute to
the financial crisis. The Subcommittee received testimony from
the following witnesses: Mr. Scott Alvarez, General Counsel,
Federal Reserve Board; Ms. Meredith Cross, Director of the
Division of Corporation Finance, U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission; Mr. Michael Krimminger, General Counsel, Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation; Ms. Julie Williams, First Senior
Deputy Comptroller and Chief Counsel, Office of the Comptroller
of the Currency; Mr. Bob Ryan, Acting Commissioner, Federal
Housing Administration; Mr. Patrick Lawler, Chief Economist and
Associate Director, Office of Policy Analysis and Research,
Federal Housing Finance Agency; Mr. Henry V. Cunningham, Jr.,
President, Cunningham & Company, on behalf of the Mortgage
Bankers Association; Mr. Tom Deutsch, Executive Director,
American Securitization Forum; Mr. J. Christopher Hoeffel,
Managing Director, Investcorp International Inc., on behalf of
the CRE Finance Council; Mr. Kevin D. Schneider, President &
CEO, U.S. Mortgage Insurance, Genworth Financial, on behalf of
the Mortgage Insurance Companies of America; Mr. Bram Smith,
Executive Director, Loan Syndications and Trading Association;
and Ms. Ellen Harnick, Senior Policy Counsel, Center for
Responsible Lending.
OVERSIGHT AND RESTRUCTURING OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
(SEC)
On March 10, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission's
Operations, Activities, Challenges and FY 2012 Budget
Request.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Robert Cook, Director, Division of
Trading and Markets, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC);
Ms. Meredith Cross, Director, Division of Corporation Finance,
SEC; Mr. Robert Khuzami, Director, Division of Enforcement,
SEC; Ms. Eileen Rominger, Director, Division of Investment
Management, SEC; and Mr. Carlo di Florio, Director, Office of
Compliance Inspections and Examinations, SEC.
On June 24, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Mutual Fund Industry: Ensuring Market
Stability and Investor Confidence.'' The hearing examined the
Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC's) regulation of the
mutual fund industry; the SEC's response to the financial
crisis and the impact of the crisis on money market mutual
funds; proposals to change the valuation of money market mutual
funds; the SEC's proposal to improve distribution fees, also
known as ``12b-1 fees;'' and the impact of the SEC's proxy
rules adopted in 2010, which would permit shareholders to place
nominees for directors on a company's proxy statement; and
other issues of interest to mutual fund providers. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. Mercer Bullard, Associate Professor, University of
Mississippi School of Law; Mr. Andrew ``Buddy'' Donohue,
Partner, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP; Mr. Scott Goebel, Senior
Vice President, Secretary, and General Counsel, Fidelity
Management & Research Company; Ms. Heidi Stam, Managing
Director and General Counsel, The Vanguard Group; Mr. Paul
Schott Stevens, President & CEO, Investment Company Institute;
and Mr. Rene Stulz, Everett D. Reese Chair of Banking and
Monetary Economics, The Ohio State University.
MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITIES MARKET
On September 7, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing
in New York, New York entitled ``Facilitating Continued
Investor Demand in the U.S. Mortgage Market Without a
Government Guarantee.'' The hearing examined the conditions
necessary for a private sector mortgage market to develop and
thrive in the United States. Proposals to facilitate investor
demand for private-label residential mortgage backed securities
were also considered. The Subcommittee received testimony from
the following witnesses: Mr. Martin Hughes, President and CEO,
Redwood Trust, Inc.; Mr. Chris Katopis, Executive Director,
Association of Mortgage Investors; Mr. Joshua Rosner, Managing
Director, Graham Fisher & Co.; and Mr. Ajay Rajadhyaksha,
Managing Director, Barclays Capital.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-2................. GSE Reform: Immediate February 9, 2011
Steps to Protect
Taxpayers and End the
Bailout.
112-14................ Oversight of the March 10, 2011
Securities and Exchange
Commission's Operations,
Activities, Challenges
and FY 2012 Budget
Request.
112-17................ Legislative Proposals to March 11, 2011
Create a Covered Bond
Market in the United
States.
112-19................ Legislative Proposals to March 16, 2011
Promote Job Creation,
Capital Formation, and
Market Certainty.
112-22................ Legislative Hearing on March 31, 2011
Immediate Steps to
Protect Taxpayers from
the Ongoing Bailout of
Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac.
112-27................ Understanding the April 14, 2011
Implications and
Consequences of the
Proposed Rule on Risk
Retention.
112-29................ Legislative Proposals to May 11, 2011
Address the Negative
Consequences of the Dodd-
Frank Whistleblower
Provisions.
112-33................ Transparency, Transition May 25, 2011
and Taxpayer Protection:
More Steps to End the GSE
Bailout.
112-42................ Oversight of the Mutual June 24, 2011
Fund Industry: Ensuring
Market Stability and
Investor Confidence.
112-56................ Facilitating Continued September 7, 2011
Investor Demand in the
U.S. Mortgage Market
Without a Government
Guarantee (Field Hearing).
112-58................ Ensuring Appropriate September 13, 2011
Regulatory Oversight of
Broker-Dealers and
Legislative Proposals to
Improve Investment
Adviser Oversight.
112-63................ Legislative Proposals to September 21, 2011
Facilitate Small Business
Capital Formation and Job
Creation.
112-75................ Legislative Proposals to October 14, 2011
Bring Certainty to the
Over-the-Counter
Derivatives Market.
112-82................ H.R. , the Private November 3, 2011
Mortgage Market
Investment Act.
112-85................ H.R. 1697, The Communities November 16, 2011
First Act (Joint Hearing
with Financial
Institutions).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology
(Ratio: 8-6)
RON PAUL, Texas, Chairman
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri, Ranking MemberLTER B. JONES, North Carolina,
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York Vice Chairman
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
AL GREEN, Texas PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee Legislative Activities
FREE COMPETITION IN CURRENCY ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1098)
Summary
H.R. 1098, the Free Competition in Currency Act of 2011,
would repeal the federal law establishing U.S. coins, currency,
and Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender for all debts;
prohibit the imposition of taxes on coins, medals, tokens, or
gold, silver, platinum, palladium, or rhodium bullion issued by
a state, the United States, a foreign government, or any other
person; prohibit states from assessing any tax or fee on any
currency or other monetary instrument that is used in
interstate or foreign commerce and that has legal tender status
under the Constitution; and repeal provisions of the federal
criminal code relating to circulating coins of gold, silver, or
other metal for use as current money and making or possessing
likenesses of such coins; and abate any current prosecution
under such provisions and nullify any previous convictions.
Legislative History
On March 15, 2011, H.R. 1098 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology Chairman Ron Paul
and was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, the
Committee on Ways and Means, and the Committee on the
Judiciary. The bill has no cosponsors.
On September 13, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Road Map to Sound Money: A Legislative Hearing on
H.R. 1098 and Restoring the Dollar.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Dr. Lawrence M. Parks,
Ph.D., Executive Director, Foundation for the Advancement of
Monetary Education; and Dr. Lawrence H. White, Ph.D., Professor
of Economics, Department of Economics, George Mason University.
THE GOLD RESERVE TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1495)
Summary
H.R. 1495, the Gold Reserve Transparency Act of 2011, would
direct the Secretary of the Treasury to conduct a full assay,
inventory, and audit of federal gold reserves, including an
analysis of the sufficiency of the measures taken for their
security. The bill would also direct the Government
Accountability Office to review the results of the assay,
inventory, audit, and analysis.
Legislative History
On April 12, 2011, H.R. 1495 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology Chairman Ron Paul
and was referred to the Committee on Financial Services. The
bill has no cosponsors.
On June 23, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``Investigating the Gold: H.R. 1495, the Gold
Reserve Transparency Act of 2011 and the Oversight of United
States Gold Holdings.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Gary T. Engel, Director of
Financial Management and Assurance, Government Accountability
Office; and The Honorable Eric M. Thorson, Inspector General,
Department of Treasury.
Subcommittee Oversight Activities
THE ECONOMY AND JOBS
On February 9, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Can Monetary Policy Really Create Jobs?'' The focus
of the hearing was the effectiveness of Federal Reserve policy
in creating jobs. The purpose of the hearing was twofold:
first, to examine whether the Federal Reserve is meeting, or
ever could meet, its mandates of maintaining stable prices and
high employment when prices and employment rates are high; and
second, to examine whether the Fed's accommodative monetary
policy has implications for long-term employment prospects. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Dr. Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Professor of Economics, Sellinger
School of Business, Loyola University; Dr. Richard Vedder,
Professor of Economics, Ohio University; and Dr. Josh Bivens,
Economic Policy Institute, Washington, D.C.
MONETARY POLICY AND RISING PRICES
On March 17, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The Relationship of Monetary Policy and Rising Prices.'' The
purpose of the hearing was to examine whether the stimulative
monetary policy the Federal Reserve has recently engaged in
will trigger inflation. The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Lewis E. Lehrman, Senior
Partner, L.E. Lehrman & Co; Mr. James Grant, Editor, Grant's
Interest Rate Observer; and Professor Joseph T. Salerno, Pace
University.
BULLION COIN PROGRAMS
On April 7, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Bullion Coin Programs of the United States Mint: Can They Be
Improved?'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine possible
improvements to the Mint's bullion programs. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Beth Deisher,
Editor, Coin World Magazine; Terrence Hanlon, President, Dillon
Gage Metals Division; Ross Hansen, Founder, Northwest
Territorial Mint; and Raymond Nessim, Chief Executive Officer,
Manfra, Tordella & Brookes, Inc.
MONETARY POLICY AND THE DEBT CEILING
On May 11, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Monetary Policy and the Debt Ceiling: Examining the
Relationship between the Federal Reserve and Government Debt.''
The purpose of the hearing was to examine the role that the
federal government's debt plays in the central bank's monetary
policy decision making and the effect of that role on the
budget deficit. The hearing focused on examining the link
between the Federal Reserve and government debt, including
whether the Treasury Department can increase the government
debt as the Federal Reserve increases the monetary base; how
the Federal Reserve purchases government debt to conduct
monetary policy; the role of the Federal Reserve in financing
government budget deficits; the impact of current monetary and
fiscal policy on the cost of financing the government's debt;
and the issue of raising the debt ceiling. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Dr. Richard
Ebeling, Professor of Economics, Northwood University; Mr. Bert
Ely, Ely & Company, Inc.; and Dr. Matthew J. Slaughter, Dean,
Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College.
GENERAL OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
On June 1, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Federal Reserve Lending Disclosure: FOIA, Dodd-Frank, and the
Data Dump.'' The hearing examined information disclosed by the
Federal Reserve in compliance with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203) and the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Scott G. Alvarez,
General Counsel, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System; and Mr. Thomas C. Baxter, Jr., General Counsel, Federal
Reserve Bank of New York.
On October 4, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Audit the Fed: Dodd-Frank, QE3, and Federal Reserve
Transparency.'' The purpose of this hearing was to examine the
results of the audits of the Federal Reserve by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act;
earlier legislative efforts to audit the Federal Reserve;
current Federal Reserve audit and data disclosure requirements;
and Federal Reserve transparency. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Orice Williams
Brown, Managing Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, Government Accountability Office; Dr. Robert D.
Auerbach, Professor of Public Affairs, Lyndon B. Johnson School
of Public Affairs, University of Texas, Austin; and Dr. Mark A.
Calabria, Director of Financial Regulation Studies, Cato
Institute.
CONDUCT OF MONETARY POLICY BY THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL
RESERVE SYSTEM
On July 26, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Impact of Monetary Policy on the Economy: A Regional Fed
Perspective on Inflation, Unemployment, and QE3.'' The purpose
of the hearing was to receive a regional Federal Reserve Bank
perspective on inflation, unemployment, monetary policy actions
and the possibility of further liquidity operations. The
Subcommittee received testimony from Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City President Thomas Hoenig, who was the sole witness.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-3................. Can Monetary Policy Really February 9, 2011
Create Jobs?.
112-20................ The Relationship of March 17, 2011
Monetary Policy and
Rising Prices.
112-25................ Bullion Coin Programs of April 7, 2011
the United States Mint:
Can They Be Improved?.
112-28................ Monetary Policy and the May 11, 2011
Debt Ceiling: Examining
the Relationship Between
the Federal Reserve and
Government Debt.
112-35................ Federal Reserve Lending June 1, 2011
Disclosure: FOIA, Dodd-
Frank, and the Data Dump.
112-41................ Investigating the Gold: June 23, 2011
H.R. 1495, the Gold
Reserve Transparency Act
of 2011 and the Oversight
of the United States Gold
Holdings.
112-50................ Impact of the Monetary July 26, 2011
Policy on the Economy: A
Regional Fed Perspective
on Inflation,
Unemployment, and QE3.
112-59................ Road Map to Sound Money: A September 13, 2011
Legislative Hearing on
H.R. 1098 and Restoring
the Dollar.
112-67................ Audit the Fed: Dodd-Frank, October 4, 2011
QE3, and Federal Reserve
Transparency.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
(Ratio: 17-13)
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
Virginia, Chairman
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Ranking Member RENACCI, Ohio, Vice
LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois Chairman
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
RUBEN HINOJOSA, Texas WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina
CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York JEB HENSARLING, Texas
JOE BACA, California PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia KEVIN McCARTHY, California
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
JOHN CARNEY, Jr., Delaware BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officio N P. DUFFY, Wisconsin
FRANCISCO ``QUICO'' CANSECO, Texas
MICHAEL G. GRIMM, New York
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee Legislative Activities
THE RESPONSIBLE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS ACT
(H.R. 1121)
Summary
H.R. 1121, the Responsible Consumer Financial Protection
Regulations Act of 2011, would amend Section 1011 of the Dodd-
Frank Act Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (P.L.
111- 203), by replacing the Director of the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) with a five-person Commission. The
CFPB Commission would be empowered to prescribe regulations and
issue orders to implement laws within the CFPB's jurisdiction.
One of the five seats on the CFPB Commission would be filled by
the Vice Chairman for Supervision of the Federal Reserve
System. Each of the four remaining members of the Commission
would be appointed by the President; no more than two of those
four Commissioners may be from the same political party.
Although the Chair of the Commission would fulfill the
executive and administrative functions of the CFPB, the Chair's
discretion would be bounded by policies set by the whole
Commission.
Legislative History
On March 16, 2011, H.R. 1121 was introduced by Chairman
Spencer Bachus and referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 35 cosponsors.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1121 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Improve the Structure of the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Ms. Leslie R. Andersen, President and
Chief Executive Officer, Bank of Bennington on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Ms. Lynette W. Smith, President
and Chief Executive Officer, Washington Gas Light FCU on behalf
of the National Association of Federal Credit Unions; Mr. Jess
Sharp, Executive Director, Center for Capital Markets
Competitiveness, U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Hilary Shelton,
Director, NAACP Washington Bureau and Senior VP for Advocacy
and Policy, NAACP; Mr. Noah H. Wilcox, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Grand Rapids State Bank on behalf of the
Independent Community Bankers of America; Mr. Rod Staatz,
President and Chief Executive Officer, SECU of Maryland on
behalf of the Credit Union National Association; Mr. Richard
Hunt, President, Consumer Bankers Association; and Prof. Adam
J. Levitin, Georgetown University Law Center.
On May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee by a
record vote of 13 yeas and 7 nays.
On May 12, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a record vote of 33 yeas and 24 nays. The Committee Report
(Part 1) was filed on June 16, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-107), and
Part 2 of the Committee Report was filed on July 19, 2011 (H.
Rept. 112-107, Part 2).
On July 21, 2011, the House considered the Committee Print
of H.R. 1315, which included the text of H.R. 1121 and H.R.
1667, and passed the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of
241 yeas and 173 nays.
THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION SAFETY AND SOUNDNESS IMPROVEMENT ACT
OF 2011
(H.R. 1315)
Summary
H.R. 1315, the Consumer Financial Protection Safety and
Soundness Improvement Act of 2011, would amend Section 1023 of
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(Dodd-Frank Act) (P.L. 111-203) to streamline the Financial
Stability Oversight Council's (FSOC's) review and oversight of
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rules and
regulations that may undermine the safety and soundness of U.S.
financial institutions. The bill would make three major
changes: (1) it would lower the threshold required to set aside
regulations from a two-thirds vote of the FSOC's voting
membership to a simple majority, excluding the CFPB Director;
(2) it would clarify that the FSOC must set aside any CFPB
regulation that is inconsistent with the safe and sound
operations of U.S. financial institutions; and (3) it would
eliminate the 45-day time limit for the FSOC to review and vote
on regulations.
Legislative History
On April 1, 2011, H.R. 1315 was introduced by
Representative Sean Duffy and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 4 cosponsors.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1315 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Improve the Structure of the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Ms. Leslie R. Andersen, President and
Chief Executive Officer, Bank of Bennington on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Ms. Lynette W. Smith, President
and Chief Executive Officer, Washington Gas Light FCU on behalf
of the National Association of Federal Credit Unions; Mr. Jess
Sharp, Executive Director, Center for Capital Markets
Competitiveness, U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Hilary Shelton,
Director, NAACP Washington Bureau and Senior VP for Advocacy
and Policy, NAACP; Mr. Noah H. Wilcox, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Grand Rapids State Bank on behalf of the
Independent Community Bankers of America; Mr. Rod Staatz,
President and Chief Executive Officer, SECU of Maryland on
behalf of the Credit Union National Association; Mr. Richard
Hunt, President, Consumer Bankers Association; and Prof. Adam
J. Levitin, Georgetown University Law Center.
On May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 13 yeas and 9 nays.
On May 12, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a record vote of 35 yeas and 22 nays. The Committee Report
(Part 1) was filed on May 25, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-89), and Part
2 of the Committee Report was filed on July 19, 2011 (H. Rept.
112-89, Part 2).
On July 21, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1315 and passed
the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 241 yeas and 173
nays.
THE SMALL BUSINESS LENDING ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1418)
Summary
H.R. 1418, the Small Business Lending Enhancement Act of
2011, would raise the cap on member business lending for
qualified credit unions to 27.5 percent of the credit union's
total assets. To qualify, a credit union would be required to:
(1) have member business loans outstanding at the end of each
of the four consecutive quarters preceding application, in a
total amount of not less than 80 percent of the statutory
limit; (2) be well-capitalized; (3) demonstrate five years'
experience of sound underwriting and servicing of member
business loans; (4) have experience in managing member business
loans; and (5) satisfy standards for safe and sound operations.
The bill also would require the National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA) to develop a tiered approval process
within six months of the legislation's enactment under which
insured credit unions issuing member business loans are
restricted from increasing their lending by more than 30
percent per year. H.R. 1418 would also require two studies. It
would direct the NCUA to study the types of credit unions that
engage in member business lending, the characteristics of these
loans, and the types of businesses that benefit from them, and
report its findings to Congress. The NCUA would also be
required to analyze the effect of expanded business lending on
the safety and soundness of the National Credit Union Share
Insurance Fund and the credit union system. H.R. 1418 would
also direct the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study
member business lending, including trends, types, and amounts
of loans as well as the effects of H.R. 1418 on small business
lending. The GAO would be required to report its findings to
Congress within three years, along with any legislative
recommendations.
Legislative History
On April 7, 2011, H.R. 1418 was introduced by
Representative Edward Royce and was referred to the Committee
on Financial Services. The bill has 104 cosponsors.
On October 12, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1418 entitled ``H.R. 1418: The Small Business
Lending Enhancement Act of 2011.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: The Honorable Deborah
Matz, Chairman, National Credit Union Administration; Mr. Sal
Marranca, President and Chief Executive Officer, Cattaraugus
County Bank, on behalf of the Independent Community Bankers of
America; Mr. Albert C. Kelly, Jr., President and Chief
Executive Officer, SpiritBank; Chairman-Elect, American Bankers
Association; Mr. Gary Grinnell, President and Chief Executive
Officer, Corning Credit Union, on behalf of the National
Association of Federal Credit Unions; Mr. Jeff York, President
and Chief Executive Officer, Coasthills Federal Credit Union,
on behalf of the Credit Union National Association; and Mr.
Mike Hanson, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Massachusetts Credit Union Share Insurance Corporation.
THE CONSUMER RENTAL PURCHASE ACT
(H.R. 1588)
Summary
H.R. 1588, the Consumer Rental Purchase Agreement Act,
would define rental purchase transactions, create uniform
national disclosure standards for rent-to-own businesses, and
prohibit certain practices. The bill would define a number of
terms pertaining to rental purchase transactions, including a
``rental-purchase agreement,'' which excludes credit sales and
consumer leases (as defined by the Truth in Lending Act). Also,
H.R. 1588 would (1) require rental-to-own merchants to include
certain disclosures about the transaction in their rental-
purchase agreements; (2) specify the rights of consumers to
acquire ownership of the property and request a statement of
their account; (3) specify provisions that are prohibited from
appearing in rental-purchase agreements; (4) include standards
governing renegotiations and extensions of rental-purchase
agreements; (5) mandate disclosures for both point-of-rental
and advertising; (6) permit consumers to take civil action
against any merchant that fails to comply with the requirements
in the bill; (7) require the Federal Reserve Board to prescribe
mandated regulations; (8) establish that the bill's
requirements would be enforced by the Federal Trade Commission
and that enforcement actions could also be brought by any state
attorney general; and (9) establish criminal liability for
those merchants that willfully and knowingly give false or
inaccurate information or fail to make any required disclosures
under the bill. The consumer protections contained in H.R. 1588
would generally exceed those contained in existing state laws,
but H.R. 1588 would permit states to establish stronger
protections as part of the rental transaction. The bill would,
however, prohibit states from treating rental-purchase
transactions as credit sales, security interests, retail
installment sales, conditional sale, or any other form of
consumer credit, and would prohibit states from requiring the
disclosure of fees as an interest-rate percentage.
Legislative History
On April 15, 2011, H.R. 1588 was introduced by
Representative Francisco ``Quico'' Canseco and was referred to
the Committee on Financial Services. The bill has 98
cosponsors.
On July 26, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1588 entitled ``Examining Rental Purchase
Agreements and the Potential Role for Federal Regulation.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. Charles Harwood, Deputy Director, Bureau of Consumer
Protection, Federal Trade Commission; Mr. Jim Hawkins,
Assistant Professor of Law, University of Houston Law Center;
Mr. Roy Soto, Owner, Premier Rental Purchase; Ms. Vivian
Saunders, rent-to-own customer from Lewiston Woodville, NC; and
Ms. Margot Freeman Saunders, of Counsel, National Consumer Law
Center.
On November 17, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
full Committee by voice vote.
THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION TRANSFER CLARIFICATION ACT
(H.R. 1667)
Summary
H.R. 1667, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
Transfer Clarification Act, would amend Section 1062 of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(Dodd-Frank Act) (P.L. 111-203). The Dodd-Frank Act shifts
consumer protection functions to the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) from the Federal Reserve, the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA), the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). H.R. 1667
would delay any further transfer of powers until the later of
the following: (1) July 21, 2011; or (2) the date on which the
Director of the CFPB is confirmed by the Senate.
Legislative History
On May 2, 2011, H.R. 1667 was introduced by Subcommittee on
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Chairman Shelley
Moore Capito and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 14 cosponsors.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 1667 entitled Legislative Proposals to Improve
the Structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.''
The Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: Ms. Leslie R. Andersen, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Bank of Bennington on behalf of the American
Bankers Association; Ms. Lynette W. Smith, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Washington Gas Light FCU on behalf of the
National Association of Federal Credit Unions; Mr. Jess Sharp,
Executive Director, Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Hilary Shelton, Director, NAACP
Washington Bureau and Senior VP for Advocacy and Policy, NAACP;
Mr. Noah H. Wilcox, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Grand Rapids State Bank on behalf of the Independent Community
Bankers of America; Mr. Rod Staatz, President and Chief
Executive Officer, SECU of Maryland on behalf of the Credit
Union National Association; Mr. Richard Hunt, President,
Consumer Bankers Association; and Prof. Adam J. Levitin,
Georgetown University Law Center.
On May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill favorably reported to the full Committee by a
record vote of 13 yeas and 8 nays.
On May 12, 2011, the full Committee held a markup and
ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a record
vote of 32 yeas and 26 nays.
The Committee Report, Part 1, was filed on May 27, 2011 (H.
Rept. 112-93), and Part 2 was filed on July 19, 2011 (H. Rept.
112-93, Part 2).
On July 14, 2011, the Rules Committee issued a Committee
Print of H.R. 1315, which included the text of H.R. 1121 and
H.R. 1667.
On July 21, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1315 and passed
the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 241 yeas and 173
nays.
THE COMMUNITIES FIRST ACT
(H.R. 1697)
Summary
H.R. 1697, the Communities First Act, would reduce
regulatory, paperwork, and tax burdens on small banks. The bill
would revise regulatory requirements for community banks by (1)
amending the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to permit certain
insured depository institutions to submit a short-form report
of condition; (2) amending the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to exempt
certain small-sized depository institutions from the annual
management assessment of internal controls requirements; (3)
amending the Truth in Lending Act to exempt from escrow or
impound account requirements any loan secured by a first lien
on a consumer's principal dwelling, if the loan is held by a
creditor with assets of $10 billion or less; and (4) amending
the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to exempt certain financial
institutions from furnishing a mandatory annual privacy notice.
The bill would also amend the Securities Exchange Act to
direct the Securities and Exchange Commission: (1) to ensure
that information, documents, and reports accurately and
appropriately reflect the business model of a registered
security issuer; (2) to approve any new or amended generally
accepted accounting principle only if it would have no negative
economic impact on certain small-sized insured depository
institutions; (3) to increase the shareholder registration
threshold for certain banks and bank holding companies.
The bill would also amend the Dodd-Frank Act: (1) to
authorize the Financial Stability Oversight Council to set
aside a final regulation prescribed by the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) if the Council decides that it would
be inconsistent with the safe and sound operation of U.S.
financial institutions, or could have a disproportionate
negative impact on a subset of the banking industry; and (2) to
repeal the authority of the Federal Reserve Board to delegate
to the CFPB its authority to examine persons for compliance
with federal consumer financial laws.
For the purposes of capital calculation, the bill
authorizes specified institutions: (1) to amortize losses or
write-downs on a quarterly basis over a 10-year period; and (2)
to average, over a five-year period, the appraised value of any
real estate securing a loan held by the institution.
Legislative History
On May 3, 2011, H.R. 1697 was introduced by Representative
Blaine Luetkemeyer and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 55 cosponsors.
On November 16, 2011, the Subcommittees on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit and Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a joint legislative
hearing on H.R. 1697 entitled ``H.R. 1697, The Communities
First Act.'' The Subcommittees received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Salvatore Marranca, President and
Chief Executive Officer, Cattaraugus County Bank on behalf of
the Independent Community Bankers Association; Mr. O. William
Cheney, President and Chief Executive Officer, Credit Union
National Association; Mr. John A. Klebba, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Legends Bank, on behalf of the Missouri
Bankers Association; Mr. Fred Becker, Jr., President and Chief
Executive Officer, National Association of Federal Credit
Unions; Mr. Arthur E. Wilmarth, Jr., Professor of Law, George
Washington University, Executive Director, Center for Law,
Economics and Finance; Mr. Damon Silvers, Director, Policy and
Special Counsel, American Federation of Labor and Congress of
Industrial Organizations; and Mr. Adam J. Levitin, Professor of
Law, Georgetown University Law Center.
THE COMMON SENSE ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1723)
Summary
H.R. 1723, the Common Sense Economic Recovery Act of 2011,
would allow financial institutions to treat certain loans that
would have otherwise been classified on a nonaccrual basis as
``accrual loans.'' In contrast to the subjective standards
examiners rely on, the bill would allow a bank to classify
loans, including modified mortgages, as accrual loans if they
meet the following criteria: (1) the loans are current; (2) no
payments were more than 30 days delinquent during the last six
months; (3) the loans are amortizing; and (4) payments are not
being made through an interest reserve account. The bill would
forbid banking regulators from imposing additional capital
requirements on loans that would be treated as accrual loans
under this bill. The bill would require the Financial Stability
Oversight Council (FSOC) to study the issue of any
contradictory guidance from federal banking agencies on loan
classification and capital requirements. The bill would sunset
two years after the date of enactment.
Legislative History
On May 4, 2011, H.R. 1723 was introduced by Representative
Bill Posey and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 52 cosponsors.
On July 8, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R.
1723 entitled ``Legislative Proposals Regarding Bank
Examination Practices.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. James H. McKillop, President
and CEO, Independent Bankers Bank of Florida on behalf of the
Independent Community Bankers of America; Mr. Michael Whalen,
President and CEO, Heart of America Group; Professor Simon
Johnson, The Ronald A. Kurtz, Professor of Entrepreneurship at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sloan School of
Management; Mr. George French, Deputy Director, Division of
Risk Management Supervision of the FDIC; and Ms. Jennifer
Kelly, Senior Deputy Comptroller for Mid-Size/Community Bank
Supervision of the OCC.
On November 17, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session
to consider H.R. 1723. The motion to favorably report H.R.
1723, as amended, to the full Committee was not agreed to and
the Committee did not order the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 8 yeas and
10 nays.
TO INSTRUCT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION TO STUDY THE IMPACT OF INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION
FAILURES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
(H.R. 2056)
Summary
H.R. 2056, a bill to instruct the Inspector General of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to study the
impact of insured depository institution failures, would
require the FDIC's Inspector General to study issues raised by
bank failures in states that have had more than ten such
failures since 2008. The study would cover the following
subjects: (1) the use and effect of shared loss agreements; (2)
the significance of paper losses; (3) the success of FDIC field
examiners in implementing FDIC guidelines regarding workouts of
commercial real estate; (4) the application and impact of
consent orders and cease and desist orders; (5) the impact of
FDIC policies on raising capital; and (6) the FDIC's
involvement in private equity investment. The bill would also
instruct the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study:
(1) the causes of bank failures in states with 10 or more
failures since 2008; (2) the procyclical impact of fair value
accounting standards; (3) the causes and potential solutions
for the cycle of loan write downs, raising capital, and
failures; and (4) the impact of bank failures upon the
community.
Legislative History
On May 31, 2011, H.R. 2056 was introduced by Representative
Lynn Westmoreland and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has 13 cosponsors.
On July 8, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R.
2056 entitled ``Legislative Proposals Regarding Bank
Examination Practices.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: James H. McKillop, President and
CEO, Independent Bankers Bank of Florida on behalf of the
Independent Community Bankers of America; Michael Whalen,
President and CEO, Heart of America Group; and Professor Simon
Johnson, The Ronald A. Kurtz, Professor of Entrepreneurship at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sloan School of
Management; George French, Deputy Director, Division of Risk
Management Supervision of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation; and Jennifer Kelly, Senior Deputy Comptroller for
Mid-Size/Community Bank Supervision of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency.
On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the
House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on July 26,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-182).
On July 28, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2056 under
suspension of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by
voice vote.
Subcommittee Oversight Activities
INTERCHANGE FEES
On February 17, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Understanding the Federal Reserve's Proposed Rule on
Interchange Fees: Implications and Consequences of the Durbin
Amendment.'' The hearing examined the Federal Reserve Board's
December 16, 2010 proposed rule to implement Section 1075 of
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(P.L. 111-203), relating to the fees charged to merchants when
processing debit card transactions. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Sarah Raskin, Member,
Federal Reserve Board of Governors; Frank Michael, President
and CEO of Allied Credit Union on behalf of the Credit Union
National Association; David Kemper, Chairman, President & CEO
of Commerce Bank on behalf of the American Bankers Association
and the Consumer Bankers Association; Doug Kantor, Partner,
Steptoe & Johnson on behalf of the Merchant Payments Coalition;
Josh Floum, General Counsel, Visa; and David Seltzer, Vice
President and Treasurer of 7-Eleven on behalf of the Retail
Industry Leaders Association.
REGULATORY BURDEN REDUCTION
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The Effect of Dodd-Frank on Small Financial Institutions and
Small Businesses,'' to address the challenges faced by
community-based financial institutions and their small business
clientele from the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203). The hearing
focused on the effectiveness of Dodd-Frank's exemptions for
institutions with less than $10 billion in assets, particularly
the exemption from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's
examination and enforcement authority. In addition, the hearing
examined the link between the effects of Dodd-Frank on small
institutions and the ability of small businesses to secure
loans. The Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: Albert C. Kelly, Jr., President and Chief Executive
Officer, Spirit Bank, on behalf of the American Bankers
Association; John Buckley, President and Chief Executive
Officer, Gerber Federal Credit Union on behalf of the National
Association of Federal Credit Unions; O. William Cheney,
President and Chief Executive Officer, Credit Union National
Association; Chris Stinebert, President and Chief Executive
Officer, American Financial Services Association; James D.
MacPhee, Chairman, Independent Community Bankers of America;
Peter Skillern, Executive Director, Community Reinvestment
Association of North Carolina; Jess Sharp, Executive Director,
Center for Capital Markets Competiveness, U.S. Chamber of
Commerce; Robert Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, National
Association of Home Builders; John M. Schaible, Chairman, Atlas
Federal; and David Borris, Main Street Alliance.
FDIC OVERSIGHT
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``FDIC Oversight: Examining and Evaluating the Role of the
Regulator during the Financial Crisis and Today.'' The
Honorable Sheila C. Bair, Chairman of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, was the only witness. The hearing
focused on issues pertaining to the Deposit Insurance Fund,
bank capital requirements, consumer financial protection
initiatives, debit interchange fees, the designation of
systemically important financial institutions, the authority to
resolve failed financial institutions, the Dodd-Frank Act's
regulatory impact on financial institutions of varying sizes,
and mortgage servicing practices.
TOO BIG TO FAIL
On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Does the Dodd-Frank Act End `Too Big to Fail'?'' The purpose
of the hearing was to learn more about whether the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation's Orderly Liquidation Authority,
as created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, is appropriately structured to end taxpayer
bailouts for the largest financial institutions. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. Michael H. Krimminger, General Counsel of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation; Ms. Christy Romero, Acting
Special Inspector General, Office of the Special Inspector
General for TARP; Mr. Stephen J. Lubben, Daniel J. Moore
Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law; and Mr.
Michael Barr, Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law
School.
MORTGAGE SERVICING STANDARDS
On July 7, 2011, the Subcommittees on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit and Oversight and
Investigations held a joint hearing entitled ``Mortgage
Servicing: An Examination of the Role of Federal Regulators in
Settlement Negotiations and the Future of Mortgage Servicing
Standards.'' The purpose of the hearing was to review the role
of Federal regulators in the ongoing mortgage servicing
settlement negotiations and the development of new mortgage
servicing standards. The Subcommittees received testimony from
the following witnesses: Ms. Julie Williams, First Senior
Deputy Comptroller and Chief Counsel of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency; Mr. Mark Pearce, Director,
Division of Depositor and Consumer Protection at the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation; Mr. Raj Date, Associate Director
of Research, Markets and Regulations, Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau, U.S. Department of the Treasury; the
Honorable Luther Strange, Alabama Attorney General; Mr. David
Stevens, President, Mortgage Bankers Association; and Mr.
Michael Calhoun, President, Center for Responsible Lending.
BANK EXAMINATION STANDARDS
On August 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing
in Newnan, Georgia, entitled ``Potential Mixed Messages: Is
Guidance from Washington Being Implemented by Federal Bank
Examiners?'' The purpose of the hearing was to assess whether
or not federal bank examination standards are overly stringent
and impeding an economic recovery. The hearing focused on H.R.
2056, which was introduced by Representative Lynn Westmoreland
on May 31, 2011. H.R. 2056 would instruct the Inspector General
of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to study the
impact of insured depository institution failures and closely
examine the agency's bank closure procedures. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Bret D.
Edwards, Director, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships
for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Mr. Christopher
J. Spoth, Senior Deputy Director, Division of Risk Management
Supervision for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; Mr.
Gil Barker, Southeast District Deputy Comptroller for the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency; Mr. Kevin M.
Bertsch, Associate Director, The Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System; Mr. Chuck Copeland, CEO, First National
Bank of Griffin; Mr. Michael Rossetti, President, Ravin Homes;
Mr. Jim Edwards, CEO, United Bank; and Mr. Gary Fox, Former
CEO, Bartow County Bank.
CYBERSECURITY
On September 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Cybersecurity: Threats to the Financial Sector.''
The purpose of the hearing was to examine the threats computer
hackers pose to financial institutions and government agencies;
the methods used by hackers to breach information-technology
systems; and the cooperation among government agencies and the
private sector to thwart hackers. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. A.T. Smith,
Assistant Director, United States Secret Service; Mr. Gordon
Snow, Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation; Mr. Greg Schaffer, Acting Deputy Under
Secretary, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. William B.
Nelson, President and CEO, Financial Services--Information
Sharing and Analysis Center; Mr. Bryan Sartin, Director,
Investigative Response, Verizon; Mr. Brian Tillett, Chief
Security Strategist, Symantec; Mr. Greg Garcia, Partnership
Executive for Cybersecurity and Identity Management, Bank of
America; Dr. Greg Shannon, Chief Scientist, Carnegie Mellon
University's Software Engineering Institute CERT Liaison
Program; and Mr. Marc Rotenberg, President, Electronic Privacy
Information Center.
AVAILABILITY OF SHORT-TERM CREDIT
On September 22, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``An Examination of the Availability of Credit for
Consumers.'' The purpose of the hearing was to explore the
capacity of banking institutions to address the credit needs of
low- and middle-income consumers. The hearing also examined
alternatives to traditional banking services, including check
cashing and payday lending services. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Barry Wides, Deputy
Comptroller for Community Affairs, Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency; Mr. Robert Mooney, Deputy Director for Consumer
Protection and Community Affairs, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation; Mr. David M. Marquis, Executive Director, National
Credit Union Administration; Ms. Gerri Guzman, Executive
Director, Consumer Rights Coalition; Ms. Melissa Koide, Vice
President of Policy, Center for Financial Services Innovation;
Mr. Ryan Gilbert, Chief Executive Officer, BillFloat; Mr.
Michael Grant, President, National Bankers Association; Dr.
Kimberly Manturuk, Research Associate, University of North
Carolina Center for Community Capital; and Ms. Ida Rademacher,
Vice President, Policy and Research, CFED--Expanding Economic
Opportunity.
NONRESIDENT ALIEN DEPOSIT INTEREST INCOME REPORTING
On October 27, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Proposed Regulations to Require Reporting of
Nonresident Alien Deposit Interest Income.'' The purpose of the
hearing was to review the impact of a proposed regulation that
would require financial institutions to report annually to the
Internal Revenue Service the amount of interest earned by
nonresident aliens on their U.S. bank deposits. In particular,
the hearing considered the potential effects of the proposed
regulation on nonresident alien deposits held in U.S. financial
institutions and on the safety and soundness of financial
institutions that hold significant amounts of these deposits.
The Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: Mr. J. Thomas Cardwell, Former Commissioner, Florida
Office of Financial Regulation; Mr. Alejandro ``Alex'' Sanchez,
President and Chief Executive Officer, Florida Bankers
Association; Mr. Gerry Schwebel, Executive Vice President,
International Bancshares Corporation; and Ms. Rebecca J.
Wilkins, Senior Counsel, Federal Tax Policy, Citizens for Tax
Justice.
IMPACT OF REGULATORY REFORM
On October 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing
in Wausau, Wisconsin, entitled ``Regulatory Reform: Examining
How New Regulations are Impacting Financial Institutions, Small
Businesses and Consumers.'' The purpose of the hearing was to
assess how new financial regulations are affecting the ability
of financial institutions to extend credit and stimulate job
growth. The hearing examined whether bank examination practices
are excessively stringent and impeding economic recovery. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
The Honorable Al Erickson, Mayor of Mosinee, WI; Mr. Marty
Reinhart, President, Heritage Bank; Mr. Todd Nagel, President,
River Valley Bank; Mr. Pat Wesenberg, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Central City Credit Union; Mr. Mark Willer,
Chief Operating Officer, Royal Credit Union; Mr. Mark Matthiae,
President, Crystal Finishing Systems; Mr. Kurt Bauer,
President, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce; and Ms.
Bethany Sanchez, Director of Community Development,
Metropolitan Milwaukee Fair Housing Council.
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU
On November 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: The First
100 Days.'' The purpose of the hearing was to review the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's budgeting, staffing,
rule-writing initiatives, and the current and potential
challenges facing the Bureau as well as the entities it
regulates. Mr. Raj Date, Special Advisor to the Secretary of
the Treasury, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, was the
sole witness.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-8................. Understanding the Federal February 17, 2011
Reserve's Proposed Rule
on Interchange Fees:
Implications and
Consequences of the
Durbin Amendment.
112-12................ The Effect of Dodd-Frank March 2, 2011
on Small Financial
Institutions and Small
Businesses.
112-18................ Oversight of the Consumer March 16, 2011
Financial Protection
Bureau.
112-24................ Legislative Proposals to April 6, 2011
Improve the Structure of
the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau.
112-34................ FDIC Oversight: Examining May 26, 2011
and Evaluating the Role
of the Regulator During
the Financial Crisis and
Today.
112-37................ Does the Dodd-Frank Act June 14, 2011
End ``Too Big to Fail''?.
112-44................ Mortgage Servicing: An July 7, 2011
Examination of the Role
of Federal Regulators in
Settlement Negotiations
and the Future of
Mortgage Servicing
Standards (Joint Hearing
with Oversight).
112-45................ Legislative Proposals July 8, 2011
Regarding Bank
Examination Practices.
112-49................ Examining Rental Purchase July 26, 2011
Agreements and the
Potential Role for
Federal Regulation.
112-54................ Potential Mixed Messages: August 16, 2011
Is Guidance from
Washington Being
Implemented by Federal
Bank Examiners? (Field
Hearing).
112-60................ Cybersecurity: Threats to September 14, 2011
the Financial Sector.
112-65................ An Examination of the September 22, 2011
Availability of Credit
for Consumers.
112-72................ H.R. 1418: The Small October 12, 2011
Business Lending
Enhancement Act of 2011.
112-78................ Proposed Regulations to October 27, 2011
Require Reporting of
Nonresident Alien Deposit
Interest Income.
112-79................ Regulatory Reform: October 31, 2011
Examining How New
Regulations are Impacting
Financial Institutions,
Small Businesses and
Consumers (Field Hearing).
112-80................ The Consumer Financial November 2, 2011
Protection Bureau: The
First 100 Days.
112-85................ H.R. 1697, The Communities November 16, 2011
First Act (Joint Hearing
with Capital Markets).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity
(Ratio: 10-8)
JUDY BIGGERT, Chairman
LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois, Ranking Member HURT, Virginia, Vice
MAXINE WATERS, California Chairman
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York GARY G. MILLER, California
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri Virginia
MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey
BRAD SHERMAN, California PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officio N P. DUFFY, Wisconsin
ROBERT J. DOLD, Illinois
STEVE STIVERS, Ohio
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee Legislative Activities
FHA REFINANCE PROGRAM TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 830)
Summary
H.R. 830, the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act, would
rescind all unobligated balances made available for the program
by Title I of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (12
U.S.C. 5230) that have been allocated for use under the FHA
Refinance Program (pursuant to Mortgagee Letter 2010-23 of the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development). The bill would
also terminate the program and void the Mortgagee Letter
pursuant to which it was implemented, with concessions made for
current participants in the program.
Legislative History
On February 28, 2011, H.R. 830 was introduced by
Representative Robert Dold and was referred to the Committee on
Financial Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 830 and received testimony from the following
witnesses: The Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector
General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The
Honorable David Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and
Commissioner of the Federal Housing Administration; The
Honorable Mercedes Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community
Planning and Development, Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD); Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial
Markets and Community Investment, U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO); and Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in
Housing Policy, Congressional Research Service, Library of
Congress.
On March 3, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 33 yeas and 22 nays. The Committee Report was
filed on March 7, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-25).
On March 9, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 150, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 830 under a structured rule, by a
record vote of 240 yeas and 180 nays. On March 10, 2011, the
House considered H.R. 830 and passed the bill, with amendments,
by a record vote of 256 yeas and 171 nays.
EMERGENCY MORTGAGE RELIEF PROGRAM TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 836)
Summary
H.R. 836, the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program Termination
Act, would rescind all unobligated balances made available for
the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program under section 1496(a) of
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(P.L. 111-203), which was signed into law on July 21, 2010, and
terminate the program. The bill also calls for a study by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to identify
best practices for how existing mortgage assistance programs
can be applied to veterans, active duty military personnel, and
their relatives.
Legislative History
On February 28, 2011, H.R. 836 was introduced by
Representative Jeb Hensarling and was referred to the Committee
on Financial Services. The bill has two cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 830 and received testimony from the following
witnesses: The Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector
General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The
Honorable David Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and
Commissioner of the Federal Housing Administration; The
Honorable Mercedes Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community
Planning and Development, Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD); Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial
Markets and Community Investment, U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO); and Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in
Housing Policy, Congressional Research Service, Library of
Congress.
On March 3, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 33 yeas and 22 nays. The Committee Report was
filed on March 7, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-26).
On March 9, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 151, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 836 under a structured rule, by
voice vote. On March 11, 2011, the House considered H.R. 836
and passed the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 242
yeas and 177 nays.
HAMP TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 839)
Summary
H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act, would terminate the
authority of the Treasury Department to provide any new
assistance to homeowners under the Home Affordable Modification
Program (HAMP) authorized under Title I of the Emergency
Economic Stabilization Act (12 U.S.C. 5230), while preserving
any assistance already provided to HAMP participants on a
permanent or trial basis. The bill also provides for a study by
the Treasury Department to identify best practices for how
existing mortgage assistance programs can be applied to
veterans, active duty military personnel, and their relatives.
Legislative History
On February 28, 2011, H.R. 839 was introduced by
Representative Patrick McHenry and was referred to the
Committee on Financial Services. The bill has eight cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 830 and received testimony from the following
witnesses: The Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector
General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The
Honorable David Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and
Commissioner of
the Federal Housing Administration; The Honorable Mercedes
Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community Planning and
Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);
Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); and
Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in Housing Policy, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress.
On March 9, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 32 yeas and 23 nays. The Committee Report (Part
1) was filed on March 11, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-31) and Part 2 of
the Committee Report was filed on March 14, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-
31 Part 2).
On March 16, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 170, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 839 under a structured rule, by a
record vote of 241 yeas and 180 nays. On March 29, 2011, the
House considered H.R. 839 and passed the bill, with amendments,
by a record vote of 252 yeas and 170 nays, with 1 member voting
present.
NSP TERMINATION ACT
(H.R. 861)
Summary
H.R. 861, the NSP Termination Act, would rescind all
unobligated balances made available for the Neighborhood
Stabilization Program (NSP) authorized by the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203;
124 Stat. 2209; 42 U.S.C. 5301 note) and terminate the program.
Legislative History
On March 1, 2011, H.R. 861 was introduced by Representative
Gary Miller and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has four cosponsors.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 830 and received testimony from the following
witnesses: The Honorable Neil M. Barofsky, Special Inspector
General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP); The
Honorable David Stevens, Assistant Secretary for Housing and
Commissioner of
the Federal Housing Administration; The Honorable Mercedes
Marquez, Assistant Secretary, Community Planning and
Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);
Mr. Matthew J. Scire, Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); and
Ms. Katie Jones, Analyst in Housing Policy, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress.
On March 3, 2011, the full Committee met in open session
and ordered the bill favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 31 yeas and 24 nays. The Committee Report (Part
1) was filed on March 11, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-32), and Part 2 of
the Committee Report was filed on March 14, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-
32 Part 2).
On March 16, 2011, the House adopted H. Res. 170, providing
for the consideration of H.R. 861 under a structured rule, by a
record vote of 241 yeas and 180 nays. On March 16, 2011, the
House considered H.R. 861 and passed the bill, with amendments,
by a record vote of 242 yeas and 182 nays.
FLOOD INSURANCE REFORM ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 1309)
Summary
H.R. 1309, the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011, would
reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) through
September 30, 2016, and amend the National Flood Insurance Act
to ensure the immediate and near-term fiscal and administrative
health of the NFIP. The bill would also ensure the NFIP's
continued viability by encouraging broader participation in the
program, increasing financial accountability, eliminating
unnecessary rate subsidies, and updating the program to meet
the needs of the 21st century. The key provisions of H.R. 1309
include: (1) a five-year reauthorization of the NFIP; (2) a
three-year delay in the mandatory purchase requirement for
certain properties in newly designated Special Flood Hazard
Areas (SFHAs); (3) a phase-in of full-risk, actuarial rates for
areas newly designated as Special Flood Hazard; (4) a
reinstatement of the Technical Mapping Advisory Council; and
(5) an emphasis on greater private sector participation in
providing flood insurance coverage.
Legislative History
On April 1, 2011, H.R. 1309 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity Chairman Judy
Biggert and referred to the Committee on Financial Services.
The bill has nineteen cosponsors.
On March 11, 2011 and April 1, 2011, the Subcommittee held
legislative hearings entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Reform
the National Flood Insurance Program,'' on a discussion draft
of H.R. 1309. On March 11, 2011, the Subcommittee received
written testimony from Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency and the following witnesses
testified: Orice Williams Brown, Managing Director, Government
Accountability Office (GAO); Sally McConkey, Vice Chair,
Association of State Flood Plain Managers and Manager,
Coordinated Hazard Assessment and Mapping Program, Illinois
State Water Survey; Sandra G. Parrillo, Chair, National
Association of Mutual Insurance Companies and President and CEO
of Providence Mutual; Spencer Houldin, Chair, Government
Affairs Committee, Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of
America and President, Ericson Insurance Services; Steve Ellis,
Vice President, Taxpayers for Common Sense, on behalf of the
SmarterSafer Coalition; Donna Jallick, Vice President,
Harleysville Insurance; Barry Rutenberg, First Vice Chairman,
National Association of Home Builders; Frank Nutter, President,
Reinsurance Association of America; Terry Sullivan, Sullivan
Realty, Inc., on behalf of The National Association of
Realtors; and Maurice Veissi, President-Elect, National
Association of Realtors, and Principal, Veissi & Associates. On
April 1, 2011, The Honorable Craig Fugate, Administrator,
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), was the only
witness.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
On May 12, 2011, the Committee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a recorded vote of 54 yeas and 0 nays.
On July 12, 2011, the House considered H.R. 1309 and passed
the bill, with amendments, by a record vote of 406 yeas and 22
nays.
RESPA HOME WARRANTY CLARIFICATION ACT
(H.R. 2446)
Summary
H.R. 2446, the RESPA Home Warranty Clarification Act of
2011, would amend current law to explicitly state that home
warranties are permissible settlement services under the Real
Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974. The bill would also
require that homeowners receive a specific written notice about
the payment arrangement for any individual selling,
advertising, or performing a homeowner warranty inspection for
the repair or replacement of home system components or
appliances.
Legislative History
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2446 was introduced by Subcommittee
on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity Chairman Judy
Biggert and was referred to the Committee on Financial
Services. The bill has 32 cosponsors.
On July 13, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``Mortgage Origination: The Impact of Recent
Changes on Homeowners and Businesses.'' The purpose of the
hearing was to examine H.R. 2446 and other issues concerning
the application of mortgage origination laws and regulations
which may impact consumers and mortgage industry participants.
The Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: the Honorable Sandra Braunstein, Director of
Division of Consumer and Community Affairs for the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System; the Honorable Teresa
Payne, HUD's Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Regulatory Affairs; Ms. Kelly Cochran, Deputy Assistant
Director for Regulations at the Treasury Department's Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau; Mr. James Park, Executive Director
of the Appraisal Subcommittee for the Federal Financial
Institutions Examination Council; Mr. William Shear, Director
of Financial Markets and Community Investment for the
Government Accountability Office; Ms. Anne Norton, Maryland
Deputy Commissioner of Financial Regulation; Mr. Steve Brown,
Executive Vice President at Crye-Leike; Mr. Henry Cunningham,
Jr., President of Cunningham & Company; Mr. Tim Wilson,
President of Affiliated Businesses for Long & Foster Companies;
Ms. Anne Anastasi, President of Genesis Abstract and President
of the American Land Title Association; Mr. Mike Anderson,
President of Essential Mortgage; Mr. Marc Savitt, President of
The Mortgage Center; Ms. Sara Stephens, President-Elect of the
Appraisal Institute; Mr. Don Kelly, Executive Director of the
Real Estate Valuation Advocacy Association; Ms. Janis Bowdler,
Director of the Wealth-Building Policy Project Office of
Research, Advocacy, and Legislation; and Mr. Ira Rheingold,
Executive Director, National Association of Consumer Advocates.
SECTION 8 SAVINGS ACT OF 2011
Summary
The ``Section 8 Savings Act of 2011'' would make several
changes to the rules for participation in and administration of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8
program. The legislation includes several provisions that have
been considered and adopted by the Committee in previous
Congresses to reduce the Section 8 program's costs, help the
program more efficiently serve program participants, and enable
public housing authorities (PHAs) and property owners and
managers to reduce regulatory burdens. Some of the reforms
contained in the legislation include: authorizing PHAs to
conduct biannual housing inspections instead of annual ones;
allowing PHAs to use inspection certification from other
federal or state housing assistance programs to meet inspection
requirements; greater flexibility for PHAs to help tenants
relocate if their units fail to meet basic housing standards;
simplifying procedures for determining tenant contributions;
increasing the income recertification period from one to three
years for families on ``fixed'' incomes; and income targeting
language requiring PHAs to terminate assistance to participants
whose incomes exceed 80 percent of the area median income
(AMI), and language restricting the ability of tenants with
personal assets greater than $50,000 to participate in the
program.
Legislative History
On June 23, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on an initial discussion draft of the Section 8 Savings
Act entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Reform the Housing
Choice Voucher Program'' where the Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: the Honorable Sandra
Henriquez, HUD's Assistant Secretary for the Office of Public
and Indian Housing; Mr. Tony Bazzie, Executive Director of the
Housing Authority of Raleigh County, WV; Ms. Linda Couch,
Senior Vice President for Policy at the National Low Income
Housing Coalition; Ms. Roberta Graham, Vice President at Quadel
Consulting; Mr. Tory Gunsolley, President/CEO of the Housing
Authority of the City of Houston; Mr. P. Curtis Hiebert, CEO of
the Keene, NH Housing Authority; Mr. Alex Sanchez, Executive
Director of the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara,
CA; and Ms. Barbara Sard, Vice President for Housing Policy at
the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
On October 13, 2011, the Subcommittee held a second
legislative hearing on a revised version of the discussion
draft entitled ``The Section 8 Savings Act of 2011: Proposals
to Promote Economic Independence for Assisted Families.'' The
revised discussion draft includes language to link housing
assistance with supportive services for residents such as job
training, financial literacy, and educational opportunities to
help encourage self-sufficiency. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Hope Boldon,
President and COO of The Integral Group LLC; Mr. Larry Woods,
CEO of the Housing Authority of Winston-Salem, NC; Ms. Kris
Warren, COO of the Chicago Housing Authority; Mr. Will Fischer,
Senior Policy Analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities; and Mr. Greg Russ, Executive Director and COO of
the Cambridge Housing Authority.
TO PROHIBIT THE FEDERAL INSURANCE OFFICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE
TREASURY AND OTHER FINANCIAL REGULATORS FROM COLLECTING DATA DIRECTLY
FROM INSURERS
Summary
This draft legislation would prohibit the Federal Insurance
Office (FIO) and other financial regulators from collecting
data directly from insurers. Currently, Section 502 of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(Public Law 111-203) authorizes FIO to issue subpoenas in
certain instances to insurance companies to produce data
required to carry out its statutory functions, and Section 153
authorizes the Office of Financial Research (OFR) to issue
subpoenas in certain instances to financial companies,
including insurance companies, to produce data required to
carry out the statutory functions to the OFR. The draft
legislation would revoke FIO's and OFR's authority to subpoena
information from insurance companies. It would also amend the
Dodd-Frank Act to require FIO, OFR, the Financial Stability
Oversight Council, and any other federal entity seeking data
about insurance companies to obtain that data through the
insurance company's state regulator, another federal agency, or
public source. Finally, the draft legislation would require
that these federal entities, as well as state regulators,
maintain the confidentiality of nonpublic data obtained from or
shared with other federal and state regulators.
Legislative History
On November 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``Insurance Oversight and Legislative
Proposals.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine the
draft legislation and the impact of changes made to the
regulation of insurance by the Dodd-Frank Act. The Subcommittee
heard testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Joseph Torti
III, Deputy Director and Superintendent of Insurance and
Banking for the State of Rhode Island; Mr. Michael Lanza,
Executive Vice President and General Counsel of the Selective
Insurance Group, Inc.; Mr. Steven Monroe, Chief Compliance
Officer for the U.S. and Canada for Marsh, Inc.; and Mr. Daniel
Schwarcz, Associate Professor at the University of Minnesota
Law School.
FHA-RURAL REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2011
Summary
Draft legislation entitled the ``FHA-Rural Regulatory
Improvement Act of 2011'' would enact several reforms designed
to improve the financial condition of Federal Housing
Administration (FHA), Department of Agriculture's Rural Housing
Service (RHS), and Government National Mortgage Association
(Ginnie Mae), and better protect taxpayers against losses from
fraudulent or poorly-underwritten government-backed loans. The
draft legislation would simplify the FHA loan limit calculation
by making the new loan limit 125 percent of area median home
price for all locations with a cap up to the statutory maximum
GSE loan limits. It would also increase current FHA down
payment requirements from 3.5 percent to 5 percent, and
prohibit the ``rolling-in'' of some closing costs in
circumvention of that 5 percent, as well as set minimum annual
premiums at a level equal to the previous maximum level of 0.55
percent. The draft legislation would mandate that FHA attain a
capital ratio of not less than 1.25 percent within 24 months of
enactment, and maintain a capital ratio of not less than 2
percent within 5 years of enactment for both its General
Insurance and Special Risk Insurance (GI/SRI) Funds.
Additionally, the draft legislation would transfer the RHS and
its current functions from USDA to the FHA, and designate the
Rural Housing Service Director as a Deputy Assistant Secretary
in FHA.
Legislative History
On September 8, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on the FHA-Rural Regulatory Improvement Act of 2011
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Determine the Future Role
of FHA, RHS and GNMA in the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage
Markets, Part 2'' where the Subcommittee heard testimony from
the following witnesses: the Honorable Johnny Isakson, U.S.
Senator of Georgia; Ms. Carol Galante, HUD's Acting Federal
Housing Administration Commissioner and Assistant Secretary for
Housing; Ms. Tammye Trevino, Administrator of Housing and
Community Facilities Programs for the Department of
Agriculture's Rural Development Agency; and the Honorable
Theodore Tozer, President of the Government National Mortgage
Association.
TO EXCLUDE INSURANCE COMPANIES FROM THE FEDERAL RESERVE'S LEVERAGE
CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS, RISK-BASED CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS, AND ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS
Summary
This draft legislation would exclude insurance companies
from the Federal Reserve's leverage capital requirements, risk-
based capital requirements, and accounting standards, and
prohibit the Federal Reserve Board from subjecting insurance
companies that are currently regulated by state insurance
regulators and subject to capital requirements, risk-based
capital requirements, and accounting standards set by those
state regulators to heightened prudential standards in these
areas. Currently, Section 115 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203)
authorizes the Federal Reserve to subject certain large,
interconnected financial institutions to heightened prudential
standards and Federal Reserve supervision, while Section 171
allows the Federal Reserve to impose heightened leverage and
risk-based capital requirements on certain depository
institution holding companies, including insurance companies.
Legislative History
On November 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``Insurance Oversight and Legislative
Proposals.'' The focus of the hearing was the impact of changes
made to the regulation of insurance by the Dodd-Frank Act and
the draft legislation. The Subcommittee heard testimony from
the following witnesses: Mr. Joseph Torti III, Deputy Director
and Superintendent of Insurance and Banking for the State of
Rhode Island; Mr. Michael Lanza, Executive Vice President and
General Counsel of the Selective Insurance Group, Inc.; Mr.
Steven Monroe, Chief Compliance Officer for the U.S. and Canada
for Marsh, Inc.; and Mr. Daniel Schwarcz, Associate Professor
at the University of Minnesota Law School.
TO EXCLUDE INSURANCE COMPANIES FROM THE FDIC'S ``ORDERLY LIQUIDATION
AUTHORITY''
Summary
This draft legislation would explicitly exclude insurance
companies from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's
(FDIC's) Orderly Liquidation Authority to liquidate failing
financial companies that pose a significant risk to the
financial stability of the United States, as established under
Section 204 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (Public Law 111-203). The draft legislation
would also prohibit the FDIC from counting the insurance
assets, liabilities, or revenues of an eligible financial
company in its assessments to fund its Orderly Liquidation
Fund, as established by Section 210 of the Dodd-Frank Act, to
be used to finance the liquidation of failed financial
companies.
Legislative History
On November 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on the impact of changes made to the regulation of
insurance by the Dodd-Frank Act entitled ``Insurance Oversight
and Legislative Proposals'' where the draft legislation was
discussed. The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Mr. Joseph Torti III, Deputy Director and
Superintendent of Insurance and Banking for the State of Rhode
Island; Mr. Michael Lanza, Executive Vice President and General
Counsel of the Selective Insurance Group, Inc.; Mr. Steven
Monroe, Chief Compliance Officer for the U.S. and Canada for
Marsh, Inc.; and Mr. Daniel Schwarcz, Associate Professor at
the University of Minnesota Law School.
MOVING TO WORK IMPROVEMENT, EXPANSION, AND PERMANENCY ACT
Summary
Draft legislation entitled the ``Moving to Work
Improvement, Expansion, and Permanency Act'' would strike all
references to ``demonstration'' in the Moving to Work (MTW)
statute to designate MTW as a program of HUD, remove the
arbitrary cap set in statute placed on the number of public
housing authorities (PHAs) considered or admitted for MTW
status, and enhance MTW's focus on activities promoting
economic, flexibility and cost effectiveness, and housing
choice. The draft would impose reporting requirements for MTW
PHAs, including an annual analysis of the efforts each PHA has
undertaken to achieve the purposes of the program.
Additionally, the draft legislation would give HUD the
discretion to terminate MTW contracts in the event that PHAs
are found to be in material default of the conditions and
obligations of their agreement, are found to have misused or
misappropriated funds without taking appropriate steps to
address those misdeeds, or become negligent in their effort to
advance the goals of MTW.
Legislative History
On June 23, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on the draft legislation entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Reform the Housing Choice Voucher Program'' where
the Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: the Honorable Sandra Henriquez, HUD's Assistant
Secretary for the Office of Public and Indian Housing; Mr. Tony
Bazzie, Executive Director of the Housing Authority of Raleigh
County, WV; Ms. Linda Couch, Senior Vice President for Policy
at the National Low Income Housing Coalition; Ms. Roberta
Graham, Vice President at Quadel Consulting; Mr. Tory
Gunsolley, President/CEO of the Housing Authority of the City
of Houston; Mr. P. Curtis Hiebert, CEO of the Keene, NH Housing
Authority; Mr. Alex Sanchez, Executive Director of the Housing
Authority of the County of Santa Clara, CA; and Ms. Barbara
Sard, Vice President for Housing Policy at the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities.
On October 13, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``The Section 8 Savings Act of 2011: Proposals
to Promote Economic Independence for Assisted Families'' on the
Moving to Work Improvement, Expansion, and Permanency Act
discussion draft. The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: Ms. Hope Boldon, President and COO of The
Integral Group LLC; Mr. Larry Woods, CEO of the Housing
Authority of Winston-Salem, NC; Ms. Kris Warren, COO of the
Chicago Housing Authority; Mr. Will Fischer, Senior Policy
Analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; and Mr.
Greg Russ, Executive Director and COO of the Cambridge Housing
Authority.
HOUSING COUNSELING TRANSPARENCY AND FAIRNESS ACT OF 2011
Summary
Draft legislation entitled the ``Housing Counseling
Transparency and Fairness Act of 2011'' would grant HUD new
oversight and regulatory authority over all housing counseling
activities of NeighborWorks, as well as provide the HUD
Inspector General with authority to monitor NeighborWorks'
housing counseling functions and activities.
Legislative History
On September 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``HUD and NeighborWorks Housing Counseling
Oversight.'' The hearing focused on the draft legislation and
examined the allocation and disbursement of federal housing
counseling funds through the NeighborWorks America
(NeighborWorks) nonprofit housing agency. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Deborah
Holston, HUD's Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single
Family Housing; Ms. Eileen Fitzgerald, Chief Executive Officer
of NeighborWorks America; Ms. Alicia Puente Cackley, Director,
Financial Markets and Community Investment for the Government
Accountability Office (GAO); Mr. Peter Bell, President of the
National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association; Ms. Candy Hill,
Senior Vice President of Catholic Charities USA; Ms. Debra
Olson, Interim Executive Director of the DuPage Homeownership
Center and DuPage County Board Member; and Mr. Raul Raymundo,
Chief Executive Officer of The Resurrection Project.
Subcommittee Oversight Activities
THE FUTURE OF HOUSING FINANCE
On February 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Are there Government Barriers to the Housing
Recovery?'' The hearing focused on the current state of the
housing finance market and how to facilitate the return of
private sector capital into the mortgage markets. The hearing
included testimony from the following witnesses: David Stevens,
Assistant Secretary for Housing and Commissioner of the Federal
Housing Administration, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development; Theodore ``Ted'' Tozer, President, Government
National Mortgage Association (GNMA); Phyllis Caldwell, Chief,
Homeownership Preservation Office, U.S. Department of Treasury;
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, President, American Action Forum and
former director of the Congressional Budget Office; Michael A.
J. Farrell, Chairman, President & CEO, Annaly Capital
Management, Inc.; Faith Schwartz, Executive Director, HOPE Now;
and Julia Gordon, Senior Policy Counsel, Center for Responsible
Lending.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Determine the Future Role of FHA,
RHS and GNMA in the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage
Markets.'' The hearing focused on HUD's Federal Housing
Administration (FHA) and USDA's Rural Housing Service (RHS)
single- and multi-family programs. The hearing also examined
legislative proposals to improve the financial condition of
FHA, RHS and the GNMA, the agency of HUD that guarantees the
timely payment of principal and interest on securities backing
mortgages insured by FHA and other government agencies. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Katie Alitz, President, Council for Affordable and Rural
Housing; Michael D. Berman, Chairman, Mortgage Bankers
Association; Mark A. Calabria, Director of Financial Regulation
Studies, Cato Institute; Peter Carey, President and CEO, Self-
Help Housing Enterprises, Inc.; Brian Chappelle, Partner,
Potomac Partners; Peter W. Evans, Partner, Moran and Company;
Basil Petrou, Managing Partner, Federal Financial Analytics,
Inc.; Ron Phipps, President, Phipps Realty; and Barry
Rutenberg, First Vice Chairman, National Association of Home
Builders.
FEDERAL LAWS AFFECTING INSURANCE REGULATION
On July 28, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Insurance Oversight: Policy Implications for U.S. Consumers,
Businesses and Jobs.'' The hearing focused on the current
status of the insurance industry and the impact of changes made
to the regulation of insurance by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203). The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. John Huff, Director of the Missouri Department of
Insurance, Financial Institutions, and Professional
Registration; Ms. Susan Voss, Commissioner of the Iowa
Insurance Division and President of the National Association of
Insurance Commissioners; Mr. Greg Wren, Treasurer of the
National Conference of Insurance Legislators; Mr. Clay Jackson,
Senior Vice President and Regional Agency Manager of BB&T
Cooper, Love, Jackson, Thornton & Harwell; Mr. Andrew Furgatch,
Chairman and CEO of Magna Carta Companies; Ms. Leigh Ann Pusey,
President and CEO of the American Insurance Association; Mr.
Birny Birnbaum, Executive Director of the Center for Economic
Justice; Ms. Letha Heaton, Vice President of the Admiral
Insurance Company; Mr. Gary Hughes, Executive Vice President &
General Counsel of the American Council of Life Insurers; and
Mr. Eric Smith, President and CEO Americas of Swiss Re.
On October 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Insurance Oversight: Policy Implications for U.S.
Consumers, Businesses and Jobs, Part 2.'' The hearing focused
on the goals and implementation of the newly created Federal
Insurance Office (FIO). The Honorable Michael McRaith, Director
of the Federal Insurance Office, was the sole witness.
GOVERNMENT FORECLOSURE MITIGATION PROGRAMS
On October 6, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``The Obama Administration's Response to the Housing
Crisis.'' This hearing examined the Administration's
initiatives for refinancing underwater and delinquent
mortgages, foreclosure mitigation, and other housing
revitalization efforts. The hearing also focused on ideas
outlined by President Obama in his September 8, 2011, address
to a Joint Session of Congress, including a $15 billion
community redevelopment grant initiative called ``Project
Rebuild'' and proposed modifications to the existing Home
Affordable Refinance Program (HARP). The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Ms. Tammye Trevino,
Administrator of Housing and Community Facilities Programs for
the Department of Agriculture's Rural Development Agency; Ms.
Carol Galante, HUD's Acting Federal Housing Administration
Commissioner and Assistant Secretary for Housing; Mr. Darius
Kingsley, Deputy Chief of the Department of the Treasury's
Homeownership Preservation Office; Mr. Neil Barofsky, Senior
Fellow at the New York University School of Law; Dr. Mark
Calabria, Director of Financial Regulation Studies for the Cato
Institute; Ms. Laurie Goodman, Senior Managing Director at
Amherst Securities Group LP; and Mr. Andrew Jakabovics, Senior
Director of Policy Development and Research for Enterprise
Community Partners.
HUD'S HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM
On November 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a joint hearing
with the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee entitled
``Fraud in the HUD HOME Program.'' The hearing focused on
allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse within HUD's HOME
Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) and whether HUD has
implemented appropriate policies, procedures, and internal
controls to monitor the performance of the HOME program. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. Timothy Truax, who was convicted of defrauding
organizations that received funds from the HOME program; Ms.
``Jane Smith,'' an inmate in federal prison convicted of
defrauding organizations that received funds from the HOME
program; Mr. John McCarty, Acting Deputy Inspector General for
HUD; Mr. Kenneth Donohue, former Inspector General for HUD; Mr.
James Beaudette, Deputy Director for HUD's Departmental
Enforcement Center; and Mr. Ethan Handelman, Vice President for
Policy and Advocacy for the National Housing Conference.
MANUFACTURED HOUSING
On November 29, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing
in Danville, Virginia entitled ``The State of Manufactured
Housing.'' The hearing served as a general overview of
manufactured housing and how stricter lending standards have
affected borrowers seeking to purchase manufactured homes. In
addition, the hearing examined how HUD monitors and enforces
its federal standards for the construction and safety of
manufactured homes. The Subcommittee received testimony from
the following witnesses: Mr. Henry Czauski, HUD's Acting Deputy
Administrator for Manufactured Housing Program; Mr. Kevin
Clayton, President and CEO of Clayton Homes; Mr. Tyler
Craddock, Executive Director of the Virginia Manufactured and
Modular Housing Association; Mr. Stan Rush, Account
Representative for Haylor, Freyer and Coon, Inc.; Mr. J. Scott
Yates, President of Yates Homes; Mr. Adam Rust, Research
Director for the Community Reinvestment Association of North
Carolina; and Ms. Carla Burr, a resident of manufactured
housing.
RENTAL ASSISTANCE DEMONSTRATION
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``The Obama Administration's Rental Assistance
Demonstration Proposal.'' The purpose of the hearing was to
review the Obama Administration's Rental Assistance
Demonstration (RAD) proposal, which would allow for the
voluntary conversion of units in public housing to long-term
project-based Section 8 contracts in order to access private
capital for preservation and redevelopment activities. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
The Honorable Sandra Henriquez, HUD's Assistant Secretary for
Public and Indian Housing; Mr. Ismael Guerrero, Executive
Director of the City and County of Denver's Housing Authority;
Mr. Steven Hydinger, Managing Director of BREC Development,
LLC; and Mr. Charles Elsesser, of Florida Legal Services.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-7................. Are There Government February 16, 2011
Barriers to the Housing
Market Recovery?.
112-13................ Legislative Proposals to March 2, 2011
End Taxpayer Funding for
Ineffective Foreclosure
Mitigation Programs.
112-16................ Legislative Proposals to March 11, 2011
Reform the National Flood
Insurance Program, Part I.
112-23................ Legislative Proposals to April 1, 2011
Reform the National Flood
Insurance Program, Part
II.
112-32................ Legislative Proposals to May 25, 2011
Determine the Future Role
of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-
Family Mortgage Markets.
112-40................ Legislative Proposals to June 23, 2011
Reform the Housing Choice
Voucher Program.
112-47................ Mortgage Origination: The July 13, 2011
Impact of Recent Changes
on Homeowners and
Businesses.
112-53................ Insurance Oversight: July 28, 2011
Policy Implications for
U.S. Consumers,
Businesses, and Jobs.
112-57................ Legislative Proposals to September 8, 2011
Determine the Future Role
of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-
Family Mortgage Markets,
Part 2.
112-61................ HUD and NeighborWorks September 14, 2011
Housing Counseling
Oversight.
112-69................ The Obama Administration's October 6, 2011
Response to the Housing
Crisis.
112-74................ The Section 8 Savings Act October 13, 2011
of 2011: Proposals to
Promote Economic
Independence for Assisted
Families.
112-77................ Insurance Oversight: October 25, 2011
Policy Implications for
U.S. Consumers,
Businesses, and Jobs,
Part 2.
112-81................ Fraud in the HUD Home November 2, 2011
Program (Joint Hearing
with Oversight).
112-83................ The Obama Administration's November 3, 2011
Rental Assistance
Demonstration Proposal.
112-84................ Insurance Oversight and November 16, 2011
Legislative Proposals.
112-86................ The State of Manufactured November 29, 2011
Housing (Field Hearing).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
(Ratio: 8-6)
GARY G. MILLER, California,
Chairman
CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York, Ranking MemberT J. DOLD, Illinois, Vice
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin Chairman
ANDRE CARSON, Indiana RON PAUL, Texas
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado JOHN CAMPBELL, California
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee Legislative Activities
SECURING AMERICAN JOBS THROUGH EXPORTS ACT OF 2011
(H.R. 2072)
Summary
H.R. 2072, the Securing American Jobs Through Exports Act
of 2011, would amend the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 by
extending the authority of the Export-Import Bank of the United
States (the Bank) for four years, from 2011 to 2015. Key
provisions of H.R. 2072 include: (1) a four-year
reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank charter; (2) a
gradual increase in the Bank's financing authority; (3) a
requirement that the Bank establish clear and comprehensive
guidelines regarding the type and amount of content in a good
or service eligible for Bank financing; (4) authorization for
the Bank to use up to $20 million of its surplus, subject to
appropriations, to upgrade its information technology system;
and (5) a number of new transparency and accountability
requirements for the Bank.
Legislative History
H.R. 2072 was introduced by Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade Chairman Gary Miller on June 1, 2011,
and referred to the Committee on Financial Services. The bill
has nine cosponsors.
On March 10, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The Role of the Export-Import Bank in U.S. Competitiveness
and Job Creation.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine
the role of the Export-Import Bank in fostering job growth by
helping U.S. companies compete in the international export
market. The hearing focused on how to improve the operations of
the Export-Import Bank in supporting U.S. companies as they
export to international markets. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Karan Bhatia, Vice
President and Senior Counsel, General Electric; Mr. Scott
Scherer, Senior Vice President, Boeing Capital Corporation; Mr.
David Ickert, Vice President of Finance, Air Tractor, Inc.; and
Mr. Kevin Law, President & CEO, Long Island Association.
On May 24, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals on Securing American Jobs Through
Exports: Export-Import Bank Reauthorization.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Fred
Hochberg, Chairman and President, the Export-Import Bank of the
United States; Ms. Donna K. Alexander, Chief Executive Officer,
Bankers' Association for Finance and Trade--International
Financial Services Association; Ms. Thea Lee, Deputy Chief of
Staff, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations; Mr. Osvaldo Luis Gratacos, Inspector General for
the Export-Import Bank; Mr. John Hardy, President, Coalition
for Employment Through Exports; and Dr. Matthew Slaughter,
Associate Dean for the MBA Program, Signals Company Professor
of Management, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College.
On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by a voice vote.
On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session an
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House
by a voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on September 8,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-201).
SUPPORTING ECONOMIC AND NATIONAL SECURITY BY MAINTAINING U.S.
LEADERSHIP IN MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS ACT
(H.R. 3188)
Summary
H.R. 3188, the Supporting Economic and National Security by
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Multilateral Development Banks
Act, would amend the Bretton Woods Agreements Act to allow for
general capital increases at the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the Inter-American
Development Bank (IDB), the African Development Bank, and the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. In addition
to the general capital increases, this bill also has provisions
to fight corruption, promote transparency and accountability at
these institutions, promote strong procurement standards, and
to urge Argentina to settle its debts with its public and
private creditors.
Legislative History
On October 4, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing on a discussion draft entitled ``The World Bank and
Multi Lateral Development Banks' Authorization.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
The Honorable Mark Green, Former U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania,
Former U.S. Representative (R-WI), Senior Director, U.S. Global
Leadership Coalition; The Honorable Eli Whitney Debevoise, II,
Former U.S. Executive Director, The World Bank Group, Senior
Partner, Arnold & Porter LLP; Mr. Daniel F. Runde, Director of
the Project on Prosperity and Development, William A. Schreyer
Chair in Global Analysis, Center for Strategic and
International Studies; Mr. John Murphy, Vice President for
International Affairs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce. On October 12,
2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and ordered the
discussion draft, as amended, reported favorably to the full
Committee by a voice vote.
On October 13, 2011, the discussion draft was introduced as
H.R. 3188 by Representative Robert Dold, and referred to the
Committee on Financial Services. The bill has no cosponsors.
Subcommittee Oversight Activities
GLOBAL CAPITAL FLOWS
On October 13, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``The U.S. Housing Finance System in the Global
Context: Structure, Capital Sources, and Housing Dynamics.''
The U.S. securitization process has facilitated the flow of
private investment capital from investors around the world to
fund U.S. home mortgages. This hearing focused on the
relationship between the health of the U.S. housing finance
system and global financial stability, including foreign
involvement in the U.S. housing finance system and the
motivations of foreign investors to purchase residential
mortgage-backed securities. The Subcommittee received testimony
from the following witnesses: Mr. Michael A. J. Farrell,
Chairman, CEO and President, Annaly Capital Management, Inc.;
Mr. Richard Dorfman, Managing Director and Head of
Securitization Group, Securities Industry and Financial Markets
Association; Mr. Moe Veissi, 2011 President-Elect, National
Association of Realtors; and Dr. Susan M. Wachter, Richard B.
Worley Professor of Financial Management, The Wharton School,
University of Pennsylvania.
EUROZONE DISTRESS
On October 25, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``The Eurozone Crisis and Implications for the United
States.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine the
potential effects of Europe's economic problems on the U.S.
economy, particularly on trade and employment. The hearing also
examined European policy options under consideration for
containing the crisis and the role of the U.S. in these
decisions. The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: The Honorable Charles Collyns, Assistant
Secretary for International Finance, U.S. Department of the
Treasury; Mr. Peter S. Rashish, Vice President, Europe &
Eurasia, U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Dr. Desmond Lachman,
Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; and Mr. Douglas
J. Elliott, Fellow of Economic Studies, Initiative on Business
and Public Policy, Brookings Institution.
MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS
On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The Role of the U.S. in the World Bank and Multilateral
Development Banks: Bank Oversight and Requested Capital
Increases.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from The
Honorable Lael Brainard, Under Secretary for International
Affairs, Department of the Treasury.
On July 27, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The Impact of the World Bank and Multilateral Development
Banks on U.S. Job Creation.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: The Honorable James T.
Kolbe, former Member of Congress, Senior Transatlantic Fellow,
German Marshall Fund of the United States; Mr. Robert
Mosbacher, Jr., Chairman, Mosbacher Energy Company, Past-
President and CEO, Overseas Private Investment Corporation; Mr.
James A. Harmon, Chairman, Caravel Management, LLC, Past-
President and CEO, Export-Import Bank of the United States; Mr.
Benjamin Leo, Research Fellow, Center for Global Development,
Former Treasury Department and National Security Council
Official; and Mr. John Hardy, President, Coalition for
Employment through Exports.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``The Impact of the World Bank and Multilateral
Development Banks on National Security.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: The Honorable
Marisa Lago, Assistant Secretary for International Markets and
Development, U.S. Department of the Treasury; and Rear Admiral
Michelle Howard, chief of Staff to the Director, Strategic
Plans and Policy, J5, the Joint Staff.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-15................ The Role of the Export- March 10, 2011
Import Bank in U.S.
Competitiveness and Job
Creation.
112-31................ Legislative Proposals on May 24, 2011
Securing American Jobs
Through Exports: Export-
Import Bank
Reauthorization.
112-38................ The Role of the U.S. in June 14, 2011
the World Bank and
Multilateral Development
Banks: Bank Oversight and
Requested Capital
Increases.
112-52................ The Impact of the World July 27, 2011
Bank and Multi-Lateral
Development Banks on U.S.
Job Creation.
112-64................ The Impact of the World September 21, 2011
Bank and Multi-Lateral
Development Banks on
National Security.
112-68................ The World Bank and Multi October 4, 2011
Lateral Development
Banks' Authorization.
112-73................ The U.S. Housing Finance October 13, 2011
System in the Global
Context: Structure,
Capital Sources and
Housing Dynamics.
112-76................ The Eurozone Crisis and October 25, 2011
Implications for the
United States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
(Ratio: 10-8)
RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas, Chairman
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts, Ranking MemberITZPATRICK,
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts Pennsylvania, Vice Chairman
MAXINE WATERS, California PETER T. KING, New York
JOE BACA, California MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico
KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota BILL POSEY, Florida
JAMES A. HIMES, Connecticut NAN A. S. HAYWORTH, New York
JOHN C. CARNEY, Jr., Delaware JAMES B. RENACCI, Ohio
BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, ex officioANCISCO ``QUICO'' CANSECO, Texas
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama, ex
officio
Subcommittee Oversight Activities
GSE LEGAL FEES
On February 15, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``An Analysis of the Post-Conservatorship Legal
Expenses of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.'' The hearing explored
issues related to the Federal Housing Finance Agency's (FHFA's)
oversight of legal fees incurred by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
since the companies' entry into conservatorship in September
2008. FHFA disclosed at the hearing that taxpayers have spent
more than $162 million defending Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and
their former top executives in civil lawsuits accusing them of
fraud. The Subcommittee received testimony from the following
witnesses: Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting Director, FHFA; Mr.
Alfred Pollard, General Counsel, FHFA; Mr. Michael Williams,
Chief Executive Officer, Fannie Mae; Mr. Timothy J. Mayopoulos,
General Counsel, Fannie Mae; and the Honorable Mike DeWine,
Attorney General of Ohio.
COSTS OF THE DODD-FRANK ACT
On March 30, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on ``The
Costs of Implementing the Dodd-Frank Act: Budgetary and
Economic.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from the
following witnesses: the Honorable Jill E. Sommers,
Commissioner, Commodity Futures Trading Commission; Mr. Douglas
W. Elmendorf, Director, Congressional Budget Office (CBO); Mr.
Jeffrey Lacker, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond;
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Ph.D., President, American Action Forum;
James Angel, Ph.D., CFA, Associate Professor of Finance,
McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University; James
Overdahl, Ph.D., Vice President NERA Economic Consulting,
former Chief Economist for the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC); and David Min, Associate Director of
Financial Markets Policy, Center for American Progress.
SECURITIES FRAUD
On May 13, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The Stanford Ponzi Scheme: Lessons for Protecting Investors
from the Next Securities Fraud.'' This hearing reviewed the
failure of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to uncover a
Ponzi scheme allegedly orchestrated by Houston businessman
Allen Stanford that defrauded thousands of U.S. investors. The
hearing also focused on what steps the SEC and FINRA could take
to prevent similar securities frauds in the future. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. David Kotz, Inspector General, SEC; Mr. Robert Khuzami,
Director of the Division of Enforcement, SEC; Mr. Carlo di
Florio, Director of Office of Compliance Inspections and
Examinations, SEC; Mr. Richard Ketchum, Chief Executive
Officer, FINRA; Ms. Julie Preuitt, Assistant Regional Director,
SEC Fort Worth Regional Office; Mr. Charles Rawl, a former
Stanford Group Company employee and whistleblower; and Mr.
Stanford Kauffman, a victim of the Stanford fraud.
MORTGAGE SERVICING STANDARDS
On July 7, 2011, the Subcommittees on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit and Oversight and
Investigations held a joint hearing entitled ``Mortgage
Servicing: An Examination of the Role of Federal Regulators in
Settlement Negotiations and the Future of Mortgage Servicing
Standards.'' The purpose of the hearing was to review the role
of Federal regulators in the ongoing mortgage servicing
settlement negotiations and the development of new mortgage
servicing standards. The Subcommittees heard testimony from the
following witnesses: Ms. Julie Williams, First Senior Deputy
Comptroller and Chief Counsel of the Office of the Comptroller
of the Currency; Mr. Mark Pearce, Director, Division of
Depositor and Consumer Protection at the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation; Mr. Raj Date, Associate Director of
Research, Markets and Regulations, Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau, U.S. Department of the Treasury; the
Honorable Luther Strange, Alabama Attorney General; Mr. David
Stevens, President, Mortgage Bankers Association; and Mr.
Michael Calhoun, President, Center for Responsible Lending.
OVERSIGHT OF THE FINANCIAL STABILITY OVERSIGHT COUNCIL
On April 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
``Oversight of the Financial Stability Oversight Council.'' The
hearing focused on the efforts of the Financial Stability
Oversight Council (Council), an inter-agency body established
under the Dodd-Frank Act to monitor and contain risk to the
financial system, to implement Title I of the Act. In
particular, the hearing examined the Council's execution of its
mandate to identify financial institutions that will be subject
to enhanced supervision and prudential standards; the Council's
coordination of rulemaking among financial regulatory agencies;
the Council's studies on regulations that might affect the
competitiveness of U.S. financial institutions in the global
market for financial services; and the Council's efforts to
monitor insurance on the federal level. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: Gary Gensler,
Chairman, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC); Jeffrey
A. Goldstein, Under Secretary for Domestic Finance, Treasury
Department; John Huff, Director, Missouri Department of
Insurance, Financial Institutions, and Professional
Registration; J. Nellie Liang, Director, Office of Financial
Stability Policy and Research, Federal Reserve Board; Robert W.
Cook, Director of Division of Trading and Markets, Securities
and Exchange Commission; Arthur J. Murton, Director, Division
of Insurance and Research, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation; and Tim Long, Chief National Bank Examiner and
Senior Deputy Comptroller for Regulatory Policy, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency.
On July 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Office of Financial Research and the
Financial Stability Oversight Council.'' The hearing addressed
the efforts to organize and standup the Office of Financial
research (OFR), coordination between FSOC, OFR and other
regulators, and data security issues at OFR. The Subcommittee
received testimony from the following witnesses: The Honorable
Richard Berner, Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury; Dr.
Nassim N. Taleb, Distinguished Professor, New York University
Polytechnic Institute; Mr. Dilip Krishna, Vice President of
Financial Services, Teradata Corporation; Mr. Alan Paller,
Director of Research, SANS Institute; and Dr. John Lietchy,
Professor of Marketing and Statistics, Director of the Center
for the Study of Global Financial Stability, Pennsylvania State
University.
OVERSIGHT OF THE CREDIT RATING AGENCIES POST-DODD FRANK
On July 27, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Credit Rating Agencies Post Dodd-Frank.''
The hearing examined how federal regulation and operations of
the credit rating agencies have changed since the financial
crisis and following enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203). The
hearing reviewed the progress of federal agencies in striking
references to ratings agencies in their regulations and
addressed investor over-reliance on the ratings opinions of the
three leading ratings agencies, Standard & Poor's, Moody's
Investor Service and Fitch Ratings. The Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. John Ramsay, Deputy
Director, Division of Trading and Markets, U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission; Mr. Mark Van Der Weide, Senior Associate
Director, Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation,
Federal Reserve Board; Mr. David Wilson, Senior Deputy
Comptroller and Chief National Bank Examiner, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency; Mr. Deven Sharma, President,
Standard & Poor's; Mr. Michael Rowan, Global Managing Director,
Commercial Group, Moody's Investors Service; Mr. James Gellert,
Chief Executive Officer, Rapid Ratings; Mr. Jules Kroll,
Chairman and CEO, Kroll Bond Rating Agency; Mr. Larry White,
Robert Kavesh Professor of Economics, Stern School of Business,
New York University; and Mr. Gregory Smith, Chief Operating
Officer and General Counsel, Colorado Public Employees'
Retirement Association.
OVERSIGHT OF THE OFFICE OF TERRORISM AND FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE POST-9/
11
On September 6, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing
in New York City entitled ``Combating Terror Post-9/11:
Oversight of the Office of Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence.'' The hearing reviewed the activities of the
Treasury Department's Office of Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence to safeguard the integrity of the nation's
financial system and to fight terrorist facilitators, money
launderers, and other threats to national security. The
Honorable Daniel Glaser, Assistant Secretary for Terrorist
Financing, Department of the Treasury, was the sole witness.
POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AT THE SEC
On September 22, 2011, the Subcommittee held a joint
hearing with the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's
Subcommittee on TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public
and Private Programs, entitled ``Potential Conflicts of
Interest at the SEC: The Becker Case.'' The hearing examined
how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) handled
potential conflicts of interest involving David Becker, a
former SEC general counsel who financially benefited from the
Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme. The Subcommittees received
testimony from the following witnesses: the Honorable Mary
Schapiro, Chairman, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission;
Mr. H. David Kotz, Inspector General, U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission; and Mr. David M. Becker, Former General
Counsel, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS
On October 12, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Oversight of the Federal Home Loan Bank System.''
The hearing examined the capital requirements, financial
health, and stability of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, as
well as the Federal Home Loan Bank System's ability to fulfill
its housing mission and provide liquidity to the cooperative's
member banks in a safe and sound manner. Subcommittee received
testimony from the following witnesses: Mr. Anthony P. Costa,
Chairman and co-CEO, Empire State Bank, on behalf of the
American Bankers Association; Mr. Lee R. Gibson, Chairman of
the Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas and Chairman of the
Council of Federal Home Loan Banks; Mr. Tim Zimmerman,
President/CEO, Standard Bank, PaSB, on behalf of the
Independent Community Bankers of America; and the Honorable
Bruce Morrison, former Director of the Federal Housing Finance
Board.
OVERSIGHT OF THE HUD HOME PROGRAM
On November 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a joint hearing
with the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee entitled
``Fraud in the HUD HOME Program.'' The hearing focused on
allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse within HUD's HOME
Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) and whether HUD has
implemented appropriate policies, procedures, and internal
controls to monitor the performance of the HOME program. The
Subcommittee received testimony from the following witnesses:
Mr. Timothy Truax, who was convicted of defrauding
organizations that received funds from the HOME program; Ms.
``Jane Smith,'' an inmate in federal prison convicted of
defrauding organizations that received funds from the HOME
program; Mr. John McCarty, Acting Deputy Inspector General for
HUD; Mr. Kenneth Donohue, former Inspector General for HUD; Mr.
James Beaudette, Deputy Director for HUD's Departmental
Enforcement Center; and Mr. Ethan Handelman, Vice President for
Policy and Advocacy for the National Housing Conference.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-4................. An Analysis of the Post- February 15, 2011
Conservatorship Legal
Expenses of Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac.
112-21................ The Costs of Implementing March 30, 2011
the Dodd-Frank Act:
Budgetary and Economic.
112-26................ Oversight of the Financial April 14, 2011
Stability Oversight
Council.
112-30................ The Stanford Ponzi Scheme: May 13, 2011
Lessons for Protecting
Investors from the Next
Securities Fraud.
112-44................ Mortgage Servicing: An July 7, 2011
Examination of the Role
of Federal Regulators in
Settlement Negotiations
and the Future of
Mortgage Servicing
Standards (Joint Hearing
with Financial
Institutions).
112-48................ Oversight of the Office of July 14, 2011
Financial Research and
the Financial Stability
Oversight Council.
112-51................ Oversight of the Credit July 27, 2011
Rating Agencies Post Dodd-
Frank.
112-55................ Combating Terror Post 9/ September 6, 2011
11: Oversight of the
Office of Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence
(Field Hearing).
112-66................ Potential Conflicts of the September 22, 2011
Interest at the SEC: The
Becker Case (Joint
Hearing with Subcommittee
on TARP, Financial
Services and Bailouts of
Public and Private
Programs of the Committee
on Oversight and
Government Reform).
112-71................ Oversight of the Federal October 12, 2011
Home Loan Bank System.
112-81................ Fraud in the HUD HOME November 2, 2011
Program (Joint Hearing
with Housing).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
OVERSIGHT PLAN FOR THE 112TH CONGRESS
Clause 2(d) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires that each
standing committee in the first session of a congress adopt an
oversight plan for the two-year period of the Congress and
submit the plan to the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform and the Committee on House Administration.
Clause 1(d)(1) of rule XI requires each committee to submit
to the House not later than the 30th day after June 1 and
December 1 a semiannual report on the activities of that
committee under rules X and XI during the Congress of such
year. Clause 1(d)(2)(B) of rule XI also requires that the
report include a summary of the oversight plans submitted
pursuant to clause 2(d) of rule X; a summary of the actions
taken and recommendations made with respect to such plan; and a
summary of any additional oversight activities undertaken by
the committee and any recommendations made or actions taken
thereon.
Part A of this section contains the Oversight Plan of the
Committee on Financial Services for the One Hundred Twelfth
Congress, which the Committee considered and adopted on
February 10, 2011.
Part B of this section contains a summary of the actions
taken to implement that plan and the recommendations made with
respect to the plan. Additional oversight activities undertaken
by the Committee, and the recommendations made or actions taken
thereon, are contained in the specific sections relating to the
activities of the full Committee and each of the subcommittees.
Part A
OVERSIGHT PLAN OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES FOR THE ONE
HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
February 10, 2011.--Approved by the Committee on Financial Services
----------
Mr. BACHUS, from the Committee on Financial Services,
submitted to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
and the Committee on House Administration the following
REPORT
Clause 2(d)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires each standing
committee, not later than February 15 of the first session, to
adopt an oversight plan for the 112th Congress. The oversight
plan must be submitted simultaneously to the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on House
Administration.
The following agenda constitutes the oversight plan of the
Committee on Financial Services for the 112th Congress. It
includes areas in which the Committee and its subcommittees
expect to conduct oversight during this Congress, but does not
preclude oversight or investigation of additional matters or
programs as they arise. Any areas mentioned in the oversight
plan may be considered by the Financial Services Committee, the
five subcommittees of jurisdiction or the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations. The Committee will consult, as
appropriate, with other committees of the House that may share
jurisdiction on any of the subjects listed below.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
Enacted in response to the financial crisis of 2008 and the
bail-outs of large Wall Street firms at taxpayer expense, the
Dodd-Frank Act (P.L. 111-203) represents the most extensive
change in the regulation of financial institutions since the
Great Depression. The Dodd-Frank Act requires federal
regulators to undertake more than 240 rule-makings and to carry
out over 60 studies. The implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act
will affect not only every financial institution that does
business in the United States but also non-financial
institutions and consumers as well. The Dodd-Frank Act holds
out the promise that it will ``promote the financial stability
of the United States by improving accountability and
transparency in the financial system,'' ``end `too big to
fail,''' ``protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts,''
and ``protect consumers from abusive financial services
practices.'' One of the primary tasks of the Committee in the
112th Congress will therefore be to oversee the implementation
of the Dodd-Frank Act to ensure that these objectives are being
met. The Committee will conduct careful oversight and
monitoring of the financial regulators charged with
implementing the Dodd-Frank Act to ensure that they prudently
exercise the new authority conferred upon them under the Act
without unduly hampering the ability of consumers and
businesses to obtain credit, or the ability of capital market
participants to allocate capital to productive uses, mitigate
risk, and grow the economy. In particular, the Committee will
seek to ensure that regulators carefully and transparently
assess the costs and benefits of regulations called for by the
Dodd-Frank Act in order to strike an appropriate balance
between prudent regulation and economic growth. The Committee
will assess the results of the implementation of the Dodd-Frank
Act in order to improve those parts of the Act that work well
while changing those parts that do not, and to identify and
remedy unintended consequences, such as restrictions of access
to credit by consumers and businesses, impediments to
investment and job creation, or higher costs of doing business
that will be passed on to consumers. The Committee will also
examine the international response to the Dodd-Frank Act to
determine if the law could place the United States financial
services industry at a competitive disadvantage.
Specific Dodd-Frank Oversight Matters
Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). The Dodd-
Frank Act creates an interagency body--the Financial Stability
Oversight Council--charged with identifying, monitoring and
addressing potential threats to U.S. financial stability. The
Dodd-Frank Act requires the FSOC to report annually to
Congress, to be followed by testimony by the Secretary of the
Treasury in his capacity as FSOC Chairman. The Committee will
conduct significant oversight over the FSOC, monitoring among
other things the extent to which its designation of
``systemically significant'' firms may create an expectation
among market participants that the government will not permit
these firms to fail, as well as the effectiveness of the FSOC
in making financial markets more stable and resilient.
Office of Financial Research (OFR). The Dodd-Frank Act
creates a new ``Office of Financial Research'' housed within
the Department of the Treasury and grants it broad powers to
compel the production of information and data from financial
market participants. The OFR is to use this information to
conduct research designed to improve the quality of financial
regulation, and to monitor and report on systemic risk. Section
153 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the OFR to report annually
to Congress on the state of the U.S. financial system, and
requires the Director of the OFR to testify annually before the
Committee on the OFR's activities and its assessment of
systemic risk. The Committee will conduct oversight of the OFR
to ensure that the OFR's requests for data are not unduly
burdensome or costly and that the confidentiality of the data
that it collects is strictly maintained. The Committee will
also assess whether the OFR duplicates data collection efforts
already being undertaken by other regulatory bodies.
Volcker Rule. On January 22, 2011, the Financial Stability
Oversight Council issued recommendations on the implementation
of Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Act--the so-called Volcker
Rule--which bars bank holding companies from engaging in
proprietary trading and severely limits their ability to
sponsor and invest in hedge funds and private equity. The
Federal regulators have nine months to promulgate regulations
based upon the FSOC's recommendations. The Committee will
oversee the regulators' implementation of the Volcker Rule to
ensure that it does not result in unintended consequences for
U.S. economic competitiveness and job creation, or for the
liquidity and efficiency of U.S. capital markets.
Capital Markets
Oversight and Restructuring of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). The Committee will monitor all significant
aspects of the SEC's operations to ensure that it fulfills its
Congressional mandate. The Committee will carefully examine the
SEC's budget requests to ensure that the agency deploys its
resources effectively. The Committee will carefully examine the
operations and organizational structure of the SEC, placing an
emphasis on its supervisory and inspection functions. The
Committee will also consider the impact of separating the SEC's
examination and policy functions and whether such functions
should be consolidated. The Committee will review the various
reports and studies of the organizational structure and
management of the SEC mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, including
the study being conducted by the Boston Consulting Group, to
determine whether legislative reforms are needed to address the
SEC's organizational structure and ensure that the SEC
efficiently and effectively fulfills its investor protection
mission. The Committee will also monitor steps taken by the SEC
in response to findings by the Government Accountability Office
that the SEC failed to maintain effective internal controls
over its financial reporting, due to material weaknesses
involving SEC's internal control over information systems and
its financial reporting and accounting processes.
Derivatives. The Committee will examine the operations,
growth and structure of the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives
market. The Committee will explore how the Dodd-Frank Act
fundamentally reforms the use of OTC derivatives and how the
SEC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the
Federal Reserve, and the Department of Treasury are
implementing new rules required by the Dodd-Frank Act to govern
the OTC marketplace. The Committee will review whether the pace
and breadth of rulemaking required by the Dodd-Frank Act may
lead to unintended consequences in the area of jobs, the
economy, the proper functioning of U.S. capital markets,
international competitiveness, and appropriate risk mitigation.
The Committee will examine all facets of the derivatives
market, including clearing, exchange or swap execution facility
trading; the roles of dealers, inter-dealer brokers, data
repositories, clearinghouses, and end-users; trade and price
reporting; and ownership and governance restrictions. The
Committee will examine any requirements that federal regulators
impose on ``end-users'' who use swaps to hedge against or
mitigate risks. The Committee will examine transparency and
clarity for the derivatives markets. The Committee will closely
monitor Dodd-Frank implementation so that the new regulations
foster market efficiency, provide market participants with
important market information, and provide price transparency
through the increased use of swap execution facilities and
clearing organizations, when appropriate. The Committee will
also examine the Dodd-Frank Act's prohibition of federal
assistance to a ``swaps entity,'' which includes swap dealers
and major swap participants (and the equivalents in security-
based swaps), securities and futures exchanges, swap execution
facilities (SEFs), and clearing organizations registered with
the CFTC, the SEC, or any other federal or state agency. This
prohibition will be examined against other provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Act which allow for ``financial market utilities''
to have access to the Federal Reserve discount window in times
of crisis.
Credit Rating Agencies. The Committee will examine the
continuing role that credit rating agencies, also known as
Nationally Recognized Statistical Ratings Organizations
(NRSROs), play in the United States financial markets, the
SEC's oversight of NRSROs, how NRSROs are compensated, and
whether their methodologies accurately reflect the risks
associated with different debt instruments. The Committee will
examine the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on competition among
current NRSROs, and on new and prospective NRSRO entrants. The
Committee will examine the effect of the repeal of Rule 436(g)
under the Securities Act of 1933, which resulted in significant
disruption in the asset-backed securities marketplace. The
Committee will examine the implementation by federal regulators
of provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act requiring them to establish
new standards for evaluating credit-worthiness that do not
include references to ratings issued by NRSROs.
Securitization and Risk Retention. The Committee will
monitor the joint risk retention rule-making pursuant to
Section 941 of the Dodd-Frank Act to ensure that the
development and implementation of the risk retention rules
promote sound underwriting practices without constricting the
flow of credit and destabilizing an already fragile housing
market, and that those rules appropriately differentiate among
multiple asset classes. The Committee will focus particular
attention on the joint rulemaking to define a class of
``qualified residential mortgages'' (QRMs) that will be exempt
from risk retention requirements. The Committee will also
comprehensively examine the asset backed securities market, the
securitization of mortgages and issues related to the
assignment and servicing of securitized mortgages.
Regulation and Oversight of Broker-Dealers and Investment
Advisers. The Committee will examine the study mandated by
Section 913 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires the SEC to
review the effectiveness of the legal and regulatory standards
of care applicable to broker-dealers and investment advisers
when providing personalized investment advice to retail
customers. The Committee will also examine the study mandated
by Section 914 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires the SEC to
report on the need for enhanced examination and enforcement
resources for investment advisers, and on whether self-
regulatory organizations or user fees should be used to augment
SEC and state oversight of investment advisers.
Advisers to Private Funds. The Committee will examine the
functions served by advisers to private funds, including hedge
funds, private equity funds, and venture capital funds in the
United States financial marketplace. The Committee will review
the role hedge funds and private pools of capital serve in the
capital markets, and their interaction with investors,
financial intermediaries, and public companies. The Committee
will examine the Dodd-Frank Act's mandate that advisers to
private funds with more than $150 million in assets under
management register with the SEC under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940.
Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC). The
Committee will review the operations, initiatives, and
activities of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation,
as well as the application of the Securities Investor
Protection Act (SIPA). In light of SIPC's exposure to the
failures of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities and Lehman
Brothers, the Committee will examine SIPC's existing reserves,
member broker-dealer assessments, access to private and public
lines of credit, and coverage levels, as well as proposals to
improve SIPC's operations and management. The Committee will
also review the impact of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act
that amend the Securities Investor Protection Act, and the work
and recommendations of the SIPC Modernization Task Force.
Municipal Securities. In light of concerns over potential
defaults by state, county, city, and local governments, the
Committee will monitor the health of the United States
municipal securities markets and consider reforms to increase
transparency in that segment of the capital markets. The
Committee will also consider the apparent trend in the
municipal bond market away from the issuance of general
obligation bonds toward revenue bonds, and the implications of
that trend on the possibility of defaults. The Committee will
also consider the possible consequences of state and municipal
budget shortfalls and possible defaults on the municipal debt
markets and the U.S. financial system. The Committee will also
examine provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act designed to strengthen
the oversight of the municipal securities industry and broaden
municipal securities market protections to cover unregulated
market participants and their financial transactions with
municipal entities.
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). The Committee
will review the operations, initiatives and activities of the
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The Committee will
review the changes imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act, which altered
the MSRB's governance to include the protection of state and
local government issuers, public pension plans, and others
whose credit stands behind municipal bonds, in addition to
protecting investors and the public interest. The Committee
will also review the MSRB's regulation of municipal advisors.
Capital Formation. The Committee will survey regulatory
impediments to capital formation and seek both regulatory and
market-based incentives to increase access to capital,
particularly for those small companies contemplating an initial
public offering. The Committee will also examine the SEC's
efforts to fulfill its Congressional mandate of promoting
capital formation.
Equity/Option Market Structure. The Committee will review
recent developments in the United States equity and option
markets and the SEC's response to those developments. The
Committee will closely monitor the SEC to ensure that the
Commission follows its mandate to promote fair, orderly and
efficient markets, and that any new regulations foster market
efficiency, competition and innovation, and are based on
economic and empirical market data. The Committee will also
monitor the work of the Joint CFTC-SEC Advisory Committee on
Emerging Regulatory Issues, as it develops regulatory or
legislative recommendations that attempt to respond to the
extraordinary market movements on May 6, 2010.
Covered Bonds. The Committee will review the potential for
covered bonds to increase mortgage and broader asset class
financing, improve underwriting standards, and strengthen
United States financial institutions by providing a new funding
source with greater transparency, thereby fostering increased
liquidity in the capital markets. The Committee will also
review whether existing regulatory initiatives, including the
Department of the Treasury's ``Best Practices for Residential
Covered Bonds'' and the FDIC's covered bond policy statement to
``facilitate the prudent and incremental development of the
U.S. covered bond market'' are sufficient to foster the
creation of a covered bond market in the United States, or
whether additional regulatory or legislative initiatives are
necessary.
Corporate Governance. The Committee will review
developments and issues concerning corporate governance at
public companies. The Committee will examine how the Dodd-Frank
Act will impact the corporate governance practices of all
issuers, particularly small public companies. The Committee
will also examine the services provided by proxy advisory firms
to shareholders and issuers and will consider current SEC
proposals that seek to modernize corporate governance
practices. The Committee will continue to monitor the effect
that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has on the capital markets;
the impact of the permanent exemption from Section 404(b) for
public companies with less than $75 million in market
capitalization included in Dodd-Frank; and proposals to further
modify this exemption.
Employee Compensation. The Committee will monitor the
implementation of provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act governing
the compensation practices at public companies and financial
institutions. Among the issues to be examined are the
independent compensation committee requirement; the required
disclosure and compilation of data to compare the pay of the
CEO with the median pay of all employees of every public
company; the clawback of erroneously awarded employee
compensation; and the authority given to federal regulators to
prohibit incentive-based compensation structures that encourage
``inappropriate risks'' at financial institutions with more
than $1 billion in assets.
Securities Litigation. The Committee will examine the
effectiveness of the Private Securities Litigation Act of 1995
in protecting issuers from frivolous lawsuits while preserving
the ability of investors to pursue legitimate actions.
Securities Arbitration. The Committee will examine
developments in securities arbitration, including the impact of
the arbitration-related provisions contained in the Dodd-Frank
Act, specifically Section 921, which provide the SEC with the
authority to restrict mandatory pre-dispute arbitration, and
the impact that the exercise of that authority could have on
existing arbitration agreements and on issuers and investors
generally.
Securities Fraud. The Committee will review the SEC's
compliance, inspections, examinations, and enforcement
functions to ensure that adequate mechanisms exist to prevent
and detect securities fraud. The Committee will also monitor
the SEC's implementation and adherence to the reforms
recommended by the SEC's Office of Inspector General resulting
from the Commission's failure to detect either the Bernard
Madoff or Allen Stanford Ponzi schemes.
Mutual Funds. The Committee will examine the state and
operation of the U.S. mutual fund industry. This examination
will include reviewing the SEC's regulation of money market
mutual funds, and any proposed changes to the calculation of a
money market funds' ``net asset value'' (NAV). The Committee
will also review any proposals by the Financial Stability
Oversight Council to designate non-bank financial institutions
such as mutual funds as ``Systemically Important Financial
Institutions.''
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). The
Committee will review the operations, initiatives and
activities of the PCAOB. The Committee will also monitor the
PCAOB's exercise of its new authority to register, inspect and
discipline the auditors of broker-dealers, and the impact that
this increased oversight may have on the PCAOB's operations.
The Committee will also review the extent to which the PCAOB's
new authority to share information with its foreign
counterparts is sufficient to permit PCAOB inspectors to
examine non-U.S. auditors. The Committee will also monitor the
PCAOB's oversight of the auditors of financial statements of
Chinese companies that register and trade their securities in
the United States.
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). The Committee
will review the initiatives of the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) and its responsiveness to all segments
of the capital markets; the FASB's relationship with the SEC;
and proposals to enhance Congressional oversight of the FASB.
The Committee will monitor and review the FASB's specific
projects, including but not limited to fair value accounting
for financial instruments, particularly as it affects small
community banks; multi-employer pension plans; loss
contingencies; and lease accounting, to ensure that any
revisions provide useful information to investors without
disrupting the capital markets or improperly burdening issuers
and preparers.
Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The Committee
will review the role of the Government Accounting Standards
Board (GASB), which formulates accounting standards for the
voluntary use of state and local governments that issue
securities. The Committee will review the implementation of
Section 978 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which directs the SEC to
require the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to
collect fees from its members (broker-dealers and other
securities professionals) and to remit such fees to the
Financial Accounting Foundation, GASB's parent organization.
Convergence of International Accounting Standards. The
Committee will review efforts by the SEC, the FASB, and the
International Accounting Standards Board to achieve robust,
uniform international accounting standards. The Committee will
also monitor the SEC's plans to incorporate those standards as
part of United States financial reporting requirements.
Business Continuity Planning. The Committee will continue
its oversight of the implementation of disaster preparedness
and business continuity measures by the financial services
industry in order to minimize the disruptions of critical
operations in the United States financial system in the event
of natural disasters, terrorist attacks, or pandemics.
Government Sponsored Enterprises
Charter Restructuring for Government Sponsored Enterprises
(GSEs). On September 7, 2008, the Federal Housing Finance
Agency (FHFA) placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into
conservatorship. To date, Fannie Mae has tapped $88 billion and
Freddie Mac has used nearly $63 billion in taxpayer funds,
making the GSE conservatorship the costliest of all the
taxpayer bail-outs carried out over the past three years. The
decision to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and place them
in conservatorship has raised fundamental questions about the
viability of their public-private organizational structure. The
Committee will examine proposals to modify or terminate Fannie
Mae's and Freddie Mac's statutory charters.
GSE Regulatory Reform. The Committee will monitor the
activities of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which was
established in 2008 to oversee Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the
Federal Home Loan Banks, and will consider its effectiveness.
The Committee will also consider the appropriate role, if any,
for the Federal government in the secondary mortgage market.
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) System. The Committee will
monitor the capital requirements, financial health, and
stability of the FHLB System, as well as the FHLB System's
ability to fulfill its housing mission and provide liquidity to
the cooperative's member banks in a safe and sound manner. The
Committee will pay particular attention to recent reports that
some of the Federal Home Loan Banks may fall below required
capital levels.
FHLB Community and Economic Development. The Committee will
review efforts to advance community and economic development
within the FHLB System, including the implementation of the
enhanced targeted economic development lending for small
business, small farms, and small agri-businesses allowed under
the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the performance of the FHLBs in
implementing the community investment cash advance regulation.
Resolution Funding Corporation (REFCorp) Payments. The
Committee will monitor the efforts of the housing GSEs to pay
the obligations of REFCorp, which was established to cover the
costs of resolving the savings-and-loan crisis and the policy
implications for the GSEs upon the satisfaction of the
remaining REFCorp debts.
Legal Fees. The Committee will examine the expenditure of
more than $160 million in federal funds to defend Fannie Mae,
Freddie Mac and their top executives in lawsuits since the GSE
conservatorship began in September 2008. The Committee will
consider ways to limit further taxpayer exposure.
GSE Contracting with Non-Profits. To ensure that the GSEs
are not engaging in risky activities that undermine the
conservatorships, the Committee will examine the relationships
that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac maintain with non-profit
organizations that provide services, including housing
counseling, to potential homeowners. The Committee will also
examine whether the payments non-profits receive for services
provided to the GSEs are appropriate; whether GSE funds
provided to non-profits are used for political activities; and
whether adequate procedures are in place to protect the GSEs
from fraud.
GSE Foreclosure and Loan Modification Protocols. The
Committee will review Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's guidance
to mortgage servicers and participation in government mortgage
modification programs generally to ensure that undue political
influence does not result in even greater losses to taxpayers
from the GSE conservatorships.
Mortgage Putbacks and Repurchase Agreements. The Committee
will monitor Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's mortgage putback
and repurchase agreements with loan originators to ensure that
these agreements are consistent with market practice and the
FHFA's conservatorship responsibilities.
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB). The
Committee will oversee the establishment, operations, and
activities of the new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
established under title X of the Dodd-Frank Act. Under the Act,
the CFPB is to begin operations on or before July 21, 2011,
when the consumer protection functions and rule-writing
authority of other Federal financial regulators will transfer
to the new agency. The Committee will seek to ensure that the
CFPB's rules and enforcement initiatives protect consumers
against unfair and deceptive practices without stifling
economic growth, job creation, or reasonable access to credit.
The Committee will examine whether the CFPB's budget is
appropriate and will ask whether the CFPB's budget should be
subject to Congressional appropriations. The Committee will
evaluate the powers of its presidentially-appointed director to
write rules, supervise compliance, and enforce consumer
protection laws. The Committee will monitor the impact of CFPB
rules on small businesses and on financial institutions with
fewer than $10 billion of assets. The Committee will receive
the statutorily required semi-annual testimony of the Director,
once he or she is nominated and confirmed.
Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and other Initiatives
to Stabilize the Financial System. The Committee will continue
to examine closely the operation of the TARP authorized by the
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA). This oversight
will include working with the Government Accountability Office,
the Congressional Oversight Panel, and the Special Inspector
General for TARP to ensure that the program adequately protects
taxpayer interests and that its operations are transparent and
accountable. The Committee will also ensure that Treasury
regularly reports to the Committee on matters of lending,
liquidity, and safety and soundness related to those financial
institutions receiving TARP funds or guarantees. The Committee
will also examine carefully whether the recipients of TARP
funds are spending the money appropriately, with special
attention paid to any instances of waste, fraud, and abuse. The
Committee will concentrate on issues related to the distortion
of TARP fund distribution caused by political pressure and
interference rather than the judgment of the regulators. The
Committee will carefully analyze the unwinding of TARP
facilities and programs to ensure that taxpayer recoveries are
maximized and remaining funds are used for deficit reduction,
as contemplated by EESA.
``Too Big to Fail.'' The Committee also will examine the
application by Federal regulators of the ``too big to fail''
doctrine and the designation of ``systemically significant''
institutions to determine if these are effective, fair or
rational public policy distinctions. The Committee will also
consider whether the Dodd-Frank Act and the ``orderly
resolution authority'' set forth in Title II of the Act provide
an effective mechanism for imposing market discipline and
promoting financial stability. The Committee will ask whether
government actions to prop up large, complex financial
institutions imply that other institutions are ``too small to
save,'' and if recent interventions by the Treasury Department
and Federal Reserve have prejudiced local and community banks
and credit unions at the expense of institutions the regulators
believe are ``too big to fail.'' As part of that review, the
Committee will study the ways that financial institutions have
expanded and the incentives that drove them to grow. Attention
will be given to the conversion of investment banks to bank
holding companies during the financial crisis and their long-
term impact on the U.S. economy and regulatory structure. The
Committee will closely evaluate the government agencies and
offices which are now responsible for the supervision and
potential resolution of ``systemically significant'' financial
institutions. In examining the ``too big to fail'' issue, the
bailout of the American International Group (AIG) will be
carefully reviewed to determine whether the disparate treatment
of large creditors and small creditors was consistent with the
American expectation of equal treatment of all by government
agencies.
Financial Supervision. The Committee will continue to
examine Federal regulators' safety and soundness supervision of
the banking, thrift and credit union industries, to ensure that
systemic risks or other structural weaknesses in the financial
sector are identified and addressed promptly. The Committee may
also ask each financial regulatory agency to review its
promulgated rules and identify those which may be unnecessarily
burdensome or outdated. Additionally, the Committee's
examination of the regulatory system will encompass the trend
toward consolidation in the banking industry, which requires
Federal regulators to maintain the expertise and risk
evaluation systems necessary to oversee the activities of the
increasingly complex institutions under their supervision. As
an extension of this examination, the Committee will assess the
degree to which the increasing concentration of bank assets in
the largest institutions may contribute to a regulatory
environment that discriminates against the smaller, but much
more numerous community banks. The Committee will review the
``Interagency Statement on Meeting the Credit Needs of
Creditworthy Small Business Borrowers'' issued by the federal
financial institutions regulatory agencies and the state
supervisors on February 10, 2010, to ensure that the policy is
being appropriately implemented by examiners in the field.
Basel III. The Committee will examine new global bank
capital and liquidity rules being developed by the Basel
Committee on Banking Supervision, paying particular attention
to implementation, compliance burdens and global coordination.
Interchange Fees. The Committee will examine general issues
involving the setting of interchange fees. In particular, the
Committee will evaluate the Federal Reserve's rulemaking under
Section 1075 of the Dodd-Frank Act and its effect on merchants,
banks, credit unions, consumers, and the payment processing
networks. Section 1075 requires the Federal Reserve to
establish, by July 2011, a price cap for debit card interchange
fees, mandating that the fee be ``reasonable and proportional''
to the cost incurred by the issuing bank.
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC). The Financial
Crisis Inquiry Commission was created by Congress in 2009 to
``examine the causes, domestic and global, of the current
financial and economic crisis in the United States'' (P.L. 111-
21). The Commission issued its final report on January 27,
2011, accompanied by dissenting views filed by individual
Commissioners. The statute creating the FCIC requires that its
chairperson appear before the Committee to present its findings
not later than 120 days after the issuance of its final report.
Mortgage Servicing. The Committee will continue its review
of deficiencies in mortgage servicing practices, including
irregularities in the foreclosure documentation process. This
review will encompass recent reports that active-duty military
families have been overcharged on their mortgages or have faced
wrongful foreclosures. The Committee will assess whether
comprehensive national servicing standards are necessary and
appropriate, and if so, how such standards should be
implemented. To the extent the regulatory agencies seek to
implement national mortgage servicing standards, the Committee
will review those standards to ensure that proper authority
exists for such regulations and that deficient practices are
adequately addressed without unduly increasing the cost of
mortgage financing.
Small Business Lending Fund and the State Small Business
Credit Initiative. The Committee will examine the Treasury
Department's implementation of the Small Business Jobs Act of
2010, with a specific focus on the Small Business Lending Fund
(SBLF). The Committee will evaluate the program's effectiveness
at encouraging new lending to small business and protecting
taxpayers from losses on the government's injections of capital
in banks.
Deposit Insurance. The Committee will monitor the solvency
of the Deposit Insurance Fund and changes to the assessments
charged by the FDIC as mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act to ensure
that deposit insurance continues to serve its historic function
as a source of stability in the banking system and a valued
safety net for depositors.
Bank Failures. The Committee will examine the process the
FDIC uses to supervise and, if necessary, resolve community
banks and the procedures followed by the FDIC and other bank
supervisors in making this determination. Some observers have
noted there are inconsistencies in the application of FDIC
practices as a bank moves into prompt corrective action and
towards a failure. Further, the Committee will study the costs
and benefits of loss share agreements to the deposit insurance
fund and the American taxpayer. The Committee will also study
how the FDIC's resolution procedures, including but not limited
to loss share agreements, affect access to credit for small
business customers of a failed bank. The Committee will examine
the effectiveness of FDIC guidance and its subsequent
application in the FDIC's supervision of community banks,
particularly as it relates to appraisals of real estate assets.
Credit Unions. The Committee will review issues relating to
the safety and soundness and regulatory treatment of the credit
union industry. In particular, the Committee will examine the
failures in the corporate credit union system and evaluate
possible reforms to the system and to the National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
Regulatory Burden Reduction. The Committee will continue to
review the current regulatory burden on banks, thrifts, and
credit unions with the goal of reducing unnecessary,
duplicative, or overly burdensome regulations, consistent with
consumer protection and safe and sound banking practices.
Credit Scores and Credit Reports. The Committee will
continue to monitor the accuracy and use of credit reports and
credit scores with a specific focus on their impact on the
availability of consumer credit.
Internet Gambling. The Committee will continue to oversee
the implementation of the Unlawful Internet Gambling
Enforcement Act (UIGEA) and whether the final regulations
drafted by the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve, in
consultation with the Justice Department, will effectively
curtail illegal Internet gambling.
Access to Financial Services. The Committee will continue
to explore ways to expand access to mainstream financial
services by traditionally underserved segments of the U.S.
population, particularly those without any prior banking
history (commonly referred to as ``the unbanked'').
Credit Card Regulation. The Committee will continue its
review of credit card industry practices, particularly those
relating to marketing, fees and disclosures. The Committee will
monitor the implementation of recent Federal Reserve
regulations (i) defining unfair and deceptive credit card
industry practices and (ii) making the format and content of
credit card disclosures required by Truth in Lending more
effective. The Committee will also continue to evaluate the
impact of the Credit CARD Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-24) on
credit availability to consumers and small businesses alike and
will study whether the rules have led to higher consumer costs
for other financial products.
Community Development Financial Institution Fund. The
Committee will continue to oversee the operations of the
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI Fund)
which was created in 1994 to promote economic revitalization
and community development. The Committee will examine the CDFI
Fund's contributions to community revitalization and measure
its impact on efforts in rural, urban, suburban, and Native
American communities. The Committee will also monitor the CDFI
Fund's administration of the New Markets Tax Credit program
(NMTC), including reviewing the efforts being taken by the Fund
to assist minority-owned community development entities to
effectively compete for allocations under the NMTC program.
Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The Committee will
continue to review developments and issues related to the
Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA). The Committee will
also explore recommendations for updating or eliminating CRA
requirements in light of changes in the financial services
sector.
Credit Counseling. The Committee will continue to review
the credit counseling industry, which provides financial
education and debt management services to consumers seeking to
address excessive levels of personal indebtedness.
Financial Literacy. The Committee will continue its efforts
to promote greater financial literacy and awareness among
investors, consumers, and the general public. As part of these
efforts, the Committee will monitor the operations, and
evaluate the efficacy, of the Financial Literacy and Education
Commission. The Commission was established to coordinate
efforts of the Federal government and encourage government and
private sector initiatives to promote financial literacy.
Discrimination in Lending. The Committee will examine the
effectiveness of Federal fair lending oversight and enforcement
efforts.
Diversity in Financial Services. The Committee will
continue to explore the financial services industry's efforts
to attract and retain a diverse workforce. The Committee will
also review the policies, programs, and initiatives of the
Federal financial regulators to promote, obtain, and report on
supplier diversity, particularly with the use of asset
managers, investment bankers, and other providers of
professional services under any programs to assist troubled
financial institutions. The Committee will continue to monitor
Federal regulators' efforts to implement the diversity
requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act.
Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism. The
Committee will review the enforcement of anti-money laundering
and counter-terrorist financing laws and regulations. The
Committee's work in this area will include an examination of
(1) the costs and benefits of ongoing regulatory and filing
requirements, and (2) opportunities to decrease the burden of
complying with these and similar statutes without impairing the
operations of law enforcement. The Committee will examine
emerging threats in the financing of terrorist activities and
the use of informal methods of transferring value, while
keeping in consideration the fact that these services are
lifelines for some immigrants' families overseas. The Committee
will also monitor the practice of data mining and examination
of personal financial information conducted by government
agencies, to ensure that an appropriate balance is struck
between law enforcement priorities and the protection of civil
liberties.
Data Security and Identity Theft. Building on the
Committee's long-standing role in developing laws governing the
handling of sensitive personal financial information about
consumers, including the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Fair
and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACT Act), the Committee
will continue to evaluate the need for legislation that better
protects the security and confidentiality of such information
from any loss, unauthorized access, or misuse. The scope of
this review will encompass the data security policies and
protocols of the Federal agencies within the Committee's
jurisdiction. The Committee will also examine the threats of
cyber crime against individuals, businesses and financial
institutions to identify best practices that can protect
against identify theft and related cyber crimes.
Money Services Businesses' Access to Banking Services. The
Committee will examine the availability of account services to
Money Services Businesses (MSBs) and assess the effectiveness
of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and
Internal Revenue Service regulation of MSBs, and of FinCEN
regulatory guidance to both MSBs and financial institutions.
The Committee will review steps that could be taken to provide
MSBs with appropriate access to the banking system.
Appraisals. The Committee will examine reports of appraisal
fraud and the effectiveness of the Appraisal Subcommittee of
the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council in
overseeing State-based appraisal enforcement and licensing
programs, and the need for appraisal regulatory reform. The
Committee will also explore the implementation of the appraisal
independence standards adopted by the Federal Reserve in its
2008 rulemaking under the Home Ownership and Equity Protection
Act.
Transaction Account Guarantee Program: Section 343 of the
Dodd-Frank Act extends the Transaction Account Guarantee
Program (originally set to expire on December 31, 2010),
pursuant to which the FDIC guarantees all funds held in
qualifying noninterest-bearing accounts at insured depository
institutions, for an additional two years. The Committee will
monitor the program to ensure that taxpayers are adequately
protected from losses.
Insurance
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The Committee will
review and consider proposed reforms to the National Flood
Insurance Program, which is currently authorized through
September 30, 2011. Since 2006, the Government Accountability
Office has designated the NFIP as a high-risk program because
of its potential to incur billions of dollars in losses and
because the program faces serious financial, structural, and
managerial challenges. Due to extraordinary losses incurred
following the hurricanes in 2005, the program carries a debt of
$17.5 billion as of December 31, 2010.
Federal Insurance Office (FIO). The Committee will monitor
the establishment of the new Federal Insurance Office created
under Title V of the Dodd-Frank Act, paying particular
attention to the FIO's limited scope of authority and specific
functions. The Committee will work to ensure that the new
office is focused on developing expertise on insurance matters
and does not impose unwarranted or excessive data collection
burdens on the insurance sector or on small insurers in
particular. The Committee will also monitor implementation of
the FIO's authority to coordinate policy and represent the U.S.
on international insurance issues, as well as implementation of
new joint authority for Treasury and the U.S. Trade
Representative to negotiate international agreements on
insurance measures. The Committee will also examine
recommendations on improving U.S. insurance regulation made by
the director of the Federal Insurance Office, which must be
submitted to Congress by January of 2012.
State-Based Insurance Reforms. The Committee will monitor
the implementation of provisions included in Title V of the
Dodd-Frank Act to streamline the regulation of non-admitted
(surplus lines) insurance and reinsurance. In monitoring these
and other state-based insurance regulatory reform efforts, the
Committee will seek to assess whether they are achieving
uniform standards to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness
of state insurance and reinsurance regulation.
Impact of Dodd-Frank Act Implementation on the Insurance
Sector. The Committee will monitor implementation of various
provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act for their potential impact on
the insurance sector--including but not limited to the new
Financial Stability Oversight Council, the new Orderly
Liquidation Authority, the new Office of Financial Research,
and the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, as well as
new restrictions on proprietary trading and investments
(Volcker Rule), revised capital standards for bank and thrift
holding companies (the Collins Amendment), and new rules for
swaps and derivatives that affect end users--to ensure that new
regulations do not impose unwarranted or excessive burdens on
the insurance sector that might result in higher costs for
individuals or businesses that purchase insurance products and
services or result in unintended consequences for U.S. economic
competitiveness and job creation.
State Insurance Guaranty Funds. The Committee will monitor
the capacity and effectiveness of State Insurance Guaranty
Funds to enhance stability in the insurance sector and to
ensure that the financial interests of insurance policyholders
are sufficiently protected in cases where insurance companies
become insolvent.
Terrorism Risk Insurance Program. The Committee will review
the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program, which expires on December
31, 2014, for its ongoing impact on the private commercial
property insurance market and economic stability.
Housing
Housing and Urban Development, Rural Housing Service,
National Reinvestment Corporation. The Committee will review
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) budget.
The Department's budget has increased steadily in recent years,
from $31.92 billion in fiscal year 2005 to $46.998 billion in
fiscal year 2010. The Committee will also review current HUD
programs with the goal of identifying program spending cuts or
eliminating inefficient and duplicative programs. Given the
continued rise in HUD discretionary spending levels, the
Committee will review unauthorized programs to determine
whether they should continue to receive funding. The Committee
will review and hear testimony from the Administration on those
budgets under its jurisdiction. Testimony is expected from HUD,
the Rural Housing Service, and the National Reinvestment
Corporation.
HUD Inspector General Reports. The Committee has received
multiple reports from the HUD Inspector General outlining
improper implementation, poor oversight, and misuse of funds in
several of HUD's programs. The Committee will conduct a hearing
with the HUD Inspector General in an effort to better
understand the program deficiencies outlined in these reports.
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)--Single Family.
Increased delinquencies and foreclosures across the nation have
had a detrimental effect on the financial health of the FHA
program. The most recent actuarial report for fiscal year 2010,
released in November, found that the capital reserve ratio for
the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund (MMIF) was 0.50 percent,
well below the statutorily mandated level of 2 percent. This is
particularly troubling at a time when FHA's share of the single
family mortgage market continues to increase. The Committee
will examine the appropriate role for the FHA program in the
mortgage finance system, and the ability of the FHA to manage
its mortgage portfolio and mitigate its risk.
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)--Multi-Family. The FHA
Multi-family program offers loan guarantees to address
specialized mortgage financing needs, such as mortgage
insurance for rehabilitating, developing, and refinancing
apartment buildings, nursing home facilities, and nonprofit
hospitals. The Committee will exercise oversight of the FHA's
General Risk and Special Risk Insurance fund to ensure that
losses to the fund will not expose taxpayers to loss.
Government Foreclosure Mitigation Programs. The Committee
will review the Obama Administration's well-intentioned but
unsuccessful foreclosure mitigation initiatives, including the
Making Home Affordable Program (HAMP). The Administration
predicted that HAMP would keep some 3 to 4 million families at
risk of foreclosure in their homes. Nearly two years after the
program's inception, it has fallen far short of those goals:
last December, the Congressional Oversight Panel estimated that
HAMP would ultimately prevent only 700,000 to 800,000
foreclosures. The Administration's foreclosure mitigation
initiatives--including those administered by Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac--have been characterized by persistently high rates
of redefault, and the hundreds of thousands of homeowners who
have failed trial modifications are often left worse off than
if they had never participated in the programs. Though the
Administration has attempted to fix its foreclosure mitigation
initiatives--making hundreds of programmatic changes over the
course of the last two years--the Committee will examine the
reasons these programs remain a failure; whether they can ever
be successful; and whether there are better ways to spend the
public's money. The Committee will also consider possible
unintended consequences of foreclosure mitigation programs,
including delays in the foreclosure process caused by strategic
defaulters who seek mortgage modifications with no intention of
complying with the modified terms; losses resulting from such
strategic defaults that are borne by neighborhoods, investors,
and taxpayers; and the impediments such strategic defaults pose
to the stabilization of home prices and housing market
recovery.
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. The Committee
will continue its effort to reform HUD's largest rental
assistance program. The Committee will review the rising costs
of the Section 8 program. Funding for the Section 8 program in
fiscal year 2009 was $16.817 billion and rose to $18.184 in
fiscal year 2010. The Committee will review changes that can be
made to the voucher program and assess the needs of the
administrators of the voucher program as well as the voucher
recipients.
Housing Counseling. Between HUD and NeighborWorks, housing
counseling programs have received $475 million since 2008. This
is a substantial commitment of Federal dollars, and many of
these counseling programs receive funding with little oversight
or accountability. Accordingly, the Committee will conduct a
comprehensive review of current housing counseling programs
within HUD and NeighborWorks. The review will encompass
Federal, State, private and non-profit efforts to use housing
counseling funds with the goal of reducing or eliminating
funding that is duplicative or ineffective.
Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA). The
Committee will conduct a comprehensive review of GNMA to
determine whether its mission and/or authority meets
contemporary housing needs that promote affordable housing. The
Committee has requested that the Government Accountability
Office review GNMA, focusing on the agency's solvency and its
capacity to handle its increased market share.
HOPE VI. The HOPE VI program provides grants to public
housing authorities (PHAs) to demolish severely distressed
public housing units and replace them with mixed-income
developments. Previous Administrations have proposed
eliminating funding for HOPE VI in their budget proposals
because of delays and inefficiencies in the program. The
Committee will review the effectiveness of HOPE VI, the reasons
for the backlog of unspent funds, and whether the program has
met its initial objectives.
Public Housing. The Committee will review HUD's public
housing programs. The spend-out rate for public housing funds
continues to be slow and inefficient, and billions of dollars
that have been committed remain unspent.
Mortgage Broker Licensing and Oversight. The Committee will
monitor implementation of the S.A.F.E. Mortgage Licensing Act
of 2008, which established a mortgage originator licensing
system and registry to better protect homebuyers.
Loan Originator Compensation. The Committee will examine
the implementation of proposed rules issued by the Federal
Reserve governing mortgage origination compensation, which are
scheduled to become effective April 1, 2011. The Committee is
concerned that the rules may have an adverse impact on the
ability of small businesses that originate mortgages to remain
in business. The Committee will also review the interaction of
existing real estate settlement rules with rules mandated by
the Dodd-Frank Act.
Homelessness. Currently, programs at seven different
Federal agencies address homelessness, including HUD, the
Department of Education (DOE), the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the
Department of Health & Human Services (HHS). The Committee will
consider alternatives to this fragmented structure, including
improving coordination or consolidating Federal homelessness
programs in order to reduce costs and improve oversight and
transparency. The Committee will review the effectiveness of
HUD programs and services for homeless veterans, children,
youth, and families.
Review of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act. In
2000, the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act was signed into
law with the goals of improving the process and standards under
which manufactured homes are built; establishing a private
sector consensus committee that would make recommendations to
the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) at least every two years on ways to keep the
HUD code up to date; and clarifying the scope of Federal
preemption and providing HUD with additional staff and
resources. The Committee will review the implementation of this
law to date, and consider complaints that certain aspects of
the law have not been fully or properly implemented by HUD.
International Monetary Policy and Trade
Job Creation and U.S. Competitiveness. The Committee will
examine United States international monetary and trade policies
with an eye toward ensuring that those policies support the
ability of U.S. companies to be competitive in the
international marketplace, thereby promoting domestic job
creation and economic opportunity.
China. The Committee will monitor the implications of
China's economic growth and policies on the U.S. and global
economy. As China's economy and footprint expands, the degree
to which it adopts responsible policies and practices that do
not distort global markets or unfairly disadvantage its trading
partners will be examined. Principal areas that the Committee
will assess are currency exchange rates, China's role in
multilateral bodies, and foreign access to China's domestic
market.
Export-Import Bank of the United States. The Export-Import
Bank (Ex-Im Bank) is chartered by Congress to contribute to the
employment of U.S. workers through financing exports of U.S.
manufactured goods and services. The charter under which the
Ex-Im Bank operates expires on September 30, 2011, and the
Committee will therefore consider the Bank's reauthorization.
The Ex-Im Bank has been a self-sustaining agency funded by the
income it receives through its financing programs. The
Committee will examine the Bank's policies and programs to
ensure the continued fiscal soundness of the Bank. In addition,
as part of the reauthorization process, the Committee plans to
review the effectiveness of the Bank's financing programs in
supporting the global competitiveness of U.S. companies, small
and large, particularly given the liquidity challenges American
businesses currently face. The Committee will also consider how
the Bank can better compete with foreign credit export agencies
to ensure that U.S. firms are not operating at a disadvantage
against their foreign counterparts.
International Trade. The Committee recognizes that American
jobs are supported by U.S. exports, U.S. companies operating
abroad, and foreign firms operating in the United States. The
Committee will oversee existing trade programs, and consider
policies within the Committee's jurisdiction to promote U.S.
international trade so that American companies are globally
competitive. The Committee will oversee the progress of the
National Export Initiative and other Administration proposals
to increase U.S. exports and create jobs in the United States.
The Committee will remain active in the oversight of trade
negotiations as they relate to the global competitiveness of
the American financial services sector, to ensure such
agreements improve access to foreign markets, increase trade
opportunities for American businesses, and create jobs
domestically. The Committee will consider the impacts of the
recently agreed to U.S.-South Korea Free Trade Agreement and
the pending U.S. Free Trade Agreements with Panama and Colombia
and other agreements.
Market Access. The Committee will assess opportunities to
expand market access for U.S. companies and the financial
services sector, and to promote policies that can bring about
reciprocal market access with developing nations that currently
limit or prevent U.S. firms from entering and operating within
their national borders. In particular, the Committee will
examine market access issues with regard to nations with which
the U.S. has entered into free trade agreements.
Extractive Industries and Conflict Materials. The Committee
will monitor the implementation of provisions in title XV of
the Dodd-Frank Act imposing new disclosure requirements
relating to so-called conflict minerals and extractive
industries, to ensure that the underlying objectives of the
provisions are met but that unnecessary compliance burdens for
U.S. firms are minimized.
Annual Report and Testimony by the Secretary of the
Treasury on International Monetary Fund Reform and the State of
the International Financial System. The Committee will review
and assess the annual report to Congress from the Secretary of
the Treasury on the state of the international financial system
and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Pursuant to Section
613 of Public Law 105-277, the Committee will hear annual
testimony from the Secretary of the Treasury on (1) progress
made in reforming the IMF; (2) the status of efforts to reform
the international financial system; (3) compliance by borrower
countries with the terms and conditions of IMF assistance; and
(4) the status of implementation of anti-money laundering and
counterterrorism financing standards by the IMF, the
multilateral development banks, and other multilateral
financial policymaking bodies. The Committee is interested in
hearing from the Secretary of the Treasury on international
exchange rate policies and practices; the U.S. trade deficit;
the implications of the accumulation of U.S. debt instruments
in the accounts of its largest trading partners; and how U.S.
international monetary policies and programs are promoting U.S.
global competitiveness and contributing to the success of
American businesses.
Conduct of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs)
and Possible U.S. Contributions. The Committee will consider
any Administration request that the U.S. contribute to the
replenishment of the concessional lending windows at the World
Bank, the African Development Bank, and the Asian Development
Bank. Concessional windows provide grants and below market-rate
financing to the world's poorest nations; because the financing
terms are discounted, the lending vehicles are not self-
sustaining and require contributions from wealthier member
nations. During consideration of any such request, the
Committee will assess the effectiveness of these lending
facilities in achieving economic development and promoting
global economic stability. In addition, the Committee will
consider the policies of the IFIs to ensure effective use of
resources and appropriate alignment with U.S. interests in
promoting economic growth and stability. Additionally, the
Administration is expected to request that the Committee
authorize funding for the U.S. share of the general capital
increase (GCI) for the World Bank (International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development), the Inter-American Development
Bank, the Asian development Bank, the African Development Bank,
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the
International Finance Corporation. In examining such
authorization requests, the Committee will consider the reforms
each institution has agreed to make, as well as the missions
and comparative strengths of each institution.
Haiti. The Committee will continue to closely monitor the
dire economic situation facing the people of Haiti and examine
appropriate policy responses to help alleviate one of the worst
cases of human misery in the hemisphere. The Committee will
also consider the impact of the Inter-American Development
Bank's capital increase proposal on Haiti over the next decade.
International Monetary Fund (IMF). The Committee will
assess the IMF's actions during and after the financial crisis
to determine how best to leverage U.S. resources through this
multilateral institution. This examination will center on the
IMF's lending policies, its surveillance programs, and its
reform efforts related to member-nation representation.
Iran Sanctions. The Committee will monitor the
implementation of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions,
Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-
195). Particular focus will be placed on whether financial
services-related aspects of the law have been executed in
accordance with the law's intent, and what the impact of such
policies has been.
Eurozone Distress. The Committee will monitor the economic
distress in the Eurozone, which stems from unsustainable levels
of sovereign debt in several European countries, and its impact
on the U.S. and global economy. Further deterioration in the
Eurozone's fiscal health may have implications beyond the
continent's borders. Consequently, the Committee will examine
actions taken by the IMF, the European Union and other nations
to address the sovereign debt issues in the Eurozone. The
Committee will also explore how best to protect U.S. interests
while also ensuring that taxpayer dollars are not used to bail
out foreign governments that have followed reckless fiscal
paths.
Global Capital Flows. The Committee will monitor the flow
of capital globally. The buildup of large currency reserves in
surplus nations can lead to imbalances in capital allocations
and asset bubbles that threaten global economic stability. The
Committee will assess the implications of the investment of
these reserves on global financial stability.
Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology
The Economy and Jobs. In light of efforts to stimulate the
economy through increased spending and accommodative Federal
Reserve policies, the Committee will examine the extent to
which changes in the economy, particularly those resulting from
the economic crisis, have challenged assumptions about the
relationship between monetary policy, government expenditures,
deficits, employment, and economic growth. The Committee will
examine the effectiveness and consequences of the extraordinary
and simultaneous measures undertaken by the Federal Reserve and
the executive branch on economic growth and employment. The
Committee also will examine the effects of mounting Federal
debt and annual Federal budget deficits on economic recovery
and long-term economic growth.
Conduct of Monetary Policy by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System. The Committee will thoroughly examine
the process by which the Federal Reserve sets and executes its
monetary policy goals, while respecting the independence of the
Federal Reserve's decision-making. The Committee will review
the recent history of monetary policy decisions and examine the
Federal Reserve's plan for removing excess liquidity from the
economy after recovery is firmly established to prevent
inflation. The Committee will examine the quality of economic
data the Federal Reserve uses to make its decisions, the
accuracy and utility of the Federal Reserve's econometric
models, and the effect of the Federal Reserve's legislative
mandates on its decisions. The Committee will pay particular
attention to the upcoming Government Accountability Office
audit of the Federal Reserve and seek further audits to ensure
that the Federal Reserve's monetary policy decisions are based
on the best data and models, and that it successfully executes
open market operations to reach its goals. Of particular
interest to the Committee will be the second round of
quantitative easing undertaken by the Federal Reserve. As part
of this review, the Committee will hold hearings to receive the
Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System's semi-annual reports on the conduct of monetary policy
and the state of the economy.
General Oversight of the Federal Reserve System. The
Committee will conduct oversight of the operations of the
Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Reserve
System, including management structure, organizational changes
mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, and the role of the Federal
Reserve in the supervision of systemically significant banks
and non-bank financial institutions. As part of this review,
the Committee will hold statutorily required semi-annual
hearings to receive testimony from the Federal Reserve's Vice
Chairman for Supervision, a position created by Section 1108 of
the Dodd-Frank Act that the Obama Administration has not yet
filled.
Defense Production Act. The Committee will continue to
monitor the effectiveness of the Defense Production Act and its
individual authorities in promoting national security.
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
(CFIUS). The Committee will continue to monitor the
implementation of the Foreign Investment and National Security
Act of 2007, which reformed the Committee on Foreign Investment
in the United States (CFIUS). The Committee will seek to ensure
that CFIUS fulfills its statutory mandate to identify and
address those foreign investments that pose legitimate threats
to national security. The Committee will also monitor the
extent to which the United States maintains a policy of
openness toward foreign investment, so that investments that
pose no threat to national security are able to proceed.
Activities of the U.S. Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing. The Committee will conduct oversight of the
activities of these Treasury bureaus as they relate to the
printing and minting of U.S. currency and coins, and of the
operation of U.S. Mint programs for producing Congressionally
authorized commemorative coins and Congressional gold medals.
The Committee will examine methods to reduce the cost of
minting coins. The Committee will examine efforts to make
currency more accessible to the visually impaired. The
Committee will continue its review of efforts to detect and
combat the counterfeiting of U.S. coins and currency in the
United States and abroad, and will examine the counterfeiting
of rare or investment-grade coins, U.S.-made and otherwise. The
Committee will examine the difficulties the Bureau of Engraving
and Printing has experienced in producing the newest series of
$100 bills, as well as the difficulties the U.S. Mint has
experienced in meeting investor and collector demand for
bullion coin products. The Committee also will begin an
examination of the long-term demand for circulating coins and
banknotes, and consider appropriate measures to maintain an
adequate supply of each, while controlling costs to the
taxpayer.
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). The
Committee will examine the operations of FinCEN and its ongoing
efforts to implement its regulatory mandates pursuant to the
Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), to combat money laundering and
terrorist financing activities. The Committee will examine
means to reduce the burden on financial institutions in
complying with BSA regulations, while maintaining the utility
of the filings required by the BSA to law enforcement. The
Committee will examine the confidentiality of BSA reports and
examine the guidance issued by FinCEN to BSA examiners to
foster more uniform examination and enforcement practices.
The Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC). The Committee
will continue to monitor the functions of OFAC as its workload
increases, and study ways of improving its working relationship
with financial institutions.
Payment System Innovations. The Committee will review
government and private sector efforts to achieve greater
innovations and efficiencies in the payments system. The
Committee will examine payment system alternatives, including
prepaid credit cards, the use of mobile devices to transfer and
store value, web-based value-transfer systems, remote check
deposit, and informal money transfer systems, businesses or
networks, to determine both the efficiencies they can provide
to customers, businesses and financial institutions, and their
susceptibility to money laundering and terrorism financing, and
other financial crimes.
Clause 2(d)(1)(F) of Rule X of the House on Proposed Cuts
Clause 2(d)(1)(F) of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires each standing
committee to include in its oversight plan proposals to cut or
eliminate programs, including mandatory spending programs, that
are inefficient, duplicative, outdated, or more appropriately
administered by State or local governments.
The unsustainable Federal deficit caused by unchecked
spending remains the most daunting challenge facing the U.S.
economy. The deficit has created uncertainty among families,
investors, and small business owners who do not know whether
the value of saving and investment undertaken today will be
eroded through inflation and higher taxes in the years ahead
resulting from ever-increasing Federal deficits. Last month,
the Congressional Budget Office issued its ten-year ``Budget
and Economic Outlook,'' in which it estimated that the fiscal
2011 federal deficit will reach a record level of $1.48
trillion. The CBO's analysis confirms that the nation's current
fiscal path is unsustainable. Only by making the difficult
choices that are necessary to put the nation's fiscal house in
order can the 112th Congress lay the groundwork for ensuring
America's prosperity for future generations.
The following are Federal programs under the jurisdiction
of the Committee on Financial Services that will be reviewed
for possible cuts, elimination, or consolidation into other
Federal programs.
HOPE VI/Choice Neighborhoods. The Hope VI Program was
established to convert public housing developments that were
distressed or dangerous into mixed-use, more viable housing.
Both the Bush and the Obama Administrations have recommended
eliminating HOPE VI funding in their budget proposals. The
Obama Administration proposed replacing the HOPE VI program
with a new Choice Neighborhoods Initiative. However, rather
than eliminating HOPE VI and replacing the program with Choice
Neighborhoods, both were funded in the FY 2010 budget. The HOPE
VI program received $200 million in the fiscal year 2010
budget, with $60 million going to Choice Neighborhoods. Current
unobligated funds for fiscal year 2010 total $198 million. The
Committee recommends that the HOPE VI program be eliminated.
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). The CDBG program
provides federal funds to cities and localities to help them
address housing and community development. Rather than building
communities, however, the CDBG program operates like a revenue
sharing program for the states and localities. CDBG funds are
allocated by a formula through which 70 percent of the funds
are directed to ``entitlement communities''--which are central
cities of metropolitan areas, cities with populations of 50,000
or more, and urban counties--and the remaining 30 percent is
directed to states for use in small, non-entitlement
communities. The fiscal year 2010 budget included $4.45 billion
for the program. The Committee will consider ways to scale back
the CDBG program, including but not limited to changes in the
current distribution of CDBG formula funds. In addition, the
Committee will review the eligible activities and oversight and
administration of the program with the aim of ensuring that
funds are used in an appropriate manner and with the express
purpose of reducing the cost of the program.
Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI). The
BEDI program offers grants to localities for the redevelopment
of abandoned, idled and underused industrial and commercial
facilities where expansion and redevelopment is burdened by
real or potential environmental contamination. BEDI is a
competitive grant program whose purposes are served through
much larger and more flexible Federal programs. Fiscal year
2010 funding was $18 million. The BEDI program is duplicative
of other programs administered by the Environmental Protection
Agency, and the Committee recommends that it be eliminated.
Rural Housing and Economic Development (RHED). The RHED
program provides grants to non-profits for capacity building at
the state and local level for rural housing and economic
development. This program is duplicative of other rural
development funding programs administered by the Department of
Agriculture. It was zeroed out by both the Bush and Obama
Administrations in their budgets. Fiscal year 2010 funding for
this program was $25 million. The Committee recommends that it
be eliminated.
Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). Authorized under
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the NSP
allocates federal financial assistance to states and local
governments with high concentrations of foreclosed homes,
subprime mortgage loans, and delinquent home mortgages. Two
rounds of NSP funding have already been provided to states and
localities, and the Dodd-Frank Act provided for a third round
of grants to local governments and states to purchase and
rehabilitate vacant and foreclosed properties. As a result,
Federal funds continue to be directed to a program whose
effectiveness has been questioned. For example, HUD Secretary
Shaun Donovan announced in May 2010 that HUD would likely
recapture and redistribute approximately $1 billion in
unobligated NSP funds. In light of current budget deficits and
the concerns raised regarding the administration and oversight
of this program, the Committee recommends that the $1 billion
in unobligated NSP funds be rescinded and that the program be
eliminated.
Sustainable Communities. In the 2010 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (Public Law 111-117), Congress provided a
total of $150 million to HUD for a Sustainable Communities
initiative. The goal of this grant program is to improve
regional planning efforts that integrate housing and
transportation decisions, and increase state, regional, and
local capacity to incorporate livability, sustainability, and
social equity values into land use plans and zoning. While the
goals of the program have merit, the nation cannot afford
another new program and the Committee believes that these
decisions are best left to state and local governments and
zoning boards. The Sustainable Communities program has yet to
be authorized, and the Committee recommends that it be
eliminated.
Public Housing Capital Fund. In fiscal year 2009, Congress
approved $2.45 billion for the Public Housing Capital Fund,
which funds large capital projects and modernization projects.
However, the spend-out rate for these funds continues to be
slow and inefficient. Billions of committed dollars remain
unexpended: in fact, HUD has only just recently awarded the $4
billion in public housing capital funds included in the 2009
Economic Stimulus. The Committee therefore recommends
rescinding unobligated capital fund balances after 36 months.
FHA Refinance Program. On March 26, the Administration
announced a new FHA Refinance Program for underwater
homeowners. Treasury indicated that the program would be funded
with $8 billion in TARP funds that had originally been set
aside for HAMP. The program was implemented on September 7,
2010, and will continue until December 31, 2012. According to a
December 13, 2010, report by the Congressional Research
Service, FHA had received only 35 applications as of the end of
October 2010. Rather than funding another ineffective
foreclosure mitigation program, the Committee recommends that
the $8 billion in TARP funds that has been set aside for this
program be returned to the taxpayer.
Making Home Affordable Programs. On February 18, 2009,
President Obama announced a three-part ``Making Home Affordable
Program'' with the stated goal of helping 9 million borrowers
at risk of foreclosure or seeking to refinance high-cost
mortgages. The plan included (1) a refinancing program for
mortgages owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (known as the Home
Affordable Refinance plan); (2) a $75 billion loan modification
program (known as the Home Affordable Modification plan); and
(3) a commitment of $200 billion to purchase Fannie and Freddie
preferred stock. Funding for the modification plan is derived
from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and the
Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), and the GSE preferred
stock purchases drew from funds authorized by the Housing and
Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA). As described in more
detail earlier in this Oversight Plan, HAMP has not met the
goals set for it. HAMP's foreclosure mitigation initiatives
have failed to help a sufficient number of distressed
homeowners to justify the program's cost. Accordingly, the
Committee recommends rescinding unspent and unobligated
balances currently committed to these programs.
NeighborWorks America. NeighborWorks is a government-
chartered, nonprofit corporation with a national network of
affiliated organizations that engage in community reinvestment
activities, such as generating investment and providing
training and technical assistance related to affordable
housing. NeighborWorks has received congressional
appropriations to provide grants, training, and technical
assistance, and last year received $133 million in its base
appropriation and $65 million through the National Foreclosure
Mitigation Counseling Program. However, HUD has multiple
counseling programs, and the Dodd-Frank Act established a new
Office of Housing Counseling to coordinate housing counseling
programs. The Committee recommends that the counseling
operations under NeighborWorks be moved to HUD's new Housing
Counseling Office. Consolidating counseling programs under HUD
in the newly established office will eliminate overlapping and
duplicative functions, and allow for better oversight of funds
spent on housing counseling. Moreover, many of the tasks that
NeighborWorks currently performs are duplicative of existing
HUD programs and can be consolidated, which could eliminate the
need for the annual appropriation for NeighborWorks.
Legal Assistance. The Dodd-Frank Act authorized $35 million
for grants to organizations that offer legal assistance to low-
and moderate-income homeowners and tenants for home ownership
preservation, foreclosure prevention and tenancy-related home
foreclosures. The Committee recommends that unexpended and
unobligated amounts be reviewed.
Emergency Homeowner Relief Fund. The Dodd-Frank Act
established a $1 billion Emergency Homeowner Relief Fund, which
provides loans or credit advances to borrowers who cannot pay
their mortgages because of unemployment or reduction in income.
Administered by HUD, emergency mortgage relief payments may be
provided for up to twelve months and extended once for up to
twelve additional months. Because these loans increase the
amount of the borrower's indebtedness, the borrower is not
likely to pay back either the original amount of principal or
the additional loans made under the program. The borrower thus
derives no benefit from the program, and the government suffers
a loss from the eventual default. The Committee therefore
recommends that the unexpended and unobligated amounts be
rescinded.
Part B
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OVERSIGHT PLAN OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL
SERVICES FOR THE ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to oversee the
implementation of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203) (the Dodd-Frank Act) to
ensure that the promise to ``promote the financial stability of
the United States by improving accountability and transparency
in the financial system,'' ``end `too big to fail,''' ``protect
the American taxpayer by ending bailouts,'' and ``protect
consumers from abusive financial services practices'' is being
upheld.
On June 16, 2011, the Committee held a hearing entitled
``Financial Regulatory Reform: The International Context.''
During this hearing, the Committee examined the international
implications of the Dodd-Frank Act for the United States
financial services industry and the United States economy.
Specifically, the Committee considered four aspects of United
States regulation that may affect the ability of United States
financial institutions to compete against their foreign
counterparts and impede economic recovery in the United States.
The regulations discussed were capital and liquidity
requirements, regulation and oversight of ``systemically
significant financial institutions,'' derivatives regulation,
and the regulation of proprietary trading.
Specific Dodd-Frank Oversight Matters
Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC)
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
structure of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC),
an interagency body created by the Dodd-Frank Act to identify,
monitor, and address potential threats to the U.S. financial
system. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the FSOC to report annually
to Congress, to be followed by testimony by the Secretary of
the Treasury in his capacity as FSOC Chairman.
On April 14, 2011, the Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the
Financial Stability Oversight Council.'' Witnesses included
Chairman Gary Gensler of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission and Treasury Under Secretary for Domestic Finance
Jeffrey A. Goldstein, as well as representatives of other
agencies serving on the panel including the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners designee to the Council,
the Federal Reserve, the Securities Exchange Commission, the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency. The hearing examined the
performance of the Council's statutory responsibilities,
especially the mandate in Section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Act to
identify financial institutions that will be subject to
enhanced supervision by the Federal Reserve and heightened
prudential standards. During the hearing, Members from both the
majority and minority expressed concern about the lack of
transparency in the rulemaking process for Section 113
designations. Members likewise expressed disappointment that
the Administration had yet to nominate a voting Council member
having insurance expertise pursuant to Section 111, and about
the Council's reported failure to provide or clear staff to
assist the non-voting insurance representative selected by the
National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
On May 4, 2011, as a follow-up to the April 14 hearing,
Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee Chairman Neugebauer
and Ranking Member Capuano sent a letter to the member agencies
of the FSOC requesting that they resubmit the rule on the
``Authority to Require Supervision and Regulation of Certain
Nonbank Financial Companies'' for another round of notice and
comment, and include in the revised proposal a more detailed
description of the decision-making criteria and metrics that
are contemplated for the final rule.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``FDIC Oversight:
Examining and Evaluating the Role of the Regulator during the
Financial Crisis and Today.'' In her testimony, FDIC Chairman
Sheila Bair discussed the criteria for determining whether a
non-bank financial institution should be deemed systemically
important, and fielded questions about the impact that
designating financial institutions as systemically important
could have on consolidation in the banking industry and on
borrowing costs.
On June 22, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus and Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent
a letter to Comptroller General Gene Dodaro requesting a
Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit of the FSOC,
pursuant to Section 122 of the Dodd-Frank Act. In his July 6,
2011 response, Comptroller General Dodaro stated ``the GAO
accepted the request, with clarification, as work that is
within the scope of its authority.''
On June 24, 2011, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer and Subcommittee
Ranking Member Michael Capuano sent a letter to Treasury
Secretary Timothy Geithner seeking clarification of public
statements made by members of the FSOC regarding plans to seek
public comment on additional guidance designating non-bank
financial companies for enhanced supervision and regulation by
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. In the letter,
they asked the Secretary to distinguish the difference between
issuing guidance and issuing an amended rule and provide
details of the timeline for comments from the general public.
On July 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the
Office of Financial Research and the Financial Stability
Oversight Council.'' The hearing addressed the efforts to
organize and stand up the Office of Financial Research (OFR),
established by Section 152 of the Dodd-Frank Act; coordination
between FSOC, OFR and other regulators; and data security
issues at OFR.
On September 8, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus and other
Members of the Committee sent a letter to Treasury Secretary
Timothy Geithner expressing concern about the fulfillment of
the FSOC's pledge to eliminate unnecessary or duplicative
regulatory burdens on the financial system, namely on small
community banks and credit unions. Additionally, the letter
requested a status report from the Secretary on his efforts to
``streamline and simplify'' the regulatory environment.
Secretary Geithner responded on October 5, stating that ``as
agencies move forward with implementation of the Dodd-Frank
Act, I will continue to encourage, as a top priority, inter-
agency coordination and the development of rules that strike
the right balance between financial stability and innovation.''
On October 6, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``The Annual Report of the Financial Stability
Oversight Council'' to receive the FSOC's Annual Report and the
testimony of the Secretary of the Treasury. The hearing focused
on the Council's efforts to implement regulatory reforms and
identify emerging threats to the nation's financial stability.
Volcker Rule
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to oversee the
regulators' implementation of the Volcker Rule to ensure that
it does not result in unintended consequences for U.S. economic
competitiveness and job creation, or for the liquidity and
efficiency of U.S. capital markets.
On January 22, 2011, the Financial Stability Oversight
Council issued recommendations to the agencies charged with
promulgating regulations to implement the Volcker Rule. On
January 26, the Volcker Rule was the subject of discussion at a
full Committee hearing entitled ``Promoting Economic Recovery
and Job Creation: The Road Forward.'' Witnesses, including
academics and business owners, expressed concerns that the
Volcker Rule could compromise international competitiveness,
undermine the safety and soundness of financial institutions
and limit investment capital for businesses, including small
businesses. During the hearing Professor Hal S. Scott of
Harvard Law School stated that there should be no Volcker Rule.
On March 15, 2011, Chairman Bachus and Oversight and
Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Neugebauer wrote the
member agencies of the FSOC requesting information about the
use and application of comments submitted to the FSOC regarding
its study prepared under Section 619 of Dodd-Frank. The letter
requested the production of materials used by the Council to
develop its approach to implementing the Volcker Rule. In
response to this request, a letter dated June 10, 2011 and
signed by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner referred Chairman
Bachus and Subcommittee Chairman Neugebauer to FSOC's study
mandated by Dodd-Frank on Volcker Rule implementation.
On June 16, 2011, the Committee held a hearing entitled
``Financial Regulatory Reform: The International Context.''
During this hearing, the Committee examined the international
implications of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act for the United States financial services
industry and the United States economy. Specifically, the
Committee considered four aspects of United States regulation
that may affect the ability of United States financial
institutions to compete against their foreign counterparts and
impede economic recovery in the United States. The regulations
discussed were capital and liquidity requirements, regulation
and oversight of ``systemically significant financial
institutions,'' derivatives regulation, and the regulation of
proprietary trading.
On October 19, 2011, the Committee held a joint House-
Senate briefing at which representatives from the Department of
the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange
Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency discussed their proposed regulation
to implement Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Act (The Volcker
rule).
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
Oversight and Restructuring of the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC)
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor and
review all aspects of the Securities and Exchange Commission's
(SEC) budget, operations, structure and fulfillment of its
Congressional mandate.
On March 10, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission's
Operations, Activities, Challenges and FY 2012 Budget
Request.'' The hearing provided broad oversight of the SEC,
including its FY2012 budget request, the implementation of
various provisions mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, and a review
of SEC regulatory initiatives beyond the Dodd-Frank Act.
Chairman Bachus and Representatives Garrett, Hensarling,
and Neugebauer sent SEC Chairman Schapiro two letters--one on
February 24, 2011 and one on February 28, 2011--expressing
concerns regarding the SEC's General Counsel, David Becker,
having participated in matters related to the Bernard L. Madoff
Investment Securities fraud despite having inherited and
liquidated his mother's Madoff account.
On March 15, 2011, Chairman Bachus and Representative
Neugebauer sent Chairman Schapiro a letter inquiring about the
SEC's involvement in a study of the SEC's organizational
structure that was mandated by Section 967 of the Dodd-Frank
Act and was completed by the Boston Consulting Group and
submitted to Congress on March 10, 2011.
On June 23, 2011, H.R. 2308, the SEC Regulatory
Accountability Act, was introduced by Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott
Garrett and referred to the Committee on Financial Services.
The full Committee held a legislative hearing on H.R. 2308 on
September 15, 2011 entitled ``Fixing the Watchdog: Legislative
Proposals to Improve and Enhance the Securities and Exchange
Commission.'' The Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session on
November 15, 2011, and ordered H.R. 2308, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 14 yeas and
19 nays.
On June 24, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Mutual Fund Industry: Ensuring Market
Stability and Investor Confidence.'' The hearing examined the
SEC's regulation of the mutual fund industry; the SEC's
response to the financial crisis and the impact of the crisis
on money market mutual funds; proposals to change the valuation
of money market mutual funds; the SEC's proposal to improve
distribution fees, also known as ``12b-1 fees,''; the impact of
the SEC's proxy access rules adopted in 2010, which would
permit shareholders to place nominees for directors on a
company's proxy statement; and other issues of interest to
mutual fund providers.
On July 28, 2011, Vice Chairman Jeb Hensarling,
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises Chairman Scott Garrett, and Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent a
letter to SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro requesting information on
the SEC-staff labor hours and dollar amount associated with the
Commission's proxy access rulemaking, the final promulgation of
the rule, and the legal challenge of the rule.
On July 28, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus, Subcommittee on
International Monetary Policy and Trade Chairman Gary Miller,
Representative Robert Dold, and Representative Steve Stivers
sent a letter to SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro addressing the
effect on U.S. companies' competitiveness in the global
marketplace of Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which
requires publicly traded U.S. companies to report annually on
on their efforts to verify that minerals used in their products
were not taxed or controlled by rebel groups in the Democratic
Republic of Congo, and suggesting an alternative method to
mitigate the financial and administrative burden of Section
1502 on U.S. companies.
On September 22, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a joint hearing with the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform's Subcommittee on TARP,
Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs,
entitled ``Potential Conflicts of Interest at the SEC: The
Becker Case.'' The hearing examined how the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) handled potential conflicts of
interest involving David Becker, a former SEC general counsel
who financially benefited from the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme.
Derivatives
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
operations, growth and structure of the over-the-counter (OTC)
derivatives market, and the implementation of new rules
required by the Dodd-Frank Act to govern the OTC marketplace.
On February 15, 2011, the Committee on Financial Services
held a hearing entitled ``Assessing the Regulatory, Economic
and Market Implications of the Dodd-Frank Derivatives Title.''
This hearing provided broad oversight of Title VII of the Dodd-
Frank Act from the perspectives of both the federal regulators
and market participants. The hearing examined the
implementation timeline for the SEC and CFTC to complete the
rules mandated by Title VII, substantive questions about the
proposed rulemakings, and the impact on various market
participants, including the potential negative impact on non-
financial companies that use derivatives contracts to hedge
against legitimate business risks.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Promote Job Creation, Capital
Formation, and Market Certainty.'' One of the legislative
proposals discussed during that hearing was a draft bill to
amend the definitions of ``major swap participant'' and ``major
security-based swap participant'' in the Commodity Exchange Act
and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, respectively. Based on
the testimony received at that hearing, Representative Grimm
introduced H.R. 1610, the Business Risk Mitigation and Price
Stabilization Act of 2011, on April 15, 2011, which would
exempt derivatives end-users from having to post margin as
required under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act.
On April 6, 2011, Chairman Bachus, Agriculture Committee
Chairman Lucas and Senators Stabenow and Johnson wrote to the
Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairmen of the SEC, CFTC and
Federal Reserve about the importance of establishing a
regulatory regime that will not create economic disincentives
for end-users to access the derivatives markets. The letter
urged the regulators to exempt end-users from margin
requirements and seek to limit other regulatory burdens that
could have the unintended effect of driving up costs for end-
users. The letter also stressed the importance of national and
international regulatory coordination to avoid regulatory
arbitrage and competitive disadvantages for U.S. companies.
On April 15, 2011, Representatives Lucas, Bachus, Conaway,
and Garrett introduced H.R. 1573, which would extend the
deadline for implementing Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act by 18 months, which
realigns the United States with the G20 agreement to move to
reporting and central clearing by December 2012. H.R. 1573
maintains the current timeframe for the SEC and CFTC to issue
final rules defining key terms and maintains the current
timeframe for the rules requiring record retention and
regulatory reporting for swaps. H.R. 1573 also requires the SEC
and CFTC to hold public hearings to take testimony and comment
on proposed rules before they are made final, and factor those
comments into cost-benefit analysis and the timing of effective
dates. Finally, H.R. 1573 provides the SEC and CFTC authority
to exempt certain persons from registration and/or other
regulatory requirements if they are subject to comparable
supervision by another regulatory authority, if there are
information sharing arrangements in effect between the
Commissions and that regulatory authority, and if it is in the
public interest.
On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring Certainty to the
Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' The hearing examined
four legislative proposals that would amend provisions in Title
VII of the Dodd-Frank Act that could negatively affect the
United States economy.
On May 11, 2011, H.R. 1838, a bill to repeal a provision of
the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
prohibiting any Federal bailout of swap dealers or
participants, was introduced by Representative Nan Hayworth and
referred to the Committee on Financial Services and the
Committee on Agriculture. On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a
legislative hearing on H.R. 1838 entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Bring Certainty to the Over-the-Counter
Derivatives Market.'' On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in
open session and ordered H.R. 1838, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 21 yeas and
12 nays.
On July 19, 2011, H.R. 2586, the Swap Execution Facility
Clarification Act, was introduced by Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott
Garrett and referred to the Committee on Financial Services and
the Committee on Agriculture. On October 14, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises held a legislative hearing on H.R. 2586 entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Bring Certainty to the Over-the-
Counter Derivatives Market.'' On November 15, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises met in open session and ordered H.R. 2586 favorably
reported to the full Committee by voice vote.
On August 1, 2011, H.R. 2779, a bill to exempt inter-
affiliate swaps from certain regulatory requirements put in
place by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, was introduced by Representative Steve Stivers
and referred to the Committee on Financial Services and the
Committee on Agriculture. On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a
legislative hearing on H.R. 2779 entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Bring Certainty to the Over-the-Counter
Derivatives Market.'' On November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in
open session and ordered H.R. 2779 favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 23 yeas, 6 nays and 1
present.
On September 23, 2011, H.R. 3045, the Retirement Income
Protection Act of 2011, was introduced by Representative
Francisco ``Quico'' Canseco and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services, the Committee on Agriculture, and the
Committee on Education and the Workforce. The bill has one
cosponsor. On October 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 3045 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Bring
Certainty to the Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market.'' On
November 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered H.R. 3045 favorably reported to the full Committee by a
record vote of 19 yeas and 14 nays.
On June 7, 2011, the full Committee hosted a briefing on
swaps clearing, at which industry representatives discussed
implementation of provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act, with a
focus on how or whether clearing provisions need to be phased
in; segregation and protection of cleared swaps customer
collateral; central clearinghouse ownership, governance, and
membership issues; and the New York Federal Reserve's ongoing
role on clearing issues and how it relates to the Dodd-Frank
Act's rulemaking process.
On August 2, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus wrote to
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner expressing concerns about
the extraterritorial reach and impact of Title VII of the Dodd-
Frank Act on the U.S. derivatives marketplace and the U.S.
economy.
Credit Rating Agencies
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine
credit rating agencies, or Nationally Recognized Statistical
Ratings Organizations (NRSROs), in the United States financial
markets and specifically, the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on
NRSROs and the repeal if Rule 436(g) under the Securities Act
of 1933.
On April 14, 2011, H.R. 1539, the Asset-Backed Market
Stabilization Act of 2011, was introduced by Representative
Steve Stivers. The bill would repeal section 939G of the Dodd-
Frank Act, which repealed the SEC rule 436(g). On March 16,
2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on the draft
version of H.R. 1539 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and Market
Certainty.'' On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in
open session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 18 yeas and 14 nays. On July
20, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and ordered
the bill favorably reported to the House by 31 yeas and 19
nays. The Committee Report was filed on August 12, 2011 (H.
Rept. 112-196).
On July 27, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the
Credit Rating Agencies Post Dodd-Frank.'' The hearing examined
how federal regulation and operations of the credit rating
agencies have changed since the financial crisis and following
enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act. The hearing reviewed the
progress of federal agencies in striking references to ratings
agencies in their regulations and addressed investor over-
reliance on the ratings opinions of the three leading ratings
agencies, Standard & Poor's, Moody's Investor Service and Fitch
Ratings.
Securitization and Risk Retention
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
regulatory implementation of Section 941 of the Dodd-Frank Act,
establishing new risk retention standards for securitizations
of mortgages and other assets.
On April 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Understanding the Implications and Consequences of the
Proposed Rule on Risk Retention.'' The hearing focused on the
proposed rule to implement Section 941 issued by the Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Federal Reserve Board, the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Housing Finance
Agency, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in
March 2011, particularly its implications for the availability
of affordable mortgage credit.
In addition, on February 10, 2011, Chairman Bachus sent a
letter to the six Federal agencies charged with promulgating
the risk retention rules for residential mortgage-backed
securities, asking that ``Qualified Residential Mortgages''
(QRMs) exempt from the risk retention requirements be defined
with sufficient flexibility so as to reduce reliance upon the
Federal Housing Administration's mortgage insurance program,
thereby limiting taxpayer exposure.
On August 2, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus and Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
Chairman Scott Garrett wrote to the Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Chairman of
the Federal Reserve, the Acting Director of the FHFA, the
Acting Chairman of the FDIC, the Chairman of the SEC, and the
Acting Comptroller of the Currency expressing concern about a
provision issued by their agencies requiring securitizers to
set aside the premium from sales of securities in ``premium
capture cash reserves,'' and prevent securitizers from
collecting a profit until up to ten years later when the
security matures.
On September 7, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing
in New York, New York entitled ``Facilitating Continued
Investor Demand in the U.S. Mortgage Market Without a
Government Guarantee.'' This hearing examined the conditions
necessary to facilitate investor demand for private-label
residential mortgage backed securities. In particular, the
hearing focused on proposals to (1) provide greater
transparency about residential mortgage-backed securities; (2)
facilitate standardization; and (3) provide greater certainty
that the terms of residential mortgage-backed securities will
be enforced. In addition, the witnesses discussed the need for
clarification regarding the risk retention rules, as well as
their views on whether increased transparency and
representations and warranties could serve as a viable
alternative to risk retention.
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee held a legislative
hearing entitled ``H.R. ___, the Private Mortgage Market
Investment Act.'' This hearing examined the Private Mortgage
Market Act (PMMI), which would establish uniform standards that
would lay the foundation for a new securitization market that
would replace the secondary-mortgage market now dominated by
the government sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac. The PMMI also strikes Section 941 of the Dodd-Frank Act
based on the belief that the goals of risk retention--better
underwriting and fewer loans made to borrowers who cannot
afford them--can be better achieved through standardized
underwriting requirements and clarity and consistency about
issuer representations and warranties. During this hearing, the
witnesses expressed their views about how to fix the private-
label securitization market and their opinions of the PMMI,
including whether the PMMI provides a viable alternative to
risk retention through standardization, transparency, and
representations and warranties.
Regulation and Oversight of Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
study mandated by Sections 913 and 914 of the Dodd-Frank Act,
relating to the duties of care owed to investors by broker-
dealers and investment advisers.
Section 913 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the SEC to
evaluate existing standards for personalized investment advice
to retail investors and to promulgate regulations based upon
the findings of the study. The SEC released the study mandated
by Section 913 on January 21, 2011. On March 15, 2011, Chairman
Bachus, Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman Kline,
and Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas sent a letter to
Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro, and
CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler, expressing concern that
uncoordinated rulemaking on the fiduciary duty owed by
investment professionals could lead to market confusion and
economic disruption.
On March 17, 2011, the Republican Members of the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises sent a letter to SEC Chairman Schapiro regarding
the SEC staff study on the regulatory regime for broker-dealers
and investment advisers conducted pursuant to Section 913 of
the Dodd-Frank Act. The letter requested that the SEC gather
stronger analytical and empirical information, including an
assessment of the impact throughout the entire financial
marketplace and consideration of related oversight, examination
and enforcement programs, before moving forward with the
rulemaking mandated by Section 913.
On August 2, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus sent a letter to
SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro regarding the SEC's rulemaking
authority under Section 913 of the Dodd-Frank Act and urged SEC
to consider the appropriateness and necessity of adjusting the
standard of care for broker-dealers prior to performing an
analysis of the harm to retail customers of a broker-dealer.
On September 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing
entitled ``Ensuring Appropriate Regulatory Oversight of Broker-
Dealers and Legislative Proposals to Improve Investment
Oversight.'' Section 913 of the Dodd-Frank Act required the SEC
to report to the Committee on the standards of care applicable
to broker-dealers and investment advisers when providing
personalized investment advice to customers, and the SEC
presented the findings of its report at this hearing. The
hearing also examined a legislative proposal by Chairman
Spencer Bachus entitled the ``Investment Adviser Oversight Act
of 2011,'' which adopts an alternative outlined by the SEC in a
study required by Section 914 of the Dodd-Frank Act, and would
amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to provide for the
creation of national investment adviser associations (NIAAs)
registered with and overseen by the SEC.
On November 18, 2011, the full Committee hosted a briefing
for staff on the MF Global bankruptcy and liquidation
proceedings. Representatives of the CME Group provided an
overview of how broker-dealers and futures commission merchants
(FCMs) segregate customer assets; the role of self-regulatory
organizations in ensuring that their members do not impose
systemic risk on a clearinghouse; the purpose of a
clearinghouse guaranty fund; the role of the CME Group in the
bankruptcy of an FCM; the transfer of customer accounts from a
failed FCM; and the interaction and coordination of Federal
regulatory agencies and the self-regulatory organizations.
Advisers to Private Funds
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
functions served by advisers to private funds, including hedge
funds, private equity funds, and venture capital funds, in the
United States financial marketplace.
On March 15, 2011, H.R. 1082, the Small Business Capital
Access and Job Preservation Act, was introduced by
Representative Robert Hurt. The bill would exempt advisers to
private equity funds from SEC registration requirements as
mandated by Title IV of the Dodd-Frank Act. On March 16, 2011,
the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises held a legislative hearing on H.R. 1082 entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Promote Job Creation, Capital
Formation, and Market Certainty.'' On May 3, 2011 and May 4,
2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and ordered the bill
favorably reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 19
yeas and 13 nays. On June 22, 2011, the full Committee met in
open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the House by voice vote. The Committee Report was
filed on July 12, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-143).
Municipal Securities
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
U.S. municipal securities markets and consider reforms to
increase transparency in that segment of the capital markets.
On February 23, 2011, Chairman Bachus sent a letter to SEC
Chairman Schapiro about the SEC's proposed rule to implement
Section 975 of the Dodd-Frank Act governing the oversight of
municipal advisers.
Capital Formation
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
regulatory impediments to capital formation and consider both
regulatory and market-based incentives to increase access to
capital.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Promote Job Creation, Capital
Formation, and Market Certainty.'' One of the legislative
proposals discussed during that hearing was H.R. 1070, the
Small Company Capital Formation Act of 2011, which was
introduced by Representative Schweikert on March 14, 2011. H.R.
1070 would increase the offering threshold for companies
exempted from registration under SEC Regulation A from $5
million to $50 million. The bill also requires the SEC to re-
examine the threshold every two years and report to Congress on
decisions regarding the adjustment of the threshold. On May 3,
2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and
ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote. On June 22, 2011, the full Committee
met in open session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably
reported to the House by voice vote. The Committee Report was
filed on September 14, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-206). On November 2,
2011, the House agreed to a motion to suspend the rules and
pass H.R. 1070, as amended, by a record vote of 421 yeas and 1
nay.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small Business
Capital Formation and Job Creation,'' to examine legislative
proposals to encourage capital formation and job creation.
Specifically, the proposals were to amend the Securities Act of
1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002.
On June 14, 2011, H.R. 2167, the Private Company
Flexibility and Growth Act, was introduced by Representative
David Schweikert. The bill would raise the threshold for
mandatory registration under the Exchange Act from 500
shareholders to 1,000 shareholders for all companies;
shareholders who received securities under employee
compensation plans would not count towards the threshold. On
September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on
H.R. 2167 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small
Business Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' On October 5,
2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and ordered H.R.
2167, as amended, favorably reported to the full Committee by
voice vote. On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered H.R. 2167, as amended, favorably reported
to the House by voice vote.
On September 14, 2011, H.R. 2930, the Entrepreneur Access
to Capital Act, was introduced by Representative Patrick
McHenry. The bill would create an exemption from SEC
registration for ``crowdfunding'' for offerings up to $1
million so long as the individual's investment is no more than
the lesser of $10,000 or 10% of the investor's annual income,
and offerings up to $2 million if the issuer provides audited
financial statements. On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a
legislative hearing on H.R. 2930 entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Facilitate Small Business Capital Formation and
Job Creation.'' On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered H.R. 2930 favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 18 yeas and 14 nays. On October
26, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and ordered
the bill, as amended, favorably reported to the House by voice
vote. The Committee Report was filed on October 31, 2011 (H.
Rept. 112-262). On November 3, 2011, the House considered H.R.
2930 and passed the bill, as amended, by a record vote of 407
yeas and 17 nays.
On September 15, 2011, H.R. 2940, the Access to Capital for
Job Creators Act, was introduced by Representative Kevin
McCarthy. The bill would make the exemption under Regulation D
Rule 506 available to companies even if their securities are
marketed through a general solicitation or advertising so long
as purchasers are ``accredited investors.'' On September 21,
2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on H.R. 2940
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small Business
Capital Formation and Job Creation.'' On October 5, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises met in open session and ordered H.R. 2940, as
amended, favorably reported to the full Committee by voice
vote. On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to
the House by voice vote. The Committee Report was filed on
October 31, 2011 (H. Rept. 112-263). On November 3, 2011, the
House considered H.R. 2940 and passed the bill by a record vote
of 413 yeas and 11 nays.
On May 24, 2011, H.R. 1965, a bill to amend the securities
laws to establish certain thresholds for shareholder
registration, and for other purposes, was introduced by
Representative James Himes. The bill would raise the threshold
for mandatory registration under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Exchange Act'') from 500 shareholders to 2,000
shareholders for banks or bank holding companies, and modify
the threshold for deregistration under Sections 12(g) and 15(d)
of the Exchange Act for a bank or a bank holding company from
300 to 1,200 shareholders. On September 21, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises held a legislative hearing on H.R. 1965 entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Facilitate Small Business Capital
Formation and Job Creation.'' On October 5, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises met in open session and ordered the bill, as
amended, favorably reported to the full Committee by voice
vote. On October 26, 2011, the full Committee met in open
session and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported to
the House by voice vote. On November 2, 2011, the House agreed
to a motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1965, as
amended, by a record vote of 420 yeas and 2 nays.
On October 14, 2011, H.R. 3213, the Small Company Job
Growth and Regulatory Relief Act of 2011, was introduced by
Representative Stephen Fincher. The bill would expand the
exemption from Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and
increase the market capitalization threshold for a full 404(b)
exemption from $75 million to $350 million. On September 21,
2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on the
discussion draft of H.R. 3213 entitled ``Legislative Proposals
to Facilitate Small Business Capital Formation and Job
Creation.'' On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered the draft version of H.R. 3213, as amended,
favorably reported to the full Committee by a record vote of 18
yeas and 14 nays.
Equity/Option Market Structure
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to ensure that
the SEC follows its mandate to promote fair, orderly and
efficient markets, and that any new regulations foster market
efficiency, competition and innovation, and are based on
economic and empirical market data. The Committee is also
called upon to monitor the work of the Joint CFTC-SEC Advisory
Committee on Emerging Regulatory Issues, as it develops
regulatory or legislative recommendations that attempt to
respond to the extraordinary market movements on May 6, 2010.
On August 1, 2011, the full Committee hosted a briefing on
``Options Fundamentals.'' Mr. Alan Grigoletto, the Director of
OIC Education for the Options Clearing Corporation, provided an
introduction to the basic concepts of exchange traded and
centrally cleared options contracts. The terminology and
mechanics for call and put options were explained in
conjunction with the risk characteristics and rewards for both
the buyer and seller of these instruments.
Covered Bonds
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
whether the existing statutory and regulatory framework is
sufficient to foster the creation of a covered bond market in
the U.S. or whether additional regulatory or legislative
initiatives are necessary.
On March 11, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Create a Covered Bond Market in the
United States.'' The hearing focused on H.R. 940, the United
States covered Bonds Act of 2011, which was introduced by
Representative Garrett on March 8, 2011. The hearing also
examined perspectives on how the United States could enact
legislation to provide a legal framework to allow covered bonds
to be issued in the United States.
Corporate Governance
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
developments and issues relating to corporate governance at
public companies.
On May 11, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Address the Negative Consequences of
the Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Provisions.'' The hearing focused
on a legislative proposal by Representative Michael Grimm that
would amend the whistleblower provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act,
in particular Section 922, by preserving the viability of
internal reporting regimes established by the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and preventing employees who are responsible for
wrongful acts from receiving an award from the bounty program
established by Section 922. On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2483, the
Whistleblower Improvement Act of 2011, was introduced by
Representative Michael Grimm and referred to the Committee on
Financial Services.
Employee Compensation
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
implementation of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act
governing compensation practices at public companies and
financial institutions.
On March 14, 2011, H.R. 1062, the Burdensome Data
Collection Relief Act, was introduced by Representative Nan
Hayworth. H.R. 1062 would repeal Section 953(b) of the Dodd-
Frank Act, which requires publicly traded companies to disclose
the median of the annual total compensation of all employees of
the company (other than the CEO), the annual total compensation
of the CEO, and a ratio comparing those two numbers. On March
16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on the draft
version of H.R. 1062 entitled ``Legislative Proposals to
Promote Job Creation, Capital Formation, and Market
Certainty.'' On May 3, 2011 and May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee
on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in
open session and ordered the bill favorably reported to the
full Committee by a record vote of 20 yeas and 12 nays. On June
22, 2011, the full Committee met in open session and ordered
the bill favorably reported to the House by a record vote of 33
yeas and 21 nays. The Committee Report was filed on July 12,
2011 (H. Rept. 112-142).
Mutual Funds
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine the
state and operation of the U.S. mutual fund industry, and to
review the SEC's regulation of money market mutual funds, and
any proposed changes to the calculation of a money market
funds' ``net asset value'' (NAV), and any proposals by the
Financial Stability Oversight Council to designate non-bank
financial institutions such as mutual funds as ``Systemically
Important Financial Institutions.''
On June 24, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Mutual Fund Industry: Ensuring Market
Stability and Investor Confidence.'' This was the first
Financial Services Committee hearing on the mutual fund
industry since May 2005. The hearing addressed current issues
in mutual fund industry regulation, including distribution
fees, or Rule ``12b-1 fees,'' on which the SEC voted to propose
measures to improve regulation in July 2010. The hearing also
examined the proxy access rules that the SEC adopted in 2010
that would permit shareholders to place nominees for directors
on a company's proxy statement. The Subcommittee reviewed the
impact on the mutual fund industry of Section 113 of the Dodd-
Frank Act, which directs the FSOC to select nonbank financial
companies for heightened supervision, and Section 918, which
requires the GAO to conduct a study on mutual fund advertising.
On August 12, 2011 Chairman Spencer Bachus, Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman
Scott Garrett and other Republican Members of the Committee
wrote to SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro requesting more information
on the Commission's plans to potentially require money market
mutual funds to float its net asset value; and the impact of
the SEC's rules adopted in 2010 to strengthen the resiliency of
money market mutual funds.
Securities Fraud
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
SEC's compliance, inspections, examinations, and enforcement
functions to ensure that adequate mechanisms exist to prevent
and detect securities fraud.
On May 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing entitled ``The Stanford Ponzi
Scheme: Lessons for Protecting Investors from the Next
Securities Fraud.'' This hearing reviewed the failure of the
SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to
uncover the Stanford Ponzi scheme. The hearing also focused on
what steps the SEC and FINRA could take to prevent similar
securities frauds in the future.
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board's (PCAOB's) exercise
of its new authority under Section 982 of the Dodd-Frank Act to
register, inspect and discipline the auditors of brokers-
dealers, and the impact that this increased oversight may have
on the PCAOB's operations.
On May 27, 2011, Chairman Bachus and Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman
Garrett sent a letter to PCAOB Chairman James Doty regarding
the PCAOB's proposed interim rule to implement Section 982,
particularly as it relates to the costs and benefits of
applying that rule to the auditors of introducing broker-
dealers.
Business Continuity Planning
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
implementation of disaster preparedness and business continuity
measures by the financial services industry in order to
minimize the disruptions of critical operations in the U.S.
financial system in the event of natural disasters, terrorist
attacks, or pandemics.
On February 8, 2011, Chairman Bachus and Representative
Garrett sent a letter to federal regulators and executives at
exchanges and clearinghouses seeking information about
computer-network security in response to reports that the
NASDAQ Stock Market's computer network had been compromised.
The purpose of the letter was to ensure that the regulators and
exchanges and clearinghouses were doing all in their power to
ensure the ongoing integrity and security of exchange trading
systems and clearinghouses. In addition to the SEC and CFTC,
the letter was sent to executives from BATS Global Markets, the
Chicago Board Options Exchange, the CME Group, the Depository
Trust & Clearing Corporation, Direct Edge, the International
Securities Exchange, IntercontinentalExchange, the NASDAQ Stock
Market, NYSE Euronext, and the Options Clearing Corporation.
Government Sponsored Enterprises
Charter Restructuring for GSEs
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine
proposals to modify or terminate Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's
statutory charters.
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2436, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Taxpayer Payback Act of 2011, was introduced by Representative
Donald Manzullo. The bill would prohibit any reduction in the
dividend rate paid to the Secretary of the Treasury on the
senior preferred stock of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. On May
25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on the
discussion draft of H.R. 2436 entitled ``Transparency,
Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps to End the GSE
Bailout.'' On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered H.R. 2436 favorably reported to the full
Committee by voice vote.
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2439, the Removing GSEs Charters
During Receivership Act of 2011, was introduced by
Representative Steve Stivers. The bill would authorize the
Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to revoke the charters of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and require the FHFA to revoke the
charter when a successor, limited-life entity is dissolved. On
May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing on
the discussion draft of H.R. 2439 entitled ``Transparency,
Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps to End the GSE
Bailout.'' On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in open
session and ordered H.R. 2439, as amended, favorably reported
to the full Committee by voice vote.
On July 8, 2011, H.R. 2462, the Cap the GSE Bailout Act of
2011, was introduced by Representative Michael Fitzpatrick. The
bill would limit outlays to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to the
larger of (a) net amounts Fannie and Freddie have received from
2010 to 2012 or (b) $200 billion. On May 25, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored
Enterprises held a legislative hearing on the discussion draft
of H.R. 2462 entitled ``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer
Protection: More Steps to End the GSE Bailout.'' On July 12,
2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises met in open session and ordered H.R.
2462, as amended, favorably reported to the full Committee by
voice vote.
GSE Regulatory Reform
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
activities of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and
consider the appropriate role, if any, for the Federal
government in the secondary mortgage market.
From January through May 2011, the full Committee held two
hearings to examine GSE reform proposals; the Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held three
hearings, two of which focused on 15 different bills and
legislative ideas; and the Subcommittee held one markup. On
April 5, 2011, the Subcommittee overwhelmingly passed with
bipartisan support eight legislative measures designed to scale
back the role played by the GSEs in the U.S. mortgage market
and limit further taxpayer exposure.
On January 26, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
titled ``Promoting Economic Recovery and Job Creation: The Road
Forward.'' The hearing broadly examined the health of the
United States economy, impediments to job growth and ways to
address the nation's budget challenges. John Taylor of Stanford
University also argued during the hearing that GSE reform is
necessary.
On February 9, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a hearing titled
``GSE Reform: Immediate Steps to protect Taxpayers and End the
Bailout.'' Four scholars offered suggestions for reforms,
debated the merits of government guarantees, and examined ways
to transition Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from a Federal
conservatorship.
On March 1, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing titled
``Mortgage Finance Reform: An Examination of the Obama
Administration's Report to Congress,'' at which Treasury
Secretary Timothy Geithner presented the Obama Administration's
options for GSE reform. Section 1074 of the Dodd-Frank Act
required the Treasury Department to ``conduct a study of and
develop recommendations regarding the options for ending the
[GSE] conservatorship.'' The Treasury Department and the
Department of Housing and Urban Development submitted a 31-page
white paper on February 11, 2011, titled ``Reforming America's
Housing Finance Market: A Report to Congress.'' Secretary
Geithner listed a series of short-term steps that the
Administration intends to take that it believes will help
attract private capital into the mortgage market and reduce the
``unfair capital advantages that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
previously enjoyed,'' and he outlined three options for long-
term change. He did not endorse any of the options.
Option One would place the mortgage market in the hands of
the private sector and limit the government's insurance role to
narrowly-targeted groups of borrowers through the Federal
Housing Administration (FHA), the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Veterans' Affairs. The
middleman role currently played by Fannie and Freddie would
disappear. Option Two would also create a more private market,
narrowly targeting government assistance in programs for low-
and moderate-income borrowers. Under this proposal, the
government would also develop a backstop mechanism to ensure
access to credit during a housing crisis. Option Three
envisions a system based on an explicit guarantee of
catastrophic risks. Under this proposal, a group of private
mortgage guarantor companies would provide guarantees for
mortgage-backed securities that meet certain underwriting
standards. A government reinsurer would then provide
reinsurance to the holders of these securities, which would be
paid out only if shareholders of the private mortgage
guarantors have been entirely wiped out. The government would
price and issue the catastrophic guarantee, collect a premium
for the guarantee, and administer the program.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing
titled ``Legislative Hearing on Immediate Steps to Protect
Taxpayers from the Ongoing Bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac.'' The two-panel hearing focused on eight bills designed to
scale back the role played by the GSEs in the U.S. mortgage
market and limit further taxpayer exposure. The bills would (1)
expand the reporting requirements and enhance the authority of
the FHFA's Inspector General; (2) suspend the current
compensation packages for all wage grade employees at Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac and establish a compensation system for the
executive officers that is consistent with that of the
Executive Schedule and the Senior Executive Service of the
Federal Government and for all other employees that is in
accordance with the General Schedule; (3) mandate that the FHFA
gradually require higher guarantee fees at Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac over the next two years while requiring the FHFA to
consider the conditions of the financial market in raising the
GSEs' guarantee fees to ensure that its actions do not disrupt
a housing recovery; (4) prohibit the GSEs from offering,
undertaking, transacting, conducting or engaging in any new
business activities while in conservatorship or receivership;
(5) require the Treasury Department to approve any new debt
issuances by the GSEs; (6) eliminate any advantages that the
new Qualified Residential Mortgage definition might confer on
the GSEs; (7) repeal the GSEs' affordable housing goals; and
(8) accelerate and formalize the reductions in the size of the
GSEs' portfolios, by setting annual limits on the maximum size
of each GSE's retained portfolio, ratcheting the limits down
over five years until they reach $250 billion.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative hearing
titled ``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More
Steps to End the GSE Bailout'' to consider seven additional GSE
reform proposals. This two-panel hearing focused on seven
legislative proposals primarily designed to scale back the role
played by the GSEs in the U.S. mortgage market and limit
further taxpayer exposure. Mr. Edward DeMarco, Acting Director
of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, testified, as did noted
GSE analysts and housing reform advocates.
On July 7, 2011, H.R. 2440, the Market Transparency and
Taxpayer Protection Act of 2011, was introduced by
Representative Robert Hurt. The bill would direct Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac to report to the FHFA on the assets they own
within 180 days of the bill's enactment, which would
incrementally reduce the government's role in the secondary
mortgage market. On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Capital
Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a legislative
hearing on the discussion draft of H.R. 2440 entitled
``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer Protection: More Steps
to End the GSE Bailout.'' On July 12, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises met in
open session and ordered H.R. 2440, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by voice vote.
On June 29, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus, Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer, Vice
Chairman Jeb Hensarling, Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert, Subcommittee on
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Chairman Shelley
Moore Capito, and Subcommittee on Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott Garrett sent a
letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Acting
Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Edward DeMarco
to express concern regarding Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's
potential expansion into new products and new lines of
business, as a provision of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010
seemingly provides an opportunity for the GSEs to contract with
the Department of Treasury to administer a new bond program.
The letter raises concerns that any such GSE action would
directly contradict the goals of the GSEs' conservatorship.
On October 13, 2011, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent a letter to
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Edward
DeMarco expressing concerns that expenditures that Freddie Mac
and Fannie Mae made in connection with an industry conference
hosted by the Mortgage Bankers Association may have had no
relation to furthering the purposes of their conservatorships.
On October 21, 2011, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent a letter to
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Edward
DeMarco expressing concern that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
could incur substantial costs in connection with implementing
the Obama Administration's Home Affordable Refinance Program
(HARP).
On November 2, 2011, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent a letter to
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Edward
DeMarco requesting information on Fannie Mae's yearly operating
expenses and questioning whether those expenses furthered the
purpose of conservatorship.
On November 7, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus, Vice Chairman
Jeb Hensarling, Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert, Subcommittee on
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Chairman Shelley
Moore Capito, Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government
Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott Garrett, Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer, and
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Trade Chairman Ron
Paul sent a letter to the Honorable Hal Rogers, the Honorable
C. W. Bill Young, the Honorable Jack Kingston, the Honorable
Robert Aderholt, the Honorable John Abney Culberson, the
Honorable Steven C. LaTourette, the Honorable Jerry Lewis, the
Honorable Frank R. Wolf, the Honorable Tom Latham, the
Honorable JoAnn Emerson, and the Honorable John R. Carter,
conferees appointed to the conference committee for H.R. 2112,
the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act in
opposition to conference report language to increase the loan
limits for mortgages insured by the federal government through
the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) or guaranteed by the
government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac.
On November 18, 2011, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent a letter to
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Edward
DeMarco requesting information on Freddie Mac's yearly
operating expenses and questioning whether those expenses
furthered the purpose of conservatorship.
On November 18, 2011, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent a letter to
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Edward
DeMarco regarding the GSEs' core activities, strategic
planning, decision making, staffing, loan level data and
guarantee fees, and on FHFA operations generally.
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) System
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
capital requirements, financial health, and stability of the
FHLB System, as well as the FHLB System's ability to fulfill
its housing mission and provide liquidity to the cooperative's
member banks in a safe and sound manner.
On March 1, 2011, during a full Committee hearing titled
``Mortgage Finance Reform: An Examination of the Obama
Administration's Report to Congress,'' Treasury Secretary
Timothy Geithner discussed ways to strengthen the FHLB System,
including enhancing regulatory oversight and limiting FHLB
portfolios to reduce systemic risks.
On July 7, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus sent a letter to
Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency Edward
DeMarco regarding the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
issued on December 27, 2010, that could substantially limit
membership in the FHLB system, affecting existing members and
many potential applicants. Given that the ANPR could
fundamentally change how financial institutions do business,
Chairman Spencer Bachus urged that the Acting Director use
caution in moving forward with the proposal.
On October 12, 2011, the Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the Federal
Home Loan Bank System.'' The purpose of the hearing was to
examine the financial health and stability of the Federal Home
Loan Bank System, as well as the Federal Home Loan Bank
System's ability to fulfill its housing mission and provide
liquidity to the cooperative's member banks in a safe and sound
manner. The hearing particularly considered the extent to which
the Home Loan Banks' policies with respect to investments and
the making of advances--especially in light of the recent
financial crises--effectively further their mission.
Legal Fees
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine the
expenditure of federal funds to defend Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac and their top executives in lawsuits since 2008 and
consider ways to limit further taxpayer exposure.
On February 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a hearing entitled ``An Analysis of the
Post-Conservatorship Legal Expenses of Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac.'' Witnesses at the hearing included the Acting FHFA
Director, Edward DeMarco, and the current CEO of Fannie Mae. In
both his oral and written testimony, Acting Director DeMarco
stated that FHFA had determined that cancelling the
indemnification contracts of the GSEs' senior executives would
have been subject to legal challenge and made it more difficult
to attract skilled professionals to work at the companies. Both
majority and minority members challenged this position.
On July 6, 2011, H.R. 2428, the GSE Legal Fee Reduction Act
of 2011, was introduced by Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer. The bill would limit
the indemnification of former GSE executives and set standards
for advancing indemnification payments. The Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a
legislative hearing on the discussion draft of H.R. 2440 on May
25, 2011 entitled ``Transparency, Transition and Taxpayer
Protection: More Steps to End the GSE Bailout.''
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB)
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
powers of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to
write rules, supervise compliance, and enforce consumer
protection laws, and the impact of CFPB rules on small
businesses and on financial institutions with fewer than $10
billion in assets.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``The
Effect of Dodd-Frank on Small Financial Institutions and Small
Businesses.'' Witnesses, including representatives of community
banks and credit unions, small business owners, and
representatives of advocacy groups, addressed the challenges
faced by small institutions as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The hearing focused on the effectiveness of Dodd-Frank's
exemptions for institutions with less than $10 billion in
assets, particularly the exemption from the CFPB's examination
and enforcement authority.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.'' The
hearing reviewed the Administration's progress in establishing
the Bureau and addressed the CFPB's initial regulatory
priorities. At the hearing, Elizabeth Warren, Special Advisor
to the Secretary of the Treasury for the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau, testified on the Bureau's budget and
staffing, the Bureau's organizational structure, and on
interactions of Bureau staff with other federal agencies. Ms.
Warren also addressed the Bureau's status in the event no
Director has been appointed and confirmed by the designated
transfer date of July 21, 2011. The hearing included
questioning on the CFPB's participation in federal agencies'
settlement negotiations with mortgage servicers.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a legislative hearing
entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Improve the Structure of
the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.'' The purpose of the
hearing was to examine three bills amending Title X of the
Dodd-Frank Act: (1) H.R. 1121, the Responsible Consumer
Financial Protection Regulations Act of 2011, to change the
leadership structure of the CFPB, replacing the Director of the
CFPB with a five-person commission; (2) H.R. 1315, the Consumer
Financial Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act of
2011, to modify the standards for review by the Financial
Stability Oversight Council of proposed CFPB regulations; and
(3) H.R. 1667, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
Transfer Clarification Act, to delay the transfer of certain
powers to the CFPB until a Director is appointed by the
President and confirmed by the Senate. On May 4, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit met
in open session and ordered the three bills favorably reported
to the full Committee. On May 12, 2011, the full Committee met
in open session and ordered the bills favorably reported to the
House. H.R. 1121 and H.R. 1667 were included in the Rules
Committee print for H.R. 1315, which was passed by the House on
July 21, 2011.
On May 24, 2011, Chairman Bachus sent a letter to Secretary
Timothy Geithner regarding Section 1016A of the Department of
Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act (P.L. 112-
10). In his letter, Chairman Bachus stressed the importance of
ensuring that the annual independent audit of the CFPB's
operations and budget is conducted in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards (GAGAS).
On October 26, Chairman Spencer Bachus sent a letter to Mr.
Raj Date, the Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury
for the CFPB to verify the CFPB's position on implementing
Regulation E of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, which
requires ATM operators to display prominent notices that
consumers will be assessed a fee for making cash withdrawals
from the machine.
On November 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``The
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: The First 100 Days.'' The
purpose of the hearing was to review the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau's budgeting, staffing, rule-writing
initiatives, and the current and potential challenges facing
the Bureau as well as the entities it regulates. Mr. Raj Date,
Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury, Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, was the sole witness.
``Too Big to Fail''
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
whether the ``orderly liquidation authority'' created by Title
II of the Dodd-Frank Act to resolve large, complex financial
institutions whose failure could threaten the United States
economy provides an effective mechanism for imposing market
discipline and promoting financial stability.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``FDIC Oversight:
Examining and Evaluating the Role of the Regulator during the
Financial Crisis and Today.'' A primary focus of the hearing,
which featured testimony by FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair, was the
FDIC's implementation of Title II and efforts to structure the
orderly liquidation authority to instill greater market
discipline and prevent future bail-outs of large financial
firms.
On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``Does
the Dodd-Frank Act End `Too Big to Fail'?'' The purpose of the
hearing was to learn more about whether the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation's Orderly Liquidation Authority--created
by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act--is appropriately structured to end taxpayer bailouts for
the largest financial institutions.
Financial Supervision
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine
Federal regulators' safety and soundness supervision of the
banking, thrift, and credit union industries, and to ensure
that systemic risks or other structural weaknesses in the
financial sector are indentified and addressed promptly.
On April 14, 2011, the Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the
Financial Stability Oversight Council.'' The hearing focused on
the activities and regulatory initiatives of the FSOC, the
interagency body created by the Dodd-Frank Act to identify,
monitor, and address potential threats to the U.S. financial
system. The Subcommittee received testimony from
representatives of the Treasury Department, the CFTC, the
Federal Reserve, the Securities Exchange Commission, the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``FDIC Oversight:
Examining and Evaluating the Role of the Regulator during the
Financial Crisis and Today.'' FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair's
testimony contained an overview of the FDIC's supervisory
program, which has included a broad spectrum of guidance to
insured depository institutions to establish, and clearly
reaffirm, safety and soundness expectations. This guidance
dealt with significant risk management issues that became
central themes during the financial crisis, such as subprime
and non-traditional mortgage lending. In addition, Chairman
Bair testified that the FDIC has increased the frequency of its
examinations and hired additional examiners to achieve the
goals of its supervisory mission.
On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``Does
the Dodd-Frank Act End `Too Big to Fail'?'' The purpose of the
hearing was to learn more about whether the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation's Orderly Liquidation Authority--created
by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act--is appropriately structured to end taxpayer bailouts for
the largest financial institutions.
On June 16, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Financial Regulatory Reform: The International
Context.'' During this hearing, the Committee examined the
international implications of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act for the United States financial
services industry and the United States economy. Specifically,
the Committee considered four aspects of United States
regulation that may affect the ability of United States
financial institutions to compete against their foreign
counterparts and impede economic recovery in the United States.
The regulations discussed were capital and liquidity
requirements, regulation and oversight of ``systemically
significant financial institutions,'' derivatives regulation,
and the regulation of proprietary trading.
On July 8, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a legislative hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals Regarding Bank Examination Practices''
to examine H.R. 1723, the Common Sense Economic Recovery Act of
2011, introduced by Representative Bill Posey on May 4, 2011,
and H.R. 2056, a bill to instruct the Inspector General of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to study the impact of
insured depository institution failures, introduced by
Representative Lynn Westmoreland on May 31, 2011. H.R. 1723
would permit certain current loans that would otherwise be
treated as nonaccrual loans as accrual loans. H.R. 2056 would
instruct the Inspector General of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation to study the impact of insured depository
institution failures and closely examine the FDIC's bank
closure procedures. On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in
open session and favorably reported H.R. 2056 to the House. On
July 28, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2056 under suspension
of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by voice vote.
On November 17, 2011, the Subcommittee met in open session and
did not order H.R. 1723 favorably reported to the full
Committee by a record vote of 8 yeas and 10 nays.
On August 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a field hearing in
Newman, Georgia entitled ``Potential Mixed Messages: Is
Guidance from Washington Being Implemented by Federal Bank
Examiners?'' The purpose of the hearing was to assess whether
or not federal bank examination standards are overly stringent
and impeding an economic recovery.
On October 27, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled
``Proposed Regulations to Require Reporting of Nonresident
Alien Deposit Interest Income.'' The purpose of the hearing was
to review the impact of a proposed regulation that would
require financial institutions to report annually to the
Internal Revenue Service the amount of interest earned by
nonresident aliens on their U.S. bank deposits. The hearing
considered the potential effects of the proposed regulation on
nonresident alien deposits held in U.S. financial institutions
and on the safety and soundness of financial institutions that
hold significant amounts of these deposits.
On October 31, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a field hearing in
Wausau, Wisconsin, entitled ``Regulatory Reform: Examining How
New Regulations are Impacting Financial Institutions, Small
Businesses and Consumers.'' The purpose of the hearing was to
assess how new financial regulations are affecting the ability
of financial institutions to extend credit and stimulate job
growth. The hearing examined whether bank examination practices
are excessively stringent and impeding economic recovery.
On November 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit and the Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a
joint hearing entitled ``H.R. 1697: The Communities First
Act.'' The purpose of the hearing was to consider H.R. 1697,
the Communities First Act, which was introduced by
Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer on May 3, 2011. H.R. 1697
would reduce regulatory, paperwork, and tax burdens on small
banks. The Subcommittee examined whether H.R. 1697 would help
community banks foster economic growth and better serve their
communities.
Basel III
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review new
global bank capital and liquidity rules being developed by the
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (known as Basel III),
paying particular attention to implementation, compliance
burdens and global coordination.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``FDIC Oversight:
Examining and Evaluating the Role of the Regulator during the
Financial Crisis and Today.'' FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair's
testimony included an update on the Basel III process and
efforts by regulators to achieve international harmonization of
capital and liquidity standards and thereby avoid opportunities
for regulatory arbitrage.
On June 16, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Financial Regulatory Reform: The International
Context.'' During this hearing, the Committee examined the
international implications of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act for the United States financial
services industry and the United States economy. The
regulations discussed were capital and liquidity requirements,
regulation and oversight of ``systemically significant
financial institutions,'' derivatives regulation, and the
regulation of proprietary trading. Basel III was a focus of
much of the testimony at the hearing.
Interchange Fees
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
implementation of Section 1075 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which
directs the Federal Reserve Board to set a ``reasonable and
proportional'' interchange fee for debit card transactions, and
consider its effect on merchants, banks, credit unions,
consumers, and the payment processing networks.
On February 17, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled
``Understanding the Federal Reserve's Proposed Rule on
Interchange Fees: Implications and Consequences of the Durbin
Amendment.'' Federal Reserve Board Governor Sarah Raskin,
representatives of small financial institutions and merchant
groups, and the general counsel of Visa presented their views
on the merits of the Federal Reserve's proposal for
implementing Section 1075.
On March 15, 2011, Financial Institutions and Consumer
Credit Subcommittee Chairman Capito introduced H.R. 1081, the
Consumers Payment System Protection Act. The bill calls for a
one-year delay of implementation of section 1075 of the Dodd-
Frank Act. During the first eight months of the delay, the
following three studies are to be conducted: (1) a study of all
of the costs associated with debit transactions; (2) an impact
study on the effect of the Federal Reserve's proposed rule on
consumers, debit card issuers, merchants; and (3) an impact
study on network exclusivity and routing provisions. The
Federal Reserve will be able to utilize the final four months
of the extended time period to re-write the rule and submit it
for public comment.
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC)
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to conduct a
statutorily required review of the Financial Crisis Inquiry
Commission's (FCIC) final report issued on January 27, 2011.
The FCIC was created by Congress in 2009 ``to examine the
causes, domestic and global, of the current financial and
economic crisis in the United States'' (P.L. 111-21). The
Commission issued its final report on January 27, 2011,
accompanied by dissenting views filed by individual
Commissioners. The chairperson of the FCIC was required to
appear before the Committee to present its findings not later
than 120 days after the issuance of the final report.
On February 16, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``The Final Report of the Financial Crisis Inquiry
Commission.'' The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the FCIC
testified, along with four other commissioners, two of whom
dissented from the Commission's majority report. The hearing
focused on the findings of the Commission's final report and
the commissioners' assessments of the Dodd-Frank Act in light
of the Commission's findings. In addition, the hearing
addressed the reasons for the Commission's inability to reach
consensus in its findings with regard to the causes of the
financial crisis.
Mortgage Servicing
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
standards proposed by regulatory agencies on mortgage servicing
in order to ensure that proper authority exists for such
regulations and that deficient practices are adequately
addressed without unduly increasing the cost of mortgage
financing.
In the wake of the ``robo-signing'' controversy involving
irregularities in the foreclosure documentation process, five
of the nation's largest mortgage servicers received a draft
settlement term sheet on March 3, 2011, from the U.S.
Department of Justice on behalf of other federal and state
agencies to resolve outstanding enforcement actions against the
firms. On March 9, 2011, Chairman Bachus and other Members of
the Committee sent a letter to Secretary Timothy Geithner
asking a number of legal and public policy questions about the
settlement term sheet.
On March 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.'' At
the hearing, Members questioned Treasury Special Assistant
Elizabeth Warren about the CFPB's participation in federal
agencies' and State Attorneys General's settlement negotiations
with mortgage servicers.
As a follow-up to Ms. Warren's responses at the March 16th
hearing, on March 30, 2011, Chairman Bachus and Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee Chairman Capito
sent a letter to Ms. Warren inviting her to clarify her
statements during the hearing regarding the CFPB's involvement
in the mortgage servicing settlement negotiations. In her April
4, 2011 response, Ms. Warren stated that ``we have been an
active participant in inter-agency discussions, sharing our
analysis and recommendations in support of a resolution that
would hold accountable any servicers that violated the law . .
. While we have provided advice to government officials, it
bears emphasizing that the consumer agency is not conducting
settlement negotiations with mortgage servicers.''
On May 6, 2011, Reps. Neugebauer, Capito, Garrett and
McHenry sent a follow-up letter to the above-referenced March
16, 2011 letter to Secretary Geithner seeking specific
documents and records related to the CFPB's involvement in the
mortgage servicing settlement negotiations.
On June 20, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus and other Members
of the Committee sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy
Geithner seeking specific documents and records related to the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's involvement in mortgage
servicing settlement negotiations.
On July 7, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit and the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a joint hearing entitled ``Mortgage
Servicing: An Examination of the Role of Federal Regulators in
Settlement Negotiations and the Future of Mortgage Servicing
Standards.'' The purpose of the hearing was to review the role
of Federal regulators in the ongoing mortgage servicing
settlement negotiations and the development of new mortgage
servicing standards.
Deposit Insurance
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
solvency of the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) and changes to the
assessments charged by the FDIC as mandated by the Dodd-Frank
Act, to ensure that deposit insurance continues to serve its
historic function as a source of stability in the banking
system and a valued safety net for depositors.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``FDIC Oversight:
Examining and Evaluating the Role of the Regulator during the
Financial Crisis and Today.'' One of the issues addressed in
FDIC Chairman Bair's testimony and in questioning by Members
was the current status of the DIF and the FDIC's implementation
of the above-referenced changes to the system for assessing
premiums on insured depository institutions.
Bank Failures
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
process the FDIC uses to supervise and resolve failed community
banks, as well as studying the costs and benefits of loss share
agreements to the Deposit Insurance Fund and the American
taxpayer.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``FDIC Oversight:
Examining and Evaluating the Role of the Regulator during the
Financial Crisis and Today.'' In her testimony, FDIC Chairman
Bair was questioned by several Members of the Subcommittee on
the FDIC's policies and procedures for resolving failed
institutions, which include offering loss sharing and
structured transactions, as well as securitizations of failed
bank assets.
On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``Does
the Dodd-Frank Act End `Too Big to Fail'?'' The purpose of the
hearing was to learn more about whether the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation's Orderly Liquidation Authority--created
by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act--is appropriately structured to end taxpayer bailouts for
the largest financial institutions.
On July 8, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions
and Consumer Credit held a legislative hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals Regarding Bank Examination Practices''
to examine H.R. 1723, the Common Sense Economic Recovery Act of
2011, introduced by Representative Bill Posey on May 4, 2011,
and H.R. 2056, a bill to instruct the Inspector General of the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to study the impact of
insured depository institution failures, introduced by
Representative Lynn Westmoreland on May 31, 2011. H.R. 1723
would permit certain current loans that would otherwise be
treated as nonaccrual loans as accrual loans. H.R. 2056 would
instruct the Inspector General of the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation to study the impact of insured depository
institution failures and closely examine the FDIC's bank
closure procedures. On July 20, 2011, the full Committee met in
open session and favorably reported H.R. 2056 to the House. On
July 28, 2011, the House considered H.R. 2056 under suspension
of the rules, and passed the bill, as amended, by voice vote.
On November 17, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit met in open session and did
not order H.R. 1723 favorably reported to the full Committee by
a record vote of 8 yeas and 10 nays.
On August 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a field hearing in
Newman, Georgia entitled ``Potential Mixed Messages: Is
Guidance from Washington Being Implemented by Federal Bank
Examiners?'' The purpose of the hearing was to assess whether
or not federal bank examination standards are overly stringent
and impeding an economic recovery. A primary focus of the
hearing was the causes and consequences of the elevated level
of bank failures in the State of Georgia.
Credit Unions
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
issues relating to the safety and soundness and regulatory
treatment of the credit union industry. In particular, the
Committee will examine the failures in the corporate credit
union system and evaluate possible reforms to the system and to
the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).
On October 12, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a legislative hearing
entitled ``H.R. 1418: The Small Business Lending Enhancement
Act of 2011.'' The purpose of the hearing was to discuss credit
union member business lending. The hearing considered H.R.
1418, the Small Business Lending Enhancement Act of 2011, was
introduced by Representatives Edward Royce and Carolyn McCarthy
on April 7, 2011. H.R. 1418 provides exceptions to caps
contained in the Federal Credit Union Act of 1934 on the
amounts that credit unions can lend to their members'
businesses. H.R. 1418 also requires both the National Credit
Union Administration and the Government Accountability Office
to study member business loans made by credit unions, as well
as recent trends in credit union lending.
Regulatory Burden Reduction
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to conduct an
ongoing review of the current regulatory burden on banks,
thrifts, and credit unions, with the goal of reducing
unnecessary, duplicative, or overly burdensome regulations,
consistent with consumer protection and safe and sound banking
practices.
On January 26, 2011, the Full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Promoting Economic Recovery and Job Creation: The
Road Forward.'' The purpose of this hearing was to provide
leading economists, academics, business-owners and citizens an
opportunity to share their views about the barriers to economic
growth. The hearing gave witnesses an opportunity to discuss
macroeconomic issues and trends facing the country and
affecting job creation. Among other issues, witnesses discussed
and evaluated the impact of regulatory uncertainty on job
growth.
On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``The
Effect of Dodd-Frank on Small Financial Institutions and Small
Businesses.'' Witnesses, including representatives of community
banks and credit unions, small business owners, and advocacy
groups, addressed the challenges faced by small institutions as
a result of the Dodd-Frank Act.
On March 9, 2011, Chairman Bachus and the other Republican
Members of the Committee sent a letter to financial regulators
expressing a number of concerns regarding the implementation of
Dodd-Frank. The letter requested that the agencies (1) provide
comment periods sufficient to address the number of proposed
rules and breadth of issues addressed by the rules, (2) ensure
consistency across agencies, and (3) provide regulatory
flexibility for small entities.
On September 8, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus and other
Members of the Committee sent a letter to Secretary of the
Department of Treasury Timothy Geithner expressing concerns
about the fulfillment of the FSOC's pledge to eliminate
unnecessary or duplicative regulatory burdens on the financial
system, namely on small community banks and credit unions.
Additionally, the letter requested a status report from the
Secretary on his efforts to ``streamline and simplify'' the
regulatory environment. Secretary Geithner responded on October
5, stating that ``as agencies move forward with implementation
of the Dodd-Frank Act, I will continue to encourage, as a top
priority, inter-agency coordination and the development of
rules that strike the right balance between financial stability
and innovation.''
On October 31, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a field hearing in
Wausau, Wisconsin, entitled ``Regulatory Reform: Examining How
New Regulations are Impacting Financial Institutions, Small
Businesses and Consumers.'' The purpose of the hearing was to
assess how new financial regulations are affecting the ability
of financial institutions to extend credit and stimulate job
growth. The hearing examined whether bank examination practices
are excessively stringent and impeding economic recovery.
On November 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit and the Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises held a
joint hearing entitled ``H.R. 1697: The Communities First
Act.'' The purpose of the hearing was to consider H.R. 1697,
the Communities First Act, which was introduced by
Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer on May 3, 2011. H.R. 1697
would reduce regulatory, paperwork, and tax burdens on small
banks. The Subcommittees examined whether H.R. 1697 would help
community banks foster economic growth and better serve their
communities.
Access to Financial Services
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to explore ways
to expand access to mainstream financial services by
traditionally underserved segments of the U.S. population,
particularly those without any prior banking history (commonly
referred to as ``the unbanked'').
On July 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled
``Examining Rental Purchase Agreements and the Potential Role
for Federal Regulation.'' The purpose of the hearing was to
discuss a proposal for improving the oversight and transparency
of the rent-to-own industry. The hearing focused on H.R. 1588,
The Consumer Rental Purchase Act, which was introduced by
Representative Francisco ``Quico'' Canseco on April 15, 2011.
H.R. 1588 would define rental purchase transactions, create
uniform national disclosure standards for rent-to-own
businesses, and prohibit certain practices. This legislation
was designed to be a federal floor for regulation of the rent-
to-own industry, leaving intact the rights of states to go
beyond these regulations, so long as those states do not define
rental purchase transactions as a credit sale or require the
disclosure of an annual percentage rate. On November 17, 2011,
H.R. 1588, as amended, was ordered favorably reported to the
full Committee by voice vote.
On September 22, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled ``An
Examination of the Availability of Credit for Consumers.'' The
purpose of the hearing was to explore the capacity of banking
institutions to address the credit needs of low- and middle-
income consumers. The hearing also examined alternatives to
traditional banking services, including check cashing and
payday lending services.
Data Security and Identity Theft
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to build on the
Committee's long-standing role in developing laws governing the
handling of sensitive personal financial information about
consumers, (including the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Fair
and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACT Act)); to evaluate
the need for legislation that better protects the security and
confidentiality of such information from any loss, unauthorized
access, or misuse; to examine the threats of cyber crime
against individuals, businesses and financial institutions; and
to identify best practices that can protect against identify
theft and related cyber crimes.
On June 29, 2011, the full Committee held a field hearing
in Hoover, Alabama, entitled ``Hacked Off: Helping Law
Enforcement Protect Private Financial Information.'' The
hearing examined threats that computer hackers pose to
individuals, businesses, financial institutions and government
agencies; the methods that hackers employ to breach information
technology systems; and the efforts of law enforcement to foil
or arrest hackers. It also examined the work of the National
Computer Forensics Institute, where state and local law
enforcement officers, prosecutors and judges are trained in
ways to detect, prosecute and try cases involving computer-
based evidence.
On September 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit held a hearing entitled
``Cybersecurity: Threats to the Financial Sector.'' The purpose
of the hearing was to examine the threats that computer hackers
pose to financial institutions and government agencies; the
methods used by hackers to breach information-technology
systems; and the cooperation among government agencies and the
private sector to thwart hackers.
Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
enforcement of anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist
financing laws and regulations.
On September 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations held a field hearing in New York, New York
entitled ``Combating Terror Post-9/11: Oversight of the Office
of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence.'' The hearing reviewed
the activities of the Treasury Department's Office of Terrorism
and Financial Intelligence to safeguard the integrity of the
nation's financial system and to fight terrorist facilitators,
money launderers, and other threats to national security. The
Honorable Daniel Glaser, Assistant Secretary for Terrorist
Financing, Department of the Treasury, was the sole witness.
Insurance
National Flood Insurance Program
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
proposed reforms to the National Flood Insurance Program which
is currently authorized through September 30, 2011.
On March 11, 2011 and April 1, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity held legislative
hearings entitled ``Legislative Proposals to Reform the
National Flood Insurance Program.'' The hearings focused on
legislation introduced by Subcommittee Chairman Biggert (H.R.
1309) which included the following reforms: (1) a five-year
reauthorization of the NFIP; (2) a three-year delay in the
mandatory purchase requirement for certain properties in newly
designated Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs); (3) a phase-in
of full-risk, actuarial rates for areas newly designated as
Special Flood Hazard; (4) a reinstatement of the Technical
Mapping Advisory Council; and (5) an emphasis on greater
private sector participation in providing flood insurance
coverage.
Federal Insurance Office
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
establishment and implementation of the Federal Insurance
Office (FIO). The Oversight Plan calls for the Committee to pay
particular attention to the FIO's limited scope of authority
and to work to ensure that FIO does not impose unwarranted or
excessive data collection burdens on the insurance sector.
On October 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Insurance
Oversight: Policy Implications for U.S., Consumers, Businesses
and Jobs, Part 2.'' This was the second in a series of hearings
on the status of the insurance industry that began on July 28,
2011. The purpose of these hearings was to review the effect of
the Dodd-Frank Act and other recent domestic and international
regulatory changes on the insurance industry, consumers, and
jobs. This hearing specifically examined the actions undertaken
by the first Director of the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) and
his plans to fulfill FIO's mandate as set forth in the Dodd-
Frank Act.
State-Based Insurance Reforms
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor
developments in the state regulatory regime for insurance to
see if the states are progressing in achieving uniform
standards to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of
insurance and reinsurance regulation, particularly in the
regulation of non-admitted (surplus lines) insurance.
On July 28, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing on ``Insurance
Oversight: Policy Implications for U.S., Consumers, Businesses
and Jobs.'' The purpose of this hearing was to receive an
update on ongoing challenges in the regulation of the insurance
industry and in particular the related implementation of the
Dodd-Frank Act. This hearing also reviewed other domestic and
international insurance initiatives that affect consumers, the
insurance industry, and jobs, and explored insurance reforms
that might be considered by Congress, federal agencies, or the
states.
Impact of Dodd-Frank Act Implementation on the Insurance Sector
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
implementation of various provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act for
their potential impact on the insurance sector. The Dodd-Frank
Act provides for three representatives on the Financial
Stability Oversight Council to have specific expertise in the
insurance area.
On February 10, 2011 Chairman Bachus, Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity Subcommittee Chairwoman Biggert,
Ranking Member Frank, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Gutierrez
sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Geithner expressing concern
that the Financial Stability Oversight Council, contrary to the
intent of the Dodd-Frank Act, was proceeding with discussions
on major issues affecting the insurance sector without the
benefit of a full complement of insurance expertise.
On April 14, 2011, the Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the
Financial Stability Oversight Council.'' Representatives from
the regulators serving on the Financial Stability Oversight
Council testified at the hearing, including John Huff, the
designated state insurance commissioner and one of the three
FSOC members with insurance expertise. In written and oral
testimony, Mr. Huff expressed frustration with his inability to
use resources available from the National Association of
Insurance Commissioners to assist him with his work on the
Council. Treasury Undersecretary for Domestic Finance Jeffrey
Goldstein offered assurances at the hearing that Mr. Huff's
concerns would be addressed.
On July 28, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing on ``Insurance
Oversight: Policy Implications for U.S., Consumers, Businesses
and Jobs.'' The purpose of this hearing was to receive an
update on ongoing challenges in the regulation of the insurance
industry and in particular the related implementation of the
Dodd-Frank Act. This hearing also reviewed other domestic and
international insurance initiatives that affect consumers, the
insurance industry, and jobs, and explored insurance reforms
that might be considered by Congress, federal agencies, or the
states.
On November 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled
``Insurance Oversight and Legislative Proposals.'' This hearing
examined three legislative discussion drafts that amend
provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that some argue would create
regulatory uncertainty for the insurance industry, and thereby
have negative consequences for U.S. consumers, businesses, and
jobs. Witnesses at the hearing also discussed the strengths and
weaknesses of the state insurance guaranty fund system in
handling insurance company failures and curtailing systemic
risk in the domestic insurance industry.
State Insurance Guaranty Funds
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
capacity and effectiveness of State Insurance Guaranty Funds to
enhance stability in the insurance sector.
On November 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled
``Insurance Oversight and legislative Proposals.'' This hearing
examined three legislative discussion drafts that amend
provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that some argue would create
regulatory uncertainty for the insurance industry, and thereby
have negative consequences for U.S. consumers, businesses, and
jobs. Witnesses at the hearing also discussed the strengths and
weaknesses of the state insurance guaranty fund system in
handling insurance company failures and curtailing systemic
risk in the domestic insurance industry.
Housing
Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP)
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to rescind the
$1 billion in unobligated funds for the Neighborhood
Stabilization Program (NSP) and eliminate the program.
On March 1, 2011, Representative Gary Miller introduced
H.R. 861, the NSP Termination Act, which would rescind all
unobligated balances made available for the NSP authorized by
the Dodd-Frank Wall Act and terminate the program. The NSP is a
federal grant program which provides funding for emergency
assistance to state and local governments to acquire, develop,
redevelop, or demolish foreclosed homes. On March 2, 2011, the
Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity
held a legislative hearing on H.R. 861. H.R. 861 was ordered
favorably reported by the Committee on March 3, 2011, and
passed the House on March 16, 2011.
Housing and Urban Development, Rural Housing Service, National
Reinvestment Corporation
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD's) budget
and current programs with the goal of identifying program
spending cuts or eliminating inefficient and duplicative
programs.
On March 1, 2011, the Committee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development.'' The hearing focused on the proposed budget for
HUD for fiscal year 2012, and featured testimony by HUD
Secretary Shaun Donovan.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Determine the Future Role of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage Markets.'' The hearing
focused on HUD's Federal Housing Administration and USDA's
Rural Housing Service (RHS) single- and multi-family programs.
The hearing also examined legislative proposals to improve the
financial condition of FHA, RHS and the Government National
Mortgage Association (GNMA), the agency of HUD that guarantees
the timely payment of principal and interest on securities
backing mortgages insured by FHA and other government agencies.
These proposals were designed to increase the current FHA down
payment requirements, simplifying the FHA's loan limit
calculation formula, and transferring RHS's current functions
into FHA to be run by a new Deputy Assistant Secretary.
On June 3, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing entitled
``Oversight of HUD's HOME Program.'' This was the first in a
series of hearings on allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse
within the HOME program. In this hearing, the Committee
examined HUD's policies and procedures for monitoring the
performance of the HOME program. The hearing investigated
several of the mismanagement allegations raised by the HUD
Office of Inspector General and a series of journalistic
exposes in The Washington Post.
On June 8, 2011, Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert and Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy Neugebauer sent a
letter to Mercedes Marquez, HUD's Assistant Secretary of the
Office of Community Planning and Development. The letter
expressed the need for assurances from HUD that every dollar
spent on the HOME Investment Partnership Initiative program,
the formula-based grant program for states and localities
administered by HUD, goes to fulfill the program's mission to
provide affordable housing to low-income families.
On September 21, 2011, Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert and
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy
Neugebauer sent a letter to Peter Kovar, HUD's Assistant
Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations.
The letter specifically requested that HUD provide address
information for both single-family projects and multi-family
projects funded with HOME Investment Partnership Program funds
in order to ensure that HUD was keeping an accurate database of
past and current development projects.
On November 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations and the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity held a joint hearing entitled ``Fraud in
the HUD HOME Program.'' This was the second in a series of
hearings on allegations of waste, fraud, and abuse within the
HOME program. HUD's Office of Inspector General (HUD OIG)
performed internal audits of HUD's management of the HOME
program in September 2009 and November 2010 which documented
problems in HUD's ability to track HOME funds and activities.
The subcommittees received testimony from the HUD OIG, HUD, and
others, including individuals convicted of defrauding the HOME
program, on HUD's failure to properly oversee participating
jurisdictions that received HOME funds.
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)--Single Family
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine the
appropriate role for the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
in the mortgage finance system, and the ability of the FHA to
manage its mortgage portfolio and mitigate its risk.
On February 16, 2011 the Insurance, Housing and Community
Opportunity Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Are There
Government Barriers to the Housing Recovery?'' The hearing
focused on the current state of the housing finance market and
how to facilitate the return of private sector capital into the
mortgage markets. FHA Director David Stevens testified on the
current role of FHA in the single family mortgage market, and
presented his views on the appropriate role for FHA in the
future.
On March 2, 2011 the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to End Taxpayer Funding for Ineffective Foreclosure
Mitigation Programs.'' The hearing featured discussion of H.R.
830, the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act, a bill to
rescind all unobligated balances made available for use under
the FHA Refinance Program (pursuant to Mortgagee Letter 2010-23
of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development).
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Determine the Future Role of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage Markets.'' The hearing
focused on HUD's Federal Housing Administration and USDA's
Rural Housing Service (RHS) single- and multi-family programs.
The hearing also examined legislative proposals to improve the
financial condition of FHA, RHS and the GNMA, the agency of HUD
that guarantees the timely payment of principal and interest on
securities backing mortgages insured by FHA and other
government agencies. These proposals were designed to increase
the current FHA down payment requirements, simplifying the
FHA's loan limit calculation formula, and transferring RHS's
current functions into FHA to be run by a new Deputy Assistant
Secretary position.
On September 8, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Determine the Future Role of FHA,
RHS and GNMA in the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage Markets,
Part 2.'' The hearing examined the single- and multi-family
programs of the FHA and the Rural Housing Service (RHS). The
hearing also examined legislative proposals to improve the
financial condition of FHA, RHS, and Ginnie Mae and to better
protect taxpayers against losses from fraudulent or poorly-
underwritten loans. In addition, witnesses discussed the
proposed rule on Qualified Residential Mortgages (QRMs) and the
effect that the rule will have on FHA, RHS, and Ginnie Mae.
On November 7, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus along with
Vice Chairman Jeb Hensarling, Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert,
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
Chairman Shelley Moore Capito, Subcommittee on Capital Markets
and Government Sponsored Enterprises Chairman Scott Garrett,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Randy
Neugebauer, and Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and
Trade Chairman Ron Paul sent a letter to the conferees
appointed to the conference committee for H.R. 2112, the
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act,
expressing their strong opposition to the inclusion of any
provisions in the H.R. 2112 conference report to increase the
loan limits for mortgages insured by the federal government
through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) or guaranteed
by the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac.
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)--Multi-Family
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to exercise its
oversight authority on the FHA's General Risk and Special Risk
Insurance fund to ensure that the fund does not expose
taxpayers to loss.
On February 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Are
There Government Barriers to the Housing Recovery?'' The
hearing focused on the current state of the housing finance
market and on how to facilitate the return of private sector
capital into the mortgage markets.
On May 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Determine the Future Role of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage Markets.'' The hearing
focused on HUD's Federal Housing Administration and USDA's RHS
single- and multi-family programs. The hearing also examined
legislative proposals to improve the financial condition of
FHA, RHS and the GNMA, the agency of HUD that guarantees the
timely payment of principal and interest on securities backing
mortgages insured by FHA and other government agencies. These
proposals were designed to increase the current FHA down
payment requirements, simplifying the FHA's loan limit
calculation formula, and transferring RHS's current functions
into FHA to be run by a new Deputy Assistant Secretary
position.
On September 8, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Determine the Future Role of FHA,
RHS and GNMA in the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage Markets,
Part 2.'' The hearing examined the single- and multi-family
programs of the FHA and the RHS. The hearing also examined
legislative proposals to improve the financial condition of
FHA, RHS, and Ginnie Mae and to better protect taxpayers
against losses from fraudulent or poorly-underwritten loans. In
addition, witnesses discussed the proposed rule on QRMs and the
effect that the rule will have on FHA, RHS, and Ginnie Mae.
Government Foreclosure Mitigation Programs
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to rescind any
unspent and unobligated balances currently committed to the
Making Home Affordable Programs.
On February 16, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Are
there Government Barriers to the Housing Recovery?'' The
hearing focused on the current state of the housing finance
market and how to facilitate the return of private sector
capital into the mortgage markets. An issue Members raised
during the hearing was the extended time periods needed to
complete foreclosure proceedings, and the effect of such
prolonged foreclosures on the housing recovery.
On February 28, 2011, Representative McHenry introduced
H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act, which would terminate the
authority of the Treasury Department to provide any new
assistance to homeowners under the Home Affordable Modification
Program (HAMP) under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act
of 2008 (P.L. 110-343), while preserving any assistance already
provided to HAMP participants on a permanent or trial basis.
The ``Making Home Affordable'' initiative is a collection of
programs designed by the Obama Administration to assist at-risk
homeowners facing difficulty paying their mortgages. The
signature piece of the Administration's overall ``Making Home
Affordable'' initiative on foreclosure prevention is HAMP,
which is a federally funded mortgage modification program that
provides financial incentives to participating mortgage
servicers to modify the mortgages of eligible homeowners. On
March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity held a legislative hearing on H.R. 839.
The bill was ordered favorably reported by the Committee on
March 9, 2011, and passed the House on March 29, 2011.
On August 11, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a briefing for Committee staff
with representatives from HUD on the status of the Emergency
Homeowners Loan Program (EHLP). The Dodd-Frank Act authorized
$1 billion for EHLP to provide zero-interest loans of up to
$50,000 to borrowers who cannot pay their mortgages because of
unemployment or a reduction in income. HUD's representatives
provided an update on the status of EHLP's implementation and
the number of applicants to the program before the program's
September 30, 2011 application deadline.
On October 5, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a briefing for Committee staff
with representatives from HUD on the Emergency Homeowners Loan
Program (EHLP). HUD's representatives provided an update on the
number of applicants to the program before the application
period closed on September 30, 2011, and the expected costs and
success rates for those applications.
On October 6, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``The Obama
Administration's Response to the Housing Crisis.'' This hearing
examined the Administration's initiatives for refinancing
underwater and delinquent mortgages, foreclosure mitigation,
and other housing revitalization efforts. The hearing also
focused on ideas outlined by President Obama in his September
8, 2011, address to a Joint Session of Congress, including a
$15 billion community redevelopment grant initiative called
``Project Rebuild'' and proposed modifications to the existing
Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP). Witnesses testified
on the successes and failures of these government-funded
initiatives, and on how to promote the return of private sector
capital into the housing market.
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
rising costs of the Section 8 program, review changes that can
be made to the program, and assess the needs of the
administrators in operating the program as well as the needs of
voucher recipients.
On June 23, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Legislative
Proposals to Reform the Housing Choice Voucher Program.'' This
hearing focused on a legislative proposal aimed at making
improvements to HUD's Housing Choice Voucher Program that
reduce or streamline duplicative or onerous regulations. The
hearing also examined ways in which the program can be improved
to reduce costs, better serve more participants, and enable
Public Housing Agencies and property owners/managers to reduce
unnecessary burdens associated with the program.
On October 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``The Section
8 Savings Act of 2011: Proposals to Promote Economic
Independence for Assisted Families.'' The hearing focused on
revisions to the Section 8 reform legislation discussed at a
previous Subcommittee hearing on June 23, 2011. The revised
language seeks to link housing assistance with supportive
services for residents such as job training, financial
literacy, and educational opportunities in order to encourage
self-sufficiency.
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``The Obama
Administration's Rental Assistance Demonstration Proposal.''
This topic of the hearing was the Obama Administration's Rental
Assistance Demonstration (RAD) proposal, which would allow for
the voluntary conversion of units in public housing to long-
term project-based Section 8 contracts in order to access
private capital for preservation and redevelopment activities.
Housing Counseling
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to conduct a
comprehensive review of current housing counseling programs
within HUD and NeighborWorks, including how Federal, State,
private and non-profit use housing counseling funds.
On September 14, 2011, Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``HUD and
NeighborWorks Housing Counseling Oversight.'' The hearing
reviewed HUD and NeighborWorks' federal housing counseling
programs, as well as funding and reform measures, including
implementation of the housing counseling provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Act.
Government National Mortgage Association
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) to determine
whether its mission and/or authority meets contemporary housing
needs that promote affordable housing.
On September 8, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled
``Legislative Proposals to Determine the Future Role of FHA,
RHS and GNMA in the Single- and Multi-Family Mortgage Markets,
Part 2.'' The hearing examined the single- and multi-family
programs of the FHA and the RHS. The hearing also examined
legislative proposals to improve the financial condition of
FHA, RHS, and Ginnie Mae and to better protect taxpayers
against losses from fraudulent or poorly-underwritten loans. In
addition, witnesses discussed the proposed rule on QRMs and the
effect that the rule will have on FHA, RHS, and Ginnie Mae.
Public Housing
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review HUD's
public housing programs with the goal of increasing their
efficiency.
On November 3, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``The Obama
Administration's Rental Assistance Demonstration Proposal.''
The topic of the hearing was the Obama Administration's Rental
Assistance Demonstration (RAD) proposal, which would allow for
the voluntary conversion of units in public housing to long-
term project-based Section 8 contracts in order to access
private capital for preservation and redevelopment activities.
Mortgage Broker Licensing and Oversight
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor
implementation of the Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage
Licensing Act Mortgage Licensing (SAFE) Act of 2008 (Public Law
110-289) and other changes made to the mortgage originator
licensing and registry system with the goal of enhancing
homebuyer protections.
On July 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Mortgage
Origination: The Impact of Recent Changes on Homeowners and
Businesses.'' This hearing examined a range of mortgage
origination laws and regulations that impact consumers and
mortgage industry participants as well as related reforms for
consideration by Congress, federal agencies, or states. The
hearing also examined legislative proposals to clarify the
application of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act
(RESPA), particularly as applied to the payment of fees to real
estate brokers and agents by home warranty companies, including
H.R. 2446, the RESPA Home Warranty Clarification Act of 2011,
which was introduced by Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert on July 7, 2011.
H.R. 2446 would amend current law to explicitly state that home
warranties are permissible RESPA settlement services.
On June 28, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a briefing for Committee staff
with representatives from HUD on the implementation of the
final rule for the SAFE Act's minimum standards for the state
licensing and registration of residential mortgage loan
originators and the requirements for operating the Nationwide
Mortgage Licensing System and Registry (NMLSR). The final rule
was published in Federal Register on June 30, 2011.
Loan Originator Compensation
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine the
implementation of proposed rules issued by the Federal Reserve
governing mortgage origination compensation, as well as the
interaction of existing real estate settlement rules with rules
mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act.
On July 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing
and Community Opportunity held a hearing entitled ``Mortgage
Origination: The Impact of Recent Changes on Homeowners and
Businesses.'' This hearing examined a range of mortgage
origination laws and regulations that impact consumers and
mortgage industry participants as well as related reforms for
consideration by Congress, federal agencies, or states. The
hearing also examined legislative proposals to clarify the
application of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act
(RESPA), particularly as applied to the payment of fees to real
estate brokers and agents by home warranty companies, including
H.R. 2446, the RESPA Home Warranty Clarification Act of 2011,
which was introduced by Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity Chairman Judy Biggert on July 7, 2011.
H.R. 2446 would amend current law to explicitly state that home
warranties are permissible RESPA settlement services.
Review of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
federal laws and regulations in place governing the processes
and standards under which manufactured homes are built and
maintained to ensure that all aspects of the law are being
fully and properly implemented by HUD.
On November 29, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance,
Housing and Community Opportunity held a field hearing in
Danville, Virginia entitled, ``The State of Manufactured
Housing.'' The hearing provided a general overview of
manufactured housing and examined how tighter lending standards
have affected borrowers seeking to purchase manufactured homes.
In addition, the hearing examined how HUD monitors and enforces
its federal standards for the construction and safety of
manufactured homes.
FHA Refinance Program
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to return to
taxpayer the $8 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
funds that has been set aside for the FHA Refinance Program.
On February 28, 2011, Representative Robert Dold introduced
H.R. 830, the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act. The
legislation would rescind all unobligated balances made
available for the program by Title I of the Emergency Economic
Stabilization Act (P.L. 110-343) that have been allocated for
use under the FHA Refinance Program (pursuant to Mortgagee
Letter 2010-23 of the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development). The bill would also terminate the program and
void the Mortgagee Letter pursuant to which it was implemented,
with concessions made for current participants in the program.
The FHA Refinance Program provides refinancing options through
the Federal Housing Administration's mortgage insurance program
to homeowners who owe more in mortgage principal than their
property's current value. On March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on
Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity held a legislative
hearing on H.R. 830. The bill was ordered favorably reported by
the Committee on March 3, 2011, and passed the House on March
10, 2011.
Emergency Homeowner Relief Fund
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to rescind the
unexpended and unobligated amounts dedicated to the Emergency
Homeowner Relief Fund.
On February 17, 2011, Chairman Bachus and Chairwoman
Biggert sent a letter to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development regarding HUD's proposed Interim Rule on the
Emergency Homeowners' Loan Program (EHLP) (Docket No. FR-5470-
J-OI). The letter expressed concern that the underlying program
was an unwise expansion of government's role in the housing
market that is both costly to taxpayers and potentially
injurious to the at-risk homeowners it purports to help. The
letter also noted that the EHLP does nothing to address the
underlying problem these at-risk homeowners face--the loss of
or inability to find a job--and therefore does not help get our
economy back on track. Further, the letter indicated Chairman
Bachus and Chairwoman Biggert's intention that Congress take
action this calendar year to repeal the EHLP's reauthorization
and rescind any unobligated balances for the program, and thus
recommended that work on the proposed Interim Rule for EHLP not
be finalized while Congress pursues these important taxpayer
protection goals.
On February 28, 2011, Representative Jeb Hensarling
introduced H.R. 836, the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program
Termination Act, to rescind all unobligated balances made
available for the Emergency Mortgage Relief Program and
terminate the program. The Emergency Homeowner Relief Fund was
established under Section 1496 of the Dodd-Frank Act to provide
loans or credit advances to borrowers who cannot pay their
mortgages because of unemployment or reduction in income. On
March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and
Community Opportunity held a legislative hearing on H.R. 836.
On March 3, 2011, the Committee ordered the bill favorably
reported, and on March 11, 2011, the bill was approved by the
House.
International Monetary Policy and Trade
Job Creation and U.S. Competitiveness
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine
United States international monetary and trade policies to
ensure that those policies support the ability of U.S.
companies to be competitive in the international marketplace,
thereby promoting domestic job creation and economic
opportunity.
On July 27, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The Impact
of the World Bank and Multilateral Development Banks on U.S.
Job Creation.'' This hearing examined how Multilateral
Development Bank assistance to developing nations prevents the
proliferation of terrorism and instability while contributing
to national economic growth through infrastructure projects and
increased employment. The hearing also explored how MDB
assistance helps developing nations to transition into emerging
markets, at which time they become open economies full of
opportunities for U.S. exports and other consumer services.
Export-Import Bank of the United States
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to consider the
reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank and examine its
policies and programs in supporting the global competitiveness
of U.S. companies, small and large, particularly given the
liquidity challenges American businesses currently face.
On March 10, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The Role of
the Export-Import Bank in U.S. Competitiveness and Job
Creation.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine the role
of the Export-Import Bank in fostering job growth by helping
U.S. companies compete in the international export market. The
hearing focused on how to improve the operations of the Export-
Import Bank to foster job growth by supporting U.S. companies
as they export to international markets.
On March 10, 2011, Chairman Bachus and Subcommittee on
International Monetary Policy and Trade Chairman Miller sent a
letter to President Obama urging him to submit nominations to
the Senate to fill two vacancies on the Export-Import Bank
Board of Directors. On July 20, 2011, an automatic six-month
extension of these board seats will lapse, and the Board of
Directors will not be able to achieve a quorum, precluding the
Ex-Im Bank from approving any transactions.
On April 9, 2011, Chairman Bachus, Subcommittee on
International Monetary Policy and Trade Chairman Miller,
Ranking Member Frank, and Subcommittee Ranking Member McCarthy
sent a letter to Secretary Geithner asking him to use
Treasury's authority under section 635(a)(3) of the Export-
Import Bank Charter to match foreign financing when foreign
sales to the United States are being supported by official
export credit through a foreign Export Credit Agency (ECA).
On May 24, 2011, the Subcommittee on International Monetary
Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``Legislative
Proposals on Securing American Jobs Through Exports: Export-
Import Bank Reauthorization.'' This hearing examined a
discussion draft of legislation to reauthorize the charter of
the Export-Import Bank of the United States.
On June 1, 2011, the discussion draft was introduced by
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
Chairman Gary Miller as H.R. 2072. On June 2, 2011, the
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade met in
open session and ordered H.R. 2072, as amended, favorably
reported to the full Committee by a voice vote. On June 22,
2011, the full Committee met in open session an ordered H.R.
2072, as amended, favorably reported to the House by a voice
vote.
Market Access
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to assess
opportunities to expand market access for U.S. companies and
the financial services sector, and to promote policies that can
bring about reciprocal market access with developing nations
that currently limit or prevent U.S. firms from entering and
operating within their national borders.
On February 25, 2011, the Engage China Coalition,
comprising twelve financial services trade associations,
briefed bipartisan Committee staff on the Coalition's efforts
to improve access to the Chinese financial services market.
China's population represents a growing consumer base for
financial services firms. However, various restrictions prevent
the level of access that would allow U.S. firms to effectively
serve this growing segment.
Extractive Industries and Conflict Minerals
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
implementation of provisions in title XV of the Dodd-Frank Act
imposing new disclosure requirements relating to so-called
``conflict minerals'' and ``extractive industries,'' to ensure
that the underlying objectives of the provisions are met but
that unnecessary compliance burdens for U.S. firms are
minimized.
On January 25, 2011, Chairman Bachus sent a letter to SEC
Chairman Mary Schapiro requesting that the SEC consider
extending the public comment period for the proposed rule to
implement Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires
U.S.-listed companies to disclose to the SEC any use of
minerals that originated in the Democratic Republic of Congo
and neighboring countries. The SEC ultimately extended the
comment period for thirty days.
On March 4, 2011, Chairman Bachus and International
Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee Chairman Miller sent a
letter to SEC Chairman Schapiro expressing concerns about the
implementation of Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Act. Section
1504 requires the disclosure of certain payments made by
natural resource companies to governments for the commercial
development of oil, natural gas or minerals. The letter
expressed concerns that if not implemented properly, Section
1504 could disadvantage U.S.-listed companies when they compete
for extractive industry contracts. The letter asked the SEC to
consider using its general exemptive authority under Section 36
of the Securities and Exchange Act to exempt reporting of
payments when disclosure of such information would violate
foreign law.
On July 28, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus, along with
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
Chairman Gary Miller, Subcommittee on International Monetary
Policy and Trade Vice Chairman Robert Dold, and Representative
Steve Stivers sent a letter to Securities and Exchange
Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro requesting a phased
implementation of regulations effectuating Section 1502 of the
Dodd-Frank, which requires publicly traded U.S. companies to
report annually on their efforts to verify that minerals used
in their products were not taxed or controlled by rebel groups
in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Act. The purpose of this
letter was to ensure that U.S. companies are able to comply and
are not competitively disadvantaged in the global marketplace.
Conduct of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and Possible
U.S. Contributions
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review any
Administration request that the U.S. contribute to the general
capital increases of the World Bank, Inter-American Development
Bank, Asian Development Bank, African Development Bank,
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the
International Finance Corporation.
On February 18, 2011, representatives of the Department of
Treasury's Office of International Affairs briefed bipartisan
Committee staff on the Administration's FY 2012 budget proposal
for Treasury's International portfolio. In its FY2012 budget,
the Administration requested that the Committee authorize
funding for the U.S. commitment to replenish the concessional
loan windows at the multilateral development banks and to fund
a capital increase at these institutions.
On May 26, 2011, representatives from the African
Development Bank (AfDB) held a roundtable discussion with
members of the International Monetary Policy and Trade
Subcommittee. The discussion was sponsored by International
Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee Chairman Miller,
Subcommittee Vice Chairman Dold, and Ranking Member McCarthy.
The purpose of the roundtable was to discuss the general
capital increase request for African Development Bank as well
as AfDB President Kaberuka's efforts to improve transparency
and accountability at the Bank.
On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The Role of
the U.S. in the World Bank and Multilateral Development Banks:
Bank Oversight and Requested Capital Increases.'' This hearing
examined the role of the U.S. in the multilateral development
banks and the benefits of its participation. It also examined
the mission and operations of the multilateral development
banks, Treasury's oversight of these institutions, and the
Administration's request to fund the U.S. contribution to these
institutions.
On July 27, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The Impact
of the World Bank and Multilateral Development Banks on U.S.
Job Creation.'' The hearing focused on how Multi-lateral
Development Bank lending and assistance to middle-income and
poor countries around the world contributes to the U.S.
employment base. The hearing also explored how MDB assistance
helps developing nations to transition into emerging markets,
at which time they become open economies and promising markets
for U.S. exports and other consumer services.
On September 21, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The Impact
of the World Bank and Multilateral Development Banks on
National Security.'' This hearing examined the effect on U.S.
national security of lending and grants provided by
Multilateral Development Banks to middle-income and poor
countries, and how that assistance helps developing countries
become stable nations that can help counteract the
proliferation of terrorism and other threats to U.S. national
security.
On October 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The World
Bank and Multi Lateral Development Banks' Authorization.'' This
hearing examined a discussion draft of legislation to authorize
general capital increases for the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development
Bank, the African Development Bank, and the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development.
On October 12, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade met in open session and ordered the
discussion draft of H.R. 3188, as amended, favorably to the
full Committee by a voice vote. On October 13, 2011, the
discussion draft was introduced by Representative Robert Dold
as H.R. 3188.
Eurozone Distress
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
economic distress in the Eurozone stemming from unsustainable
sovereign debt in several European countries, and its impact on
the United States and the global economy. It further calls on
the Committee to examine actions taken by the IMF, the European
Union, and other nations to address the sovereign debt issues
in the Eurozone.
On October 25, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The
Eurozone Crisis and Implications for the United States.'' The
purpose of the hearing was to examine the effect that Europe's
economic problems may have on the U.S. economy; in particular,
the effect of those problems on trade and employment. The
hearing also examined European policy options under
consideration for containing the crisis and the role of the
U.S. in these decisions.
Global Capital Flows
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
flow of capital globally and the implications to the United
States of factors that threaten global economic stability.
On October 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on International
Monetary Policy and Trade held a hearing entitled ``The U.S.
Housing Finance System in the Global Context: Structure,
Capital Sources, and Housing Dynamics.'' The U.S.
securitization process has facilitated the flow of private
investment capital from investors around the world to fund U.S.
home mortgages. This hearing focused on the relationship
between the health of the U.S. housing finance system and
global financial stability, including foreign involvement in
the U.S. housing finance system and the motivations of foreign
investors to purchase residential mortgage-backed securities.
Domestic Monetary Policy
The Economy and Jobs
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review
changes in the economy that affect the relationship between
monetary policy, government expenditures, deficits, employment,
and economic growth, and to examine the effectiveness and
consequences of measures undertaken by the Federal Reserve and
the executive branch on economic growth and employment.
On January 26, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Promoting Economic Recovery and Job Creation: The
Road Forward.'' The hearing examined potential barriers to job
creation and economic growth erected by the Dodd-Frank Act. At
the hearing, academics and business owners testified as to how
the Volcker Rule could adversely affect the availability of
investment capital and impede job growth and, more generally,
how the Act could harm the competitiveness of the U.S.
financial markets.
On February 9, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Can Monetary
Policy Really Create Jobs?'' The hearing examined whether the
Federal Reserve's policies have been effective in creating jobs
and stabilizing the economy.
On March 30, 2011, the Oversight and Investigations held a
hearing on ``The Costs of Implementing the Dodd-Frank Act:
Budgetary and Economic.'' The hearing reviewed the direct cost
to the federal government of implementing the Dodd-Frank Act,
as well as the Act's impact on job creation, capital formation
and compliance costs for regulated entities. Testimony was
received from regulators, academics and the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO).
On April 14, 2011, the Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the
Financial Stability Oversight Council.'' Witnesses from the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Treasury
Department, National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC), Federal Reserve, Securities Exchange Commission (SEC),
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) testified on their respective
agencies' role on the Council, and regulatory activities
related to Dodd-Frank implementation. Members voiced concerns
that a failure to sequence and coordinate U.S. regulatory
action with efforts in other nations could adversely affect the
ability of U.S. financial institutions to compete, negatively
affecting economic growth and job creation.
On July 12, 2011, the Congressional Research Service
briefed bipartisan Committee staff on the state of the U.S.
economy and the conduct of monetary policy in preparation for
the hearing the next day at which Federal Reserve Board
Chairman Ben Bernanke presented the Board's semi-annual report
on those subjects.
On July 13, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing with
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke entitled ``Monetary
Policy and the State of the Economy.'' The purpose of this
hearing was to receive the semi-annual report to Congress on
monetary policy and the state of the economy.
Conduct of Monetary Policy by the Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to perform its
statutory responsibility in overseeing the Federal Reserve
Board's conduct of monetary policy.
On February 9, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Can Monetary
Policy Really Create Jobs?'' The hearing examined whether the
Federal Reserve's policies have been effective in creating jobs
and stabilizing the economy.
On March 2, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy,'' to
receive Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke's semi-
annual report to Congress on monetary policy and the state of
the economy. Chairman Bernanke described an economy that is
growing slowly, with unemployment remaining high, and inflation
expectations remaining low. In the monetary policy overview,
Chairman Bernanke detailed the Fed's decision to engage in
``quantitative easing'' as a tool for conducting monetary
policy when the Fed funds rate is effectively at zero.
On March 17, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``The
Relationship of Monetary Policy and Rising Prices.'' The
hearing examined the role that an overly accommodative Federal
Reserve monetary policy can have in fueling inflationary
pressures.
On July 26, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Impact of
Monetary Policy on the Economy: A Regional Fed Perspective on
Inflation, Unemployment, and QE3.'' The purpose of this hearing
was to receive a regional Federal Reserve Bank perspective on
inflation, unemployment, monetary policy actions and the
possibility of further liquidity operations.
On September 28, 2011, the Federal Reserve briefed
bipartisan Committee staff on two issues: its recently
announced program to buy long-term Treasuries in an attempt to
decrease long-term interest rates; and its dollar liquidity
swap lines executed with foreign central banks.
General Oversight of the Federal Reserve System
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to conduct
oversight of the operations of the Federal Reserve Board of
Governors and the Federal Reserve System, including its
management structure, organizational changes mandated by the
Dodd-Frank Act, and the role of the Federal Reserve in the
supervision of systemically significant banks and non-bank
financial institutions.
On March 2, 2011, the full Committee held a hearing
entitled ``Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy,'' to
receive Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke's semi-
annual report to Congress on monetary policy and the state of
the economy.
On May 3, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a bipartisan staff briefing with
Federal Reserve staff to discuss the content of the data
released in December 2010, and the data released in March 2011
as a result of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits by
the news organizations Bloomberg and Fox News, detailing the
use of various emergency lending facilities established by the
Federal Reserve during the financial crisis. Fed officials gave
a brief summary of the difference between normal discount
window operations and the emergency lending authorities, and
discussed the differences between the disclosures required by
the Dodd-Frank Act and those made pursuant to the FOIA
requests.
On May 11, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Monetary Policy
and the Debt Ceiling: Examining the Relationship between the
Federal Reserve and Government Debt.'' The hearing focused on
the link between Federal Reserve monetary policy and government
debt, specifically how the Federal Reserve purchases government
debt to conduct monetary policy, the role of the Federal
Reserve in financing government budget deficits, and the
separation between the Federal Reserve and Treasury.
On June 1, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Federal Reserve
Lending Disclosure: FOIA, Dodd-Frank, and the Data Dump.'' The
hearing examined information disclosed by the Federal Reserve
in compliance with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203) and the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) requests made by Bloomberg and Fox News.
On June 8, 2011, Federal Reserve Board of Governors briefed
bipartisan Committee staff on its single-tranche open market
operations detailed in a press account on May 26, 2011. Fed
officials gave a brief summary of the single-tranche open
market operation program that began in early March, 2008, and
discussed the Bloomberg article entitled ``Fed Gave Banks
Crisis Gains on $80 Billion Secretive Loans as Low as 0.01%.''
On September 26, 2011, the Government Accountability Office
briefed bipartisan Committee staff on the audit of the Federal
Reserve emergency facilities required by Section 1109 of the
Dodd-Frank Act.
On October 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Audit the Fed:
Dodd-Frank, QE3, and Federal Reserve Transparency.'' This
hearing examined the results of the audits of the Federal
Reserve by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) mandated
by the Dodd-Frank Act; earlier legislative efforts to audit the
Federal Reserve; current Federal Reserve audit and data
disclosure requirements; and Federal Reserve transparency.
Activities of the U.S. Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to review the
activities of the U.S. Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and
Printing as they relate to the printing and minting of U.S.
currency and coins and the production of congressionally
authorized commemorative coins and Congressional gold medals.
On April 7, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Bullion Coin
Programs of the United States Mint: Can They Be Improved?'' The
focus of the hearing was on possible improvements to the U.S.
Mint's bullion programs, and whether the Mint is capable of
meeting growing demand for bullion coins. The recent recession
was accompanied by increased demand for bullion coins as a way
to hedge against inflation. Witnesses suggested one cause for
the shortfall might be the lack of suppliers to the Mint, and
advocated an expansion of the relevant supply chains to ensure
that the Mint can meet growing demand for bullion coins.
On June 9, 2011, the Office of the Inspector General for
the Department of Treasury (Treasury OIG) briefed bipartisan
Committee staff on United States government gold holdings in
the custody of the Treasury Department, and the Treasury OIG's
audit of that gold. Treasury OIG staff gave an overview of how
the gold holdings at Treasury were counted, audited, and placed
in sealed compartments in the period before the Treasury OIG
began performing the audits. They also discussed current
procedures for performing an audit, changing the seal on a gold
compartment, and the maintenance of a compartment when it
involves breaking the seal.
On June 20, 2011, the United States Mint briefed bipartisan
Committee staff on U.S. government gold holdings, for which the
Mint is the custodian. The U.S. Mint staff gave an overview of
the government's gold holdings, including a discussion of the
manner in which the gold is stored, inventoried, and assayed.
Also discussed was the frequency of audits and procedures for
auditing the gold holdings.
On June 23, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary
Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Investigating
the Gold: H.R. 1495, the Gold Reserve Transparency Act of 2011
and the Oversight of United States Gold Holdings.'' The purpose
of the hearing was to discuss H.R. 1495, the Gold Reserve
Transparency Act of 2011, as well as examine previous audits of
U.S. gold holdings, the current condition of U.S. gold
reserves, and the methodology for conducting the audit called
for in H.R. 1495.
On September 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Domestic
Monetary Policy and Technology held a hearing entitled ``Road
Map to Sound Money: A Legislative Hearing on H.R. 1098 and
Restoring the Dollar.'' The purpose of this hearing was to
examine the role of ``sound money'' in the economy as well as
H.R. 1098, the ``Free Competition in Currency Act of 2011.''
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to examine the
operations of FinCEN and its ongoing efforts to implement its
regulatory mandates pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), to
combat money laundering and terrorist financing activities.
On November 9, 2011, Undersecretary of the Office of
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence at the Department of
Treasury David Cohen briefed bipartisan Committee staff on a
proposal to reorganize the Office of Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence.
The Office of Foreign Assets Control
The Oversight Plan of the Committee on Financial Services
for the 112th Congress calls upon the Committee to monitor the
functions of the Office of Foreign Assets Control and study
ways of improving its working relationship with financial
institutions.
On November 15, 2011, Chairman Spencer Bachus sent a letter
to Secretary of the Department of Treasury Timothy Geithner
requesting that the Office of Foreign Assets Control consider
blocking funds held by Clearstream Banking S.A. on behalf of
the government of Iran, until all court cases are concluded and
all claims against the funds are adjudicated.
Hearings Held Under House Rule XI(1)(d)(2)(E)
----------
Rule XI(1)(d)(2)(E) of the Rules of the House, adopted
January 5, 2011, requires committees, or their subcommittees,
to:
(1) Hold at least one hearing during each 120-day
period on the topic of waste, fraud, abuse, or
mismanagement in Government programs which that
committee may authorize. Such hearing shall include a
focus on the most egregious instances of waste, fraud,
abuse, or mismanagement as documented by any report the
committee has received from a Federal Office of the
Inspector General or the Comptroller General of the
United States.
(2) Hold at least one hearing in any session in which
the committee has received disclaimers of agency
financial statements from auditors of any Federal
agency that the committee may authorize to hear
testimony on such disclaimers from representatives of
any such agency.
(3) Hold at least one hearing on issues raised by
reports issued by the Comptroller General of the United
States indicating that Federal programs or operations
that the committee may authorize are at high risk for
waste, fraud, and mismanagement.
Under Rule XI(1)(d)(2)(E), the hearings held pursuant to
this rule must be delineated in the Activity Report. During the
112th Congress, the following hearings were held in compliance
with the Rule:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title & Subcommittee Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-4............... An Analysis of the Post- February 15, 2011
Conservatorship Legal
Expenses of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac (Oversight).
112-13.............. Legislative Proposals to March 2, 2011
End Taxpayer Funding for
Ineffective Foreclosure
Mitigation Programs
(Housing).
112-14.............. Oversight of the Securities March 10, 2011
and Exchange Commission's
Operations, Activities,
Challenges and FY 2012
Budget Request (Capital
Markets).
112-16.............. Legislative Proposals to March 11, 2011
Reform the National Flood
Insurance Program
(Housing).
112-23.............. Legislative Proposals to April 1, 2011
Reform the National Flood
Insurance Program, Part II
(Housing).
112-36.............. Oversight of HUD's HOME June 3, 2011
Program (Full Committee).
112-48.............. Oversight of the Office of July 14, 2011
Financial Research and the
Financial Stability
Oversight Council
(Oversight).
112-55.............. Field hearing entitled September 6, 2011
``Combating Terror Post-9/
11: Oversight of the
Office of Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence''
(Oversight).
112-57.............. Legislative Proposals to September 8, 2011
Determine the Future Role
of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-
Family Mortgage Markets,
Part 2 (Housing).
112-66.............. Joint Hearing with the September 22, 2011
Subcommittee on TARP,
Financial Services and
Bailouts of Public and
Private Programs of the
Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform entitled
``Potential Conflicts of
Interest at the SEC: The
Becker Case'' (Oversight).
112-71.............. Oversight of the Federal October 12, 2011
Home Loan Bank System
(Oversight).
112-81.............. Joint Hearing entitled November 2, 2011
``Fraud in the HUD HOME
Program'' (Oversight/
Housing).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Resolution 72
----------
On February 8, 2011, the House adopted House Resolution 72,
amending the rules of the House to require certain designated
committees to inventory and review regulations, executive and
agency orders, and other administrative actions or procedures
that:
(1) Impede private-sector job creation;
(2) Discourage innovation and entrepreneurial
activity;
(3) Hurt economic growth and investment;
(4) Harm the Nation's global competitiveness;
(5) Limit access to credit and capital;
(6) Fail to utilize or apply accurate cost-benefit
analysis;
(7) Create additional economic uncertainty;
(8) Are promulgated in such a way as to limit
transparency and the opportunity for public comment,
particularly by affected parties;
(9) Lack specific statutory authorization;
(10) Undermine labor-management relations;
(11) Result in large-scale unfunded mandates on
employers without due cause;
(12) Impose undue paperwork and cost burdens on small
businesses; or
(13) Prevent the United States from becoming less
independent on foreign energy sources.
The resolution requires the Committee to identify any
oversight and legislative activity in support of, or as a
result of, such inventory and review. During the First Session
of the 112th Congress, the following hearings were held in
compliance with the resolution:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title & Subcommittee Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-1............... Promoting Economic Recovery January 26, 2011
and Job Creation: The Road
Forward (Full Committee).
112-3............... Can Monetary Policy Really February 9, 2011
Create Jobs? (Domestic
Monetary Policy).
112-5............... Assessing the Regulatory, February 15, 2011
Economic and Market
Implications of the Dodd-
Frank Derivatives Title
(Full Committee).
112-7............... Are There Government February 16, 2011
Barriers to the Housing
Market Recovery? (Housing).
112-8............... Understanding the Federal February 17, 2011
Reserve's Proposed Rule on
Interchange Fees:
Implications and
Consequences of the Durbin
Amendment (Financial
Institutions).
112-12.............. The Effect of Dodd-Frank on March 2, 2011
Small Financial
Institutions and Small
Businesses (Financial
Institutions).
112-14.............. Oversight of the Securities March 10, 2011
and Exchange Commission's
Operations, Activities,
Challenges, and FY 2012
Budget Request (Capital
Markets).
112-18.............. Oversight of the Consumer March 16, 2011
Financial Protection
Bureau (Financial
Institutions).
112-19.............. Legislative Proposals to March 16, 2011
Promote Job Creation,
Capital Formation, and
Market Certainty (Capital
Markets).
112-21.............. The Costs of Implementing March 30, 2011
the Dodd-Frank Act:
Budgetary and Economic
(Oversight).
112-24.............. Legislative Proposals to April 6, 2011
Improve the Structure of
the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau
(Financial Institutions).
112-26.............. Oversight of the Financial April 14, 2011
Stability Oversight
Council (Oversight).
112-27.............. Understanding the April 14, 2011
Implications and
Consequences of the
Proposed Rule on Risk
Retention (Capital
Markets).
112-29.............. Legislative Proposals to May 11, 2011
Address the Negative
Consequences of the Dodd-
Frank Whistleblower
Provisions (Capital
Markets).
112-36.............. Oversight of HUD's HOME June 3, 2011
Program (Full Committee).
112-37.............. Does the Dodd-Frank Act End June 14, 2011
`Too Big to Fail?'
(Financial Institutions).
112-39.............. Financial Regulatory June 16, 2011
Reform: The International
Context (Full Committee).
112-42.............. Oversight of the Mutual June 24, 2011
Fund Industry: Ensuring
Market Stability and
Investor Confidence
(Capital Markets).
112-44.............. Joint Hearing entitled July 7, 2011
``Mortgage Servicing: An
Examination of the Role of
Federal Regulators in
Settlement Negotiations
and the Future of Mortgage
Servicing Standards''
(Financial Institutions/
Oversight).
112-45.............. Legislative Proposals July 8, 2011
Regarding Bank Examination
Practices (Financial
Institutions).
Mortgage Origination: The July 13, 2011
Impact of Recent Changes
on Homeowners and
Businesses (Housing).
112-48.............. Oversight of the Office of July 14, 2011
Financial Research and the
Financial Stability
Oversight Council
(Oversight).
112-51.............. Oversight of the Credit July 27, 2011
Rating Agencies Post Dodd-
Frank (Oversight).
112-53.............. Insurance Oversight: Policy July 28, 2011
Implications for U.S.
Consumers, Businesses and
Jobs (Housing).
112-54.............. Field hearing entitled August 16, 2011
``Potential Mixed
Messages: Is Guidance from
Washington Being
Implemented by Federal
Bank Examiners?''
(Financial Institutions).
112-55.............. Field hearing entitled September 6, 2011
``Combating Terror Post-9/
11: Oversight of the
Office of Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence''
(Oversight).
112-62.............. Fixing the Watchdog: September 15, 2011
Legislative Proposals to
Improve and Enhance the
Securities and Exchange
Commission (Full
Committee).
112-63.............. Legislative Proposals to September 21, 2011
Facilitate Small Business
Capital Formation and Job
Creation (Capital Markets).
112-66.............. Joint Hearing with the September 22, 2011
Subcommittee on TARP,
Financial Services and
Bailouts of Public and
Private Programs of the
Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform entitled
``Potential Conflicts of
Interest at the SEC: The
Becker Case'' (Oversight).
112-65.............. An Examination of the September 22, 2011
Availability of Credit for
Consumers (Financial
Institutions).
112-69.............. The Obama Administration's October 6, 2011
Response to the Housing
Crisis (Housing).
112-71.............. Oversight of the Federal October 12, 2011
Home Loan Bank System
(Oversight).
112-72.............. H.R. 1418: The Small October 12, 2011
Business Lending
Enhancement Act of 2011
(Financial Institutions).
112-75.............. Legislative Proposals to October 14, 2011
Bring Certainty to the
Over-the-Counter
Derivatives Market
(Capital Markets).
112-77.............. Insurance Oversight: Policy October 25, 2011
Implications for U.S.
Consumers, Businesses and
Jobs, Part 2 (Housing).
112-78.............. Proposed Regulations to October 27, 2011
Require Reporting of
Nonresident Alien Deposit
Interest Income (Financial
Institutions).
112-79.............. Field Hearing entitled October 31, 2011
``Regulatory Reform:
Examining How New
Regulations Are Impacting
Financial Institutions,
Small Businesses and
Consumers'' (Financial
Institutions).
112-81.............. Joint Hearing entitled November 2, 2011
``Fraud in the HUD HOME
Program'' (Oversight/
Housing).
112-80.............. The Consumer Financial November 2, 2011
Protection Bureau: The
First 100 Days (Financial
Institutions).
112-85.............. Joint Hearing entitled November 16, 2011
``H.R. 1697, The
Communities First Act''
(Capital Markets/Financial
Institutions).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following letters sent from the Committee during the
First Session of the 112th Congress comply with this
Resolution:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Correspondence Subject Matter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 25, 2011.............. From Chairman Spencer Request for an
Bachus to The extension for
Honorable Mary public comment
Schapiro, Chairman, for the
Securities Exchange proposed rule
Commission. under section
1502 of the
Dodd-Frank Act
February 10, 2011............. From Chairman Spencer Qualified
Bachus to The Residential
Honorable Shaun Mortgage aspect
Donovan, Secretary, of the risk
U.S. Department of retention rule
Housing and Urban in section 941
Development; The of the Dodd-
Honorable Sheila Frank Act
Bair, Chairman,
Federal Deposit
Insurance
Corporation; The
Honorable Ben
Bernanke, Chairman,
Federal Reserve
Board; The Honorable
Mary Schapiro,
Chairman, Securities
Exchange Commission;
Mr. Edward DeMarco,
Acting Director,
Federal Housing
Finance Agency; and
Mr. John Walsh,
Acting Comptroller,
Office of the
Comptroller of the
Currency.
February 23, 2011............. From Chairman Spencer SEC proposed
Bachus to The rule on
Honorable Mary municipal
Schapiro, Chairman, advisors under
Securities Exchange Dodd-Frank Act
Commission (SEC). section 975
March 4, 2011................. From Chairman Spencer The implication
Bachus and of section 1504
Subcommittee on of the Dodd-
International Frank Act on
Monetary Policy and U.S.-listed
Trade Chairman Gary companies
G. Miller to The
Honorable Mary
Schapiro, Chairman,
Securities Exchange
Commission.
March 9, 2011................. From Chairman Spencer Volume and pace
Bachus and Republican of rulemakings
Members of the under the Dodd-
Committee to The Frank Act
Honorable Timothy
Geithner, Secretary,
U.S. Department of
Treasury; The
Honorable Ben
Bernanke, Chairman,
Federal Reserve
Board; The Honorable
Gary Gensler,
Chairman, Commodity
Futures Trading
Commission; The
Honorable Mary
Schapiro, Chairman,
Securities Exchange
Commission; The
Honorable Sheila
Bair, Chairman,
Federal Deposit
Insurance
Corporation; and Mr.
John Walsh, Acting
Comptroller, Office
of the Comptroller of
the Currency.
March 15, 2011................ From Chairman Spencer SEC, CFTC, and
Bachus, Committee on Department of
Education and the Labor
Workforce Chairman rulemaking
John Kline, and under the Dodd-
Committee on Frank Act
Agriculture Chairman
Frank Lucas to The
Honorable Hilda
Solis, Secretary,
U.S. Department of
Labor; The Honorable
Mary Schapiro,
Chairman, Securities
Exchange Commission;
and The Honorable
Gary Gensler,
Chairman, U.S.
Commodity Futures
Trading Commission
(CFTC).
March 15, 2011................ From Chairman Spencer Study prepared
Bachus and under section
Subcommittee on 619 of the Dodd-
Oversight and Frank Act
Investigations
Chairman Randy
Neugebauer to members
of the Financial
Stability Oversight
Council in the care
of The Honorable
Timothy Geithner,
Secretary, U.S.
Department of
Treasury.
March 17, 2011................ From Republican SEC staff study
Members of the on regulations
Subcommittee on for broker-
Capital Markets and dealers and
Government Sponsored investment
Enterprises to The advisors
Honorable Mary
Schapiro, Chairman,
Securities Exchange
Commission.
May 4, 2011................... From Subcommittee on Request for
Oversight and further notice,
Investigations comment, and
Chairman Randy description for
Neugebauer and the ``Authority
Subcommittee on to Require
Oversight and Supervision and
Investigations Regulation of
Ranking Member Certain Nonbank
Michael Capuano to Financial
members of the Companies''
Financial Stability rule
Oversight Council.
May 6, 2011................... From Subcommittee on Consumer
Oversight and Financial
Investigations Protection
Chairman Randy Bureau's
Neugebauer, involvement in
Subcommittee on the mortgage
Financial servicing
Institutions and settlement
Consumer Credit negotiations
Chairman Shelley
Moore Capito,
Subcommittee on
Capital Markets and
Government Sponsored
Enterprises Chairman
Scott Garrett, and
Representative
Patrick McHenry to
The Honorable Timothy
Geithner, Secretary,
U.S. Department of
the Treasury.
May 27, 2011.................. From Chairman Spencer The implication
Bachus and of proposed
Subcommittee on interim rule
Capital Markets and under section
Government Sponsored 982 of the Dodd-
Enterprises Chairman Frank Act to
Scott Garrett to Mr. the auditors of
James Doty, Chairman, introducing
Public Company broker-dealers
Accounting Oversight
Board.
June 6, 2011.................. From Subcommittee on Expressing the
Oversight and need for
Investigations assurances from
Chairman Randy HUD that every
Neugebauer and dollar spent on
Subcommittee on the HOME
Insurance, Housing Investment
and Community Partnership
Opportunity Chairman Initiative
Judy Biggert to program goes to
Assistant Secretary fulfill the
of the Office of program's
Community Planning mission to
and Development for provide
the Department of affordable
Housing and Urban housing to low-
Development Mercedes income
Marquez. families.
June 20, 2011................. From Chairman Spencer Request for
Bachus, Subcommittee specific
on Financial documents and
Institutions and records related
Consumer Credit to the Consumer
Chairman Shelley Financial
Moore Capito, Protection
Subcommittee on Bureau's
Capital Markets and involvement in
Government Sponsored mortgage
Enterprises Chairman servicing
Scott Garrett, settlement
Subcommittee on negotiations.
Oversight and
Investigations
Chairman Randy
Neugebauer,
Representative
Patrick McHenry and
Representative
Darrell Issa to
Secretary of the
Department of the
Treasury Timothy
Geithner.
June 22, 2011................. From Chairman Spencer Request for a
Bachus and General
Subcommittee on Accountability
Oversight and Office audit of
Investigations the Financial
Chairman Randy Stability
Neugebauer to the Oversight
Comptroller General Council.
of the Government
Accountability Office
Gene Dodaro.
June 24, 2011................. From Subcommittee on Public
Oversight and statements made
Investigations by members of
Chairman Randy the Financial
Neugebauer and Stability
Subcommittee on Oversight
Oversight and Council
Investigations regarding plans
Ranking Member to seek public
Michael Capuano to comment on
Secretary of the additional
Department of the guidance
Treasury Timothy designating non-
Geithner. bank financial
companies for
enhanced
supervision and
regulation by
the Federal
Reserve.
July 1, 2011.................. From Subcommittee on Expressing
Oversight and concern for the
Investigations Treasury
Chairman Randy Department's
Neugebauer to influence on
Secretary of the OCC
Department of the rulemakings.
Treasury Timothy
Geithner.
July 14, 2011................. From Chairman Spencer The Federal
Bachus to Federal Trade
Trade Commission Commission's
Chairman Jon enforcement of
Leibowitz. the Credit
Repair
Organizations
Act (CROA) and
the risks that
implementation
could pose in
putting
legitimate
credit repair
organizations
out of
business.
July 28, 2011................. Chairman Spencer Request for a
Bachus, along with phased
Subcommittee on implementation
International of regulations
Monetary Policy and concerning
Trade Chairman Gary Section 1502 of
Miller, Subcommittee the Dodd-Frank
on International Act
Monetary Policy and
Trade Vice Chairman
Robert Dold, and
Representative Steve
Stivers to Securities
and Exchange
Commission Chairman
Mary Schapiro.
July 28, 2011................. Chairman Spencer Request for
Bachus, Vice Chairman information on
Jeb Hensarling, the SEC-staff
Subcommittee on labor hours and
Capital Markets and amount spent
Government Sponsored associated with
Enterprises Chairman the labor
Scott Garrett, dedicated to
Subcommittee on the proxy
Oversight and access
Investigations rulemaking
Chairman Randy process, the
Neugebauer to final
Securities and promulgation of
Exchange Commission the rule, the
Chairman Mary litigation of
Schapiro. the rule, and
total fund
spent on
outside counsel
related.
August 2, 2011................ Chairman Spencer A provision
Bachus and issued by their
Subcommittee on agencies
Capital Markets and requiring
Government Sponsored securitizers to
Enterprises Chairman set aside the
Scott Garrett to premium from
Secretary of the U.S. sales of
Department of Housing securities in
and Urban ``premium
Development, the capture cash
Chairman of the reserves,'' and
Federal Reserve, the prevent
Acting Director of securitizers
the FHFA, the Acting from collecting
Chairman of the FDIC, a profit until
the Chairman of the up to ten years
SEC, and the Acting later when the
Comptroller of the security
Currency. matures.
August 2, 2011................ Chairman Spencer The SEC's
Bachus to SEC rulemaking
Chairman Mary authority under
Schapiro. Section 913 of
the Dodd-Frank
Act
August 12, 2011............... Chairman Spencer The SEC's
Bachus, Subcommittee discussion to
on Capital Markets require money
and Government market mutual
Sponsored Enterprises funds to have
Chairman Scott floating net
Garrett and asset values
Republican Members of
the Committee to SEC
Chairman Mary
Schapiro.
August 31, 2011............... From Chairman Spencer The Federal
Bachus to the Federal Reserve's
Reserve Chairman Ben decision to
Bernanke. extend the
comment period
for Capital One
Financial
Corporation's
acquisition of
ING Direct.
September 8, 2011............. From Chairman Spencer Financial
Bachus and Republican Stability
Members of the Oversight
Committee to the Council's
Secretary of the efforts to
Department of eliminate
Treasury Timothy unnecessary or
Geithner. duplicative
regulatory
burdens on the
financial
system.
September 14, 2011............ From Subcommittee on Requesting that
Insurance, Housing HUD provide
and Community address
Opportunity Chairman information for
Judy Biggert and both single-
Subcommittee on family projects
Oversight and and multi-
Investigations family projects
Chairman Randy funded with
Neugebauer to HOME Investment
Assistant Secretary Partnership
for Congressional and Program funds
Intergovernmental in order to
Relations at the U.S. ensure that HUD
Department of Housing is keeping an
and Urban Development accurate
Peter Kovar. database of
past and
current
development
projects
October 13, 2011.............. From Subcommittee on Expressing
Oversight and concerns about
Investigations expenditures
Chairman Randy that Freddie
Neugebauer to Acting and Fannie made
Director of the in connection
Federal Housing with the
Finance Agency Edward Mortgage
DeMarco. Bankers
Association
Conference that
had no relation
to furthering
the actual
purposes of the
conservatorship
.
October 21, 2011.............. From Oversight and Expressing
Investigations concern that
Subcommittee Chairman Fannie Mae and
Randy Neugebauer to Freddie Mac
Acting Director of could incur
the Federal Housing substantial
Finance Agency Edward costs in
DeMarco. connection with
implementing
President
Obama's
refinancing
plan entitled
``The American
Jobs Act.''
October 26, 2011.............. From Chairman Spencer The CFPB's
Bachus to Special position on
Advisor to the implementing
Secretary of the Regulation E.
Treasury, Consumer
Financial Protection
Bureau Raj Date.
November 7, 2011.............. From Chairman Spencer Opposition to
Bachus, Vice Chairman conference
Jeb Hensarling, report language
Subcommittee on to increase the
Insurance, Housing loan limits for
and Community mortgages
Opportunity Chairman insured by the
Judy Biggert, federal
Subcommittee on government
Financial through the
Institutions and Federal Housing
Consumer Credit Administration
Chairman Shelley (FHA) or
Moore Capito, guaranteed by
Subcommittee on the government
Capital Markets and sponsored
Government Sponsored enterprises
Enterprises Chairman (GSEs), Fannie
Scott Garrett, Mae and Freddie
Subcommittee on Mac
Oversight and
Investigations
Chairman Randy
Neugebauer, and
Subcommittee on
Domestic Monetary
Policy and Trade
Chairman Ron Paul to
the Honorable Hal
Rogers, the Honorable
C. W. Bill Young, the
Honorable Jack
Kingston, the
Honorable Robert
Aderholt, the
Honorable John Abney
Culberson, the
Honorable Steven C.
LaTourette, the
Honorable Jerry
Lewis, the Honorable
Frank R. Wolf, the
Honorable Tom Latham,
the Honorable Jo Ann
Emerson, and the
Honorable John R.
Carter, conferees
appointed to the
conference committee
for H.R. 2112, the
Consolidated and
Further Continuing
Appropriations Act.
November 9, 2011.............. From Oversight and Requesting a
Investigations detailed
Subcommittee Chairman account of how
Randy Neugebauer to the Office of
Counsel to the Financial
Secretary at the Research spent
Department of the the $20.5
Treasury Richard million that
Berner. had been
transferred to
it from the
operating
revenues of the
Federal
Reserve.
November 15, 2011............. From Oversight and Requesting
Investigations supplemental
Subcommittee Chairman documents
Randy Neugebauer to pertaining to
Secretary of the the HOME
Department of Housing Investment
and Urban Development Partnership
Shaun Donovan. Initiative
Program
administered by
HUD.
November 18, 2011............. From Oversight and Requesting
Investigations information on
Subcommittee Chairman Freddie Mac's
Randy Neugebauer to yearly
Acting Director of operating
the Federal Housing expenses and
Finance Agency Edward questioning
DeMarco. whether those
expenses
furthered the
purpose of
conservatorship
.
November 18, 2011............. From Oversight and Enterprise core
Investigations activities,
Subcommittee Chairman strategic
Randy Neugebauer to planning,
Acting Director of decision
the Federal Housing making,
Finance Agency Edward staffing, loan
DeMarco. level data and
G-fees, and on
FHFA operations
generally.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX I--COMMITTEE LEGISLATION
Part A--Committee Reports
REPORTS FILED BY THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES WITH THE HOUSE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill No. H. Rept. No. Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 830....................... 112-25............ FHA Refinance
Program
Termination Act
H.R. 836....................... 112-26............ Emergency Mortgage
Relief Program
Termination Act
H.R. 839....................... 112-31............ The HAMP
Termination Act of
2011
112-31, Part II... The HAMP
Termination Act of
2011
H.R. 861....................... 112-32............ NSP Termination Act
112-32, Part II... NSP Termination Act
H.R. 1315...................... 112-89............ Consumer Financial
Protection Safety
and Soundness
Improvement Act of
2011
H.R. 1315...................... 112-089, Part 2... Consumer Financial
Protection Safety
and Soundness
Improvement Act of
2011
H.R. 1667...................... 112-93............ Bureau of Consumer
Financial
Protection
Transfer
Clarification Act
H.R. 1667...................... 112-093, Part 2... Bureau of Consumer
Financial
Protection
Transfer
Clarification Act
H.R. 1309...................... 112-102........... Flood Insurance
Reform Act of 2011
H.R. 1121...................... 112-107........... Responsible
Consumer Financial
Protection
Regulations Act of
2011
H.R. 1121...................... 112-107, Part 2... Responsible
Consumer Financial
Protection
Regulations Act of
2011
H.R. 1573...................... 112-109, Part 1... To facilitate
implementation of
Title VII of The
Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and
Consumer Financial
Protection Act,
promote regulatory
coordination, and
avoid market
disruption.
112-121........... Of the Committee on
Financial Services
of the House of
Representatives
during the One
Hundred Twelfth
Congress pursuant
to Clause 1(D)
Rule XI of the
Rules of the House
of
Representatives.
H.R. 33........................ 112-131........... Church Plan
Investment
Clarification Act
H.R. 1062...................... 112-142........... Burdensome Data
Collection Relief
Act
H.R. 1082...................... 112-143........... Small Business
Capital Access and
Job Preservation
Act
H.R. 2056...................... 112-182........... To instruct the
Inspector General
of the Federal
Deposit Insurance
Corporation to
study the impact
of the insured
depository
institution
failures, and for
other purposes.
H.R. 1751...................... 112-191........... CJ's Home
Protection Act of
2011
H.R. 1539...................... 112-196........... Asset-Backed Market
Stabilization Act
of 2011
H.R. 2072...................... 112-201........... Securing Jobs
through Exports
Act of 2011
H.R. 1070...................... 112-206........... Small Company
Capital Formation
Act of 2011
H.R. 2930...................... 112-262........... Entrepreneur Access
to Capital Act
H.R. 2940...................... 112-263........... Access to Capital
for Job Creators
Act
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part B--Public Laws
This table lists measures which contained matters within
the jurisdiction of the Committee on Financial Services which
were enacted into law during the First Session of the 112th
Congress.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Law No. Bill No. Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-059....................... H.R. 2447........ To grant the
Congressional Gold
Medal to the
Montford Point
Marines.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX II--COMMITTEE PUBLICATIONS
Part A--Committee Hearings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title & Subcommittee Date(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-1............... Promoting Economic Recovery January 26, 2011
and Job Creation: The Road
Forward (Full Committee).
112-2............... GSE Reform: Immediate Steps February 9, 2011
to Protect Taxpayers and
End the Bailout (Capital
Markets).
112-3............... Can Monetary Policy Really February 9, 2011
Create Jobs? (Domestic
Monetary Policy).
112-4............... An Analysis of the Post- February 15, 2011
Conservatorship Legal
Expenses of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac (Oversight).
112-5............... Assessing the Regulatory, February 15, 2011
Economic and Market
Implications of the Dodd-
Frank Derivatives Title
(Full Committee).
112-6............... The Final Report of the February 16, 2011
Financial Crisis Inquiry
Commission (Full
Committee).
112-7............... Are There Government February 16, 2011
Barriers to the Housing
Market Recovery? (Housing).
112-8............... Understanding the Federal February 17, 2011
Reserve's Proposed Rule on
Interchange Fees:
Implications and
Consequences of the Durbin
Amendment (Financial
Institutions).
112-9............... Mortgage Finance Reform: An March 1, 2011
Examination of the Obama
Administration's Report to
Congress (Full Committee).
112-10.............. Oversight of the Department March 1, 2011
of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) (Full
Committee).
112-11.............. Monetary Policy and the March 2, 2011
State of the Economy (Full
Committee).
112-12.............. The Effect of Dodd-Frank on March 2, 2011
Small Financial
Institutions and Small
Businesses (Financial
Institutions).
112-13.............. Legislative Proposals to March 2, 2011
End Taxpayer Funding for
Ineffective Foreclosure
Mitigation Programs
(Housing).
112-14.............. Oversight of the Securities March 10, 2011
and Exchange Commission's
Operations, Activities,
Challenges, and FY 2012
Budget Request (Capital
Markets).
112-15.............. The Role of the Export- March 10, 2011
Import Bank in U.S.
Competitiveness and Job
Creation (International
Monetary Policy).
112-16.............. Legislative Proposals to March 11, 2011
Reform the National Flood
Insurance Program, Part I
(Housing).
112-17.............. Legislative Proposals to March 11, 2011
Create a Covered Bond
Market in the United
States (Capital Markets).
112-18.............. Oversight of the Consumer March 16, 2011
Financial Protection
Bureau (Financial
Institutions).
112-19.............. Legislative Proposals to March 16, 2011
Promote Job Creation,
Capital Formation, and
Market Certainty (Capital
Markets).
112-20.............. The Relationship of March 17, 2011
Monetary Policy and Rising
Prices (Domestic Monetary
Policy).
112-21.............. The Costs of Implementing March 30, 2011
the Dodd-Frank Act:
Budgetary and Economic
(Oversight).
112-22.............. Legislative Hearing on March 31, 2011
Immediate Steps to Protect
Taxpayers from the Ongoing
Bailout of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac (Capital
Markets).
112-23.............. Legislative Proposals to April 1, 2011
Reform the National Flood
Insurance Program, Part II
(Housing).
112-24.............. Legislative Proposals to April 6, 2011
Improve the Structure of
the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau
(Financial Institutions).
112-25.............. Bullion Coin Programs of April 7, 2011
the United States Mint:
Can They Be Improved?
(Domestic Monetary Policy).
112-26.............. Oversight of the Financial April 14, 2011
Stability Oversight
Council (Oversight).
112-27.............. Understanding the April 14, 2011
Implications and
Consequences of the
Proposed Rule on Risk
Retention (Capital
Markets).
112-28.............. Monetary Policy and the May 11, 2011
Debt Ceiling: Examining
the Relationship Between
the Federal Reserve and
Government Debt (Domestic
Monetary Policy).
112-29.............. Legislative Proposals to May 11, 2011
Address the Negative
Consequences of the Dodd-
Frank Whistleblower
Provisions (Capital
Markets).
112-30.............. The Stanford Ponzi Scheme: May 13, 2011
Lessons for Protecting
Investors from the Next
Securities Fraud
(Oversight).
112-31.............. Legislative Proposals on May 24, 2011
Securing American Jobs
Through Exports: Export-
Import Bank
Reauthorization
(International Monetary
Policy).
112-32.............. Legislative Proposals to May 25, 2011
Determine the Future Role
of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-
Family Mortgage Markets
(Housing).
112-33.............. Transparency, Transition May 25, 2011
and Taxpayer Protection:
More Steps to End the GSE
Bailout (Capital Markets).
112-34.............. FDIC Oversight: Examining May 26, 2011
and Evaluating the Role of
the Regulator During the
Financial Crisis and Today
(Financial Institutions).
112-35.............. Federal Reserve Lending June 1, 2011
Disclosure: FOIA, Dodd-
Frank, and the Data Dump
(Domestic Monetary Policy).
112-36.............. Oversight of HUD's HOME June 3, 2011
Program (Full Committee).
112-37.............. Does the Dodd Frank Act End June 14, 2011
``Too Big to Fail''?
(Financial Institutions).
112-38.............. The Role of the U.S. in the June 14, 2011
World Bank and
Multilateral Development
Banks: Bank Oversight and
Requested Capital
Increases (International
Monetary Policy).
112-39.............. Financial Regulatory June 16, 2011
Reform: The International
Context (Full Committee).
112-40.............. Legislative Proposals to June 23, 2011
Reform the Housing Choice
Voucher Program (Housing).
112-41.............. Investigating the Gold: June 23, 2011
H.R. 1495, the Gold
Reserve Transparency Act
of 2011 and the Oversight
of United States Gold
Holdings (Domestic
Monetary Policy).
112-42.............. Oversight of the Mutual June 24, 2011
Fund Industry: Ensuring
Market Stability and
Investor Confidence
(Capital Markets).
112-43.............. Field Hearing entitled June 29, 2011
``Hacked Off: Helping Law
Enforcement Protect
Private Financial
Information'' (Full
Committee).
112-44.............. Joint Hearing entitled July 7, 2011
``Mortgage Servicing: An
Examination of the Role of
Federal Regulators in
Settlement Negotiations
and the Future of Mortgage
Servicing Standards''
(Financial Institutions/
Oversight).
112-45.............. Legislative Proposals July 8, 2011
Regarding Bank Examination
Practices (Financial
Institutions).
112-46.............. Monetary Policy and the July 13, 2011
State of the Economy (Full
Committee).
112-47.............. Mortgage Origination: The July 13, 2011
Impact of Recent Changes
on Homeowners and
Businesses (Housing).
112-48.............. Oversight of the Office of July 14, 2011
Financial Research and the
Financial Stability
Oversight Council
(Oversight).
112-49.............. Examining Rental Purchase July 26, 2011
Agreements and the
Potential Role for Federal
Regulation (Financial
Institutions).
112-50.............. Impact of Monetary Policy July 26, 2011
on the Economy: A Regional
Fed Perspective on
Inflation, Unemployment,
and QE3 (Domestic Monetary
Policy).
112-51.............. Oversight of the Credit July 27, 2011
Rating Agencies Post Dodd-
Frank (Oversight).
112-52.............. The Impact of the World July 27, 2011
Bank and Multilateral
Development Banks on U.S.
Job Creation
(International Monetary
Policy).
112-53.............. Insurance Oversight: Policy July 28, 2011
Implications for U.S.
Consumers, Businesses and
Jobs (Housing).
112-54.............. Potential Mixed Messages: August 16, 2011
Is Guidance from
Washington Being
Implemented by Federal
Bank Examiners? (Financial
Institutions).
112-55.............. Field hearing entitled September 6, 2011
``Combating Terror Post-9/
11: Oversight of the
Office of Terrorism and
Financial Intelligence''
(Oversight).
112-56.............. Field hearing entitled September 7, 2011
``Facilitating Continued
Investor Demand in the
U.S. Mortgage Market
Without a Government
Guarantee'' (Capital
Markets).
112-57.............. Legislative Proposals to September 8, 2011
Determine the Future Role
of FHA, RHS and GNMA in
the Single- and Multi-
Family Mortgage Markets,
Part 2 (Housing).
112-58.............. Ensuring Appropriate September 13, 2011
Regulatory Oversight of
Broker-Dealers and
Legislative Proposals to
Improve Investment Adviser
Oversight (Capital
Markets).
112-59.............. Road Map to Sound Money: A September 13, 2011
Legislative Hearing on
H.R. 1098 and Restoring
the Dollar (Domestic
Monetary Policy).
112-60.............. Cybersecurity: Threats to September 14, 2011
the Financial Sector
(Financial Institutions).
112-61.............. HUD and NeighborWorks September 14, 2011
Housing Counseling
Oversight (Housing).
112-62.............. Fixing the Watchdog: September 15, 2011
Legislative Proposals to
Improve and Enhance the
Securities and Exchange
Commission (Full
Committee).
112-63.............. Legislative Proposals to September 21, 2011
Facilitate Small Business
Capital Formation and Job
Creation (Capital Markets).
112-64.............. The Impact of the World September 21, 2011
Bank and Multilateral
Development Banks on
National Security
(International Monetary
Policy).
112-65.............. An Examination of the September 22, 2011
Availability of Credit for
Consumers (Financial
Institutions).
112-66.............. Joint Hearing with the September 22, 2011
Subcommittee on TARP,
Financial Services and
Bailouts of Public and
Private Programs of the
Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform entitled
``Potential Conflicts of
Interest at the SEC: The
Becker Case'' (Oversight).
112-67.............. Audit the Fed: Dodd-Frank, October 4, 2011
QE3, and Federal Reserve
Transparency (Domestic
Monetary Policy).
112-68.............. The World Bank and October 4, 2011
Multilateral Development
Banks' Authorization
(International Monetary
Policy).
112-69.............. The Obama Administration's October 6, 2011
Response to the Housing
Crisis (Housing).
112-70.............. The Annual Report of the October 6, 2011
Financial Stability
Oversight Council (Full
Committee).
112-71.............. Oversight of the Federal October 12, 2011
Home Loan Bank System
(Oversight).
112-72.............. H.R. 1418: The Small October 12, 2011
Business Lending
Enhancement Act of 2011
(Financial Institutions).
112-73.............. The U.S. Housing Finance October 13, 2011
System in the Global
Context: Structure,
Capital Sources, and
Housing Dynamics
(International Monetary
Policy).
112-74.............. The Section 8 Savings Act October 13, 2011
of 2011: Proposals to
Promote Economic
Independence for Assisted
Families (Housing).
112-75.............. Legislative Proposals to October 14, 2011
Bring Certainty to the
Over-the-Counter
Derivatives Market
(Capital Markets).
112-76.............. The Eurozone Crisis and October 25, 2011
Implications for the
United States
(International Monetary
Policy and Trade).
112-77.............. Insurance Oversight: Policy October 25, 2011
Implications for U.S.
Consumers, Businesses and
Jobs, Part 2 (Housing).
112-78.............. Proposed Regulations to October 27, 2011
Require Reporting of
Nonresident Alien Deposit
Interest Income (Financial
Institutions).
112-79.............. Field Hearing entitled October 31, 2011
``Regulatory Reform:
Examining How New
Regulations are Impacting
Financial Institutions,
Small Businesses and
Consumers'' (Financial
Institutions).
112-80.............. The Consumer Financial November 2, 2011
Protection Bureau: The
First 100 Days (Financial
Institutions).
112-81.............. Joint Hearing entitled November 2, 2011
``Fraud in the HUD HOME
Program'' (Oversight/
Housing).
112-82.............. H.R. ___, the Private November 3, 2011
Mortgage Market Investment
Act (Capital Markets).
112-83.............. The Obama Administration's November 3, 2011
Rental Assistance
Demonstration Proposal
(Housing).
112-84.............. Insurance Oversight and November 16, 2011
Legislative Proposals
(Housing).
112-85.............. Joint Hearing entitled November 16, 2011
``H.R. 1697, The
Communities First Act''
(Capital Markets/Financial
Institutions).
112-86.............. Field hearing entitled November 29, 2011
``The State of
Manufactured Housing''
(Housing).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part B--Committee Prints
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No. Title Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
112-A................. Rules for the Committee on March 2011
Financial Services for
the 112th Congress.
------------------------------------------------------------------------