Al Green

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I missed the following votes: 1. H.R. 374, To remove the sunset provision of section 203 of Public Law 105-384, and for other purposes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. 2. H.R. 538, Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act of 2017, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. personal explanation

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, this amendment would exclude from this bill regulations that would promote financial stability and prevent or reduce systemic risk. I have indicated previously that we are concerned about the bill's unintended consequence--I don't think that my colleagues are doing this with malice aforethought--the unintended consequence of stagnating the SEC to the point that it cannot produce regulations that will prevent fraud. Nowhere in the bill does it exempt regulation that will prevent fraud. I believe that this will help us because the bill needs to allow the SEC the ability to move at the speed of innovation. These products are coming on the market. The best way for the SEC to be able to react to them efficaciously would be for the SEC to have rulemaking authority at the same speed of the innovation. I hope that we won't allow the SEC to be bogged down with a cost- benefit analysis that is impossible to produce and that, when produced, will produce litigation. Again, I think this is a reasoned, thoughtful amendment. I trust that it will be adopted. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me say this in my 1 minute. It appears that the other side believes that nothing is better because that is what this bill would cause the SEC to produce--nothing. It would stagnate the SEC. It would place the SEC in litigation. It would literally decimate the SEC because you cannot quantify bills or regulations that will prevent fraud. You can't quantify it. I have given you the example. I know the public is listening. You need to weigh in on this, members of the public, because this is not about mom-and-pops. It is about megacorporations. This piece of legislation that Ms. Waters offers at least will deal with conflicts of interest beyond the person who happens to work with the SEC, which is what has been addressed. It will deal with conflicts of interest as they relate to the businesses that they will go to or the businesses that they have left. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, in closing, let me simply say this: People who are viewing this at home should become very much concerned about the direction that we are headed in. This is a new Congress and here we are currently trying to emasculate the SEC by putting it in a position such that it cannot produce rules to protecting investors; by requiring it to know the unknowable; to know that a rule that you are putting in place to prevent fraud has a quantifiable dollar amount that you can produce so that you can measure that against the cost of producing the rule. Mr. Chairman, this amendment that I propose would benefit the SEC and investors. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I reclaim my time. There is no way for anyone to have known what Bernie Madoff was going to do. It was not knowable. You are imposing a mission impossible upon the SEC. There is a real question that has to be answered today, Mr. Chair, or at some point in the future: Does Congress regulate Wall Street or does Wall Street regulate Congress? Now, this is a serious question because that is what this kind of regulation gives us the image of being a part of. Wall Street wants this. This benefits Wall Street. It doesn't benefit mom and pops. It doesn't benefit Main Street. It benefits megacorporations. And you can couch the language in any clever way that you want. In the final analysis, this is all about megacorporations being able to do things that would prevent--that would not be in the best interest of investors. Investors who are listening to this. You ought to be concerned. This impacts you. If this legislation passes, your opportunity to participate in Wall Street with regulations that are going to prevent fraud from being perpetrated upon you--similar to what Madoff perpetrated--will not be possible. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, it does have to do--you are trying to divert us from the actual problem, which is regulations that can prevent fraud. How do you propose to quantify in dollars and cents regulations that will prevent fraud when the fraud that can be perpetrated is not knowable? I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Reclaiming my time, there is no way for anyone to have known.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would remind my friend across the aisle that the Volcker rule does deal with systemic risk. I would remind him that the SEC does play a role in regulating systemic risk. Having said that, let's just talk again. And I would engage in a colloquy with you and use my time. Explain to me how you would quantify a regulation designed to prevent fraud such as the fraud perpetrated by Madoff. How would you quantify it in dollars and cents? Because that is what you are all about, dollars and cents. How do you quantify that?

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk as the designee of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Maxine Waters).

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I think it appropriate to point out what the style of this bill is, what the words on the actual bill say. There seems to be some confusion with my colleagues on the other side as to whether or not this is a mom-and-pop bill. The bill itself says, ``A bill to improve the consideration by the Securities and Exchange Commission of the cost and benefits of its regulations and orders.'' The Securities and Exchange Commission deals with Wall Street, deals with megabusinesses. This is not about a mom-and-pop store. This is not about the small business in the neighborhood. This is about megabusinesses desiring to have access to markets without the regulations necessary to protect investors. This bill, if it passes, will place the SEC in a mission impossible position because it will be impossible for the SEC to do what it needs to do to promote regulations that will prevent fraud. Either litigation will stop them or they won't be able to define and quantify the benefits associated with regulation that can prevent fraud. A good example has been presented, but some things bear repeating. If we had produced regulations that would have prevented Bernie Madoff from robbing the country of $64 billion, we wouldn't have known it, we couldn't quantify it, because it wasn't knowable. This bill puts the SEC in a position of having to do that which is not knowable because it would prevent fraud. Now, having said this, the Waters amendment will at least allow us to curtail some of the conflicts of interest that can take place by persons who will come from some entity that works with persons on Wall Street or when they leave, go to an entity that works with Wall Street. Our regulators ought not be able to take their rules and regulations to companies and businesses that will impact Wall Street after they leave or impact their businesses once they are on Wall Street. This amendment that the Honorable Maxine Waters has presented would cause the SEC to identify, analyze, and address potential conflicts of interest in its proposed rules, and it would go on to make sure that persons who work for the SEC do not create conflicts of interest. We live in a world where it is not enough for things to be right; they must also look right. It doesn't look right for these Wall Street types, the persons from Goldman Sachs and related industries who will come to Wall Street, take jobs, and promote rules that benefit their former employers, nor does it look right for them to produce rules that will benefit employers that they will go to when they leave Wall Street. That is what this amendment will prevent. It is simple. It is not complicated, and it deals with conflicts of interest. I think this amendment ought to be supported. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I missed the following votes: H. Res. 40, Motion on Ordering the Previous Question on the Rule. Had I been present, I would have voted ``NO'' on this bill. H. Res. 40, Rule Providing for consideration of both H.R. 78--SEC Regulatory Accountability Act and H.R. 238--Commodity End-User Relief Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``NO'' on this bill. H.R. 39, TALENT Act of 2017. Had I been present, I would have voted ``YES'' on this bill.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is always an honor for me to stand here in the well of the House to know that I am one of less than 450 people in the world who have been accorded the preeminent privilege of standing in the well of the Congress of the United States of America. It is an honor to stand here at this podium with a rostrum behind me with the word ``Justice'' etched in it. Right behind me, ``Justice'' is etched into the rostrum. You can't see it at home because it is low, and it is beneath the view of the camera. Today, I want to talk about justice, Mr. Speaker. I want to talk about justice and the Justice Department. I do this, Mr. Speaker, because we have a President-elect who has said he will be a law and order President. I want to make a distinction between law and order and justice, and I want to attribute this to the Justice Department versus a law and order department. Mr. Speaker, you can have law and order in a dungeon, but you won't have justice. There is law and order in North Korea, but you don't have justice. Justice, Mr. Speaker, is what this Department is all about. It is not the law and order department. One of the best ways to explain it is to harken back to something that was called to our attention yesterday at the hearing for the nominee to become the head of the Justice Department. When the Honorable John Lewis spoke, he went back to 1965, and the crossing of the Edmund Pettus Bridge. On that day, George Wallace--one of the great segregationists of his time and, perhaps, the greatest segregationist of his time--had made it perspicuously clear to his troops that, if you maintain order, there will be law to protect you. As a result, those troops beat the marches all the way back to the church where they started. They were peaceful protesters. The Honorable John Lewis said he thought he might die. That is what law and order meant to a good many people in the South. Law and order without justice is what took place on that day; but thank God there was a judge, the Honorable Frank M. Johnson. The Honorable Frank M. Johnson issued the order to allow those marches to move from Selma to Montgomery, and he did it notwithstanding his classmate George Wallace having said that they were banned from doing it. This was justice, not law and order alone. This is our fear--that the Justice Department will go back to the hands of someone who may consider it a law and order department and a department in which there is a belief that you can do anything to maintain the order and that there will be law to support your actions and activities. Mr. Speaker, we must protect the notion of justice for all people in this country. This is why I was there yesterday to lend my support to Senator Booker when he spoke about justice and when he indicated that he could not support the nominee. I was honored to be there, seated right near the Honorable John Lewis when he said he could not support the nominee. I was also honored to be there with the head of the Congressional Black Caucus, Cedric Richmond, when he indicated: If this nominee is a civil rights advocate, why is the civil rights community so opposed to him? I think those were some very sage comments. I must tell you that we in this country have come too far to allow the Justice Department to become the law and order department.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, let's take a look at this size question because $50 billion was selected for a reason, and the reason is this: If you don't have a threshold, we knew at the time, as we know now, that you won't get any banks designated because the banks are going to sue, and they are going to tie you up in court. Well, maybe some will not, but you are going to have a real fight on your hands getting them to be designated, and it can take 2 to 4 years to get it done. Looking at the banks that are covered, only three of the banks covered are in the $50-billion range. The top 15 are over $100 billion, and the top bank is about a half trillion dollars. Again, only in Washington, D.C., would this kind of money--a half trillion dollars for one bank--be considered small change. We cannot allow the banks to dominate the process. We put the process in the hands of the banks when the regulators have to take them on one at a time. Finally, what is wrong with telling a bank, ``You have to tell us how to eliminate you if you become a systemic risk''? That is what Dodd- Frank does. This bill eliminates the ability of FSOC to determine and tell banks that they must give up.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Long-term capital had its demise in 1998. It was a canary in the coal mine. Bear Stearns followed, as well as IndyMac, Countrywide, and WaMu. They followed in 2008. We didn't have a system that allowed us to recognize these canaries in the coal mine and take affirmative action. This is what Dodd-Frank does. This is what FSOC does. And it would be a severe mistake to vote for legislation to repeal these bills. We are going to live to regret this vote. Those who vote to repeal will live to regret it.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I think it appropriate to reflect for just a moment on what the crisis was like in 2008. In 2008, when this crisis hit and it started to blossom, started to blow up, banks would not lend to each other. The crisis was so serious that banks would not bail each other out. We had a circumstance such that people were losing their homes. They were losing their homes because of these so-called exotic products that allowed them to buy homes that they could not afford, homes that would allow them to have a teaser rate that would coincide with a prepayment penalty such that they couldn't get out of the rate that was to follow, which was going to be higher than they can afford. Mr. Speaker, this bill, H.R. 6392, should be appropriately named the ``Systemic Risk Creation Act,'' because that is what it does. It creates the opportunity for systemic risk to exist, and it puts us back where we were before Dodd-Frank such that these various banks and lending institutions and other institutions of great amount of finance would be in a position to fail without our having the opportunity to immediately act upon them, as was the case with AIG. There was no system in place to deal with the AIGs of the world. Dodd-Frank allows us to do this in a systemic way, a systematic way, an orderly way. It allows us to, if we need to, wind down these huge institutions-- wind them down such that they don't create harm to the broader economy. I want you to know, Mr. Speaker, for those who think that these are all small banks, let me just give you some indication as to how small they are. I am looking now at the top five of the 27 in question. The top five: Number five is $217 billion. Number four, $255 billion. Number three, $278 billion. Number two, $350 billion. Number one, $433 billion. Only in the Congress of the United States of America would this be considered small change. We must not allow this deregulation to take place such that we put the economic order at risk again. This bill, Dodd-Frank, when it passed, allowed us to look at the entire economic order and to determine whether or not there were institutions that were a systemic risk to the economic order. Prior to Dodd-Frank, they were all siloed. Prior to Dodd-Frank, we had long-term capital. Long-term capital was the first canary in the coal mine.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. Jackson Lee for her very, very kind words. She did know Jacqui well. She had a lot of respect for her. I appreciate her taking the time to come by this evening. I want to also acknowledge that the Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson was here but had to step away. I want to also acknowledge that some 150 individuals have given us expressions concerning Jacqui, a number of organizations, at least 20, and we have 41 cosponsors of the resolution that I spoke of earlier, H. Res. 905, which expresses condolences to her family, and it commemorates her life. Finally, we have elected officials, at least 64, including the President and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who have expressed their sympathies and condolences. She was truly a person who touched a lot of people in a very positive way. I am honored to say that I was associated with her and that she truly made a difference in my life. Mr. Speaker, as we travel the road of life, we meet many people. We remember some and a good many we do not. Jacqueline Ellis is someone that I will remember, and my belief is that a good many other persons who came into contact with her, whether it was for a very short period of time or for some duration, will remember her as well. These would include the members of the sorority that she was affiliated with, Delta Sigma Theta. She was very active in this sorority. She was loved, and is still loved, by the members of Delta Sigma Theta. They would come to the Hill on an annual basis and they always took time to come by and visit her. She would always welcome them and provide services. This is but one of the many organizations that will continue to honor her, I am sure. The others that will remember her that she came in contact with would be SCLC, as was mentioned by my colleague, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. This was the organization that Dr. King led. This was the organization that fought for human rights, civil rights, and human dignity across the length and breadth of this country. She was part of that organization. In fact, she was on the board. She and Martin King, not Martin King the father but Martin King, III, the son of Dr. King, were the very best of friends--the very best of friends. He has traveled great distances to pay tribute to her. He was there in Mobile, Alabama. He came here for the services that we had. And he always, when he was in Washington, DC, would take the time to come by our office to say hello to Jacqui. People who met her along life's way would also include the Links. The Links was an organization that she was affiliated with and that she took great pride in assisting as they were having their various events. She was always helpful to other people to make sure that they were able to be successful in their endeavors. When you travel the road of life, the highway of life, you meet many people. You don't remember them all, but there are some who are special, and these are the persons who will stand out in your mind and will be remembered in the very years to come of your life. So tonight, I am grateful that the leadership has allowed us this time to pay tribute to Jacqueline Ellis, who was born in Mobile, Alabama, on October 22, 1957, a very difficult time in the life of the country, and who made a transition on September 21 of 2016. She is gone, but she is not forgotten. She will be remembered. We are grateful that we have had an opportunity to commemorate her life and celebrate the wonderful person that she was. General Leave

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. She has also been honored by a good many of my colleagues here on the Hill, including the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, who sent a letter to my office and expressed verbally her condolences and her sympathies. She has also been honored by the Honorable Steny Hoyer, by the Honorable Jim Clyburn, and by the Honorable Xavier Becerra. She has been honored by Members of Congress in many capacities. We have a resolution that has been filed. This resolution is one that pays tribute to her. It has been signed on to by a good many Members of Congress as well. So tonight I am pleased to say that Jacqueline Ellis, born in Mobile, Alabama, and matriculated her way to and through the Halls of Congress is now resting in peace. She was a person that lived every day of her life in the sense that she was busy doing something for someone every day of her adult life. She worked up until the moment she was hospitalized. Literally, I was the last person to speak to her. She and I were going to an event, the ALC dinner, the Congressional Black Caucus dinner as it is called, and she was there to pick me up and take me to the dinner. She called me and said to me: I will be waiting for you. I am downstairs. I said that I will be down in about 10 minutes. Within that period of time, she called me back and informed me that she needed to go to the hospital. I rushed down to her, and when I got there, the emergency assistance was already there. She called them prior to calling me apparently. I immediately assisted them, and we went to the hospital together. She stayed in the hospital for some days and made her transition. The important point to make is that she was working. Her work was her life. She lived to perform her duties. She was on her job in the sense that she was assisting that evening, and she was there all day long. She was ill, but she would not stop working. There were times when we would ask that she take some time off, but she always wanted to come to work. Her work was her inspiration in a sense. Her work was the thing that gave her a reason to continue to go on, and she never, ever complained. There is a song that speaks to the kind of person that she was because there are many of us right here in Congress who can relate to this. When you see the great eagle flying, you assume that it is the wings. But there is a song that addresses how it is that the eagle can soar to these high heights. That song says that it is not the wings, but rather it is the wind beneath the wings. She was the wind beneath the wings of a lot of people who were able to soar to high heights, a lot of people who did not understand all of what was before them when they accepted the responsibility to become a part of a congressional staff or a Member of Congress. She became the wind beneath their wings and helped to guide them through Congress. I am pleased to tell you that we have had several celebrations of her life. We had one in this area immediately after her untimely demise-- untimely to me because I had hoped that she would be with us a lot longer than she was. We also had a celebration of her life in her hometown of Mobile, Alabama, attended by a good many dignitaries and staffers from the Hill; a celebration of her life in Houston, Texas, similarly attended. She has been recognized and honored by people that she came in contact with. She made a difference. I will relate one brief vignette before I ask my colleague to come to the podium. When I was looking for my first chief of staff--and she was my first and only chief of staff, I might add. When I was looking for my chief of staff, I was a neophyte in Congress, and I brought her on board. You are always unsure about a new hire, especially a person who is going to be key to the office, a person that everything sort of evolves around. So I was unsure as to whether or not I had made the right decision. She and I were together, and I saw her pull over rather abruptly. She was driving. My recollection is that this happened more than once, but on this occasion, she was driving. When she pulled over, she ran over to a person, and I saw her hand the person something, and then she came back to the car. I immediately wanted to know who this was. Was it somebody that she knew? Because she did it so abruptly. She said: No, I didn't know that person. The person was not dressed in a suit and tie. The person did not have the appearance of what we would call status, although I think everybody has status. The person did not appear to be a captain of industry, if you will. She went over and she gave that person money. I found out later on that she would go to the credit union, and she would extract dollar bills--some stack; I don't know how many in the stack--and she would use that money to just give to people that she would encounter that she was of the opinion needed some help. When she did it on that day, I knew that I had made the right decision because I then knew that I saw the sermon that many people preach. It is truly better to see a sermon than to say one, or to be one than to say one. I saw that day ``love your neighbor as you love yourself.'' I saw on that occasion ``help somebody.'' I saw her live up to the true meaning of the spirit of the story of the Good Samaritan who saw the person in the streets of life and went over and took that person to the inn and said: Here is money. Use this to help this person. And if this is not enough, when I come back, I will give you more. I saw the good neighbor in Jacqui Ellis. I knew then that I made a good hire because I had a person who would not only speak a sermon, but would be a sermon. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), who is my colleague from Houston, Texas. The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee hails from the 18th Congressional District. She serves on the Judiciary Committee, she serves on the Committee on Homeland Security, and she has served us in Congress for a good many years.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to stand before the House tonight to commemorate and celebrate the life of my former Chief of Staff, Ms. Jacqueline Ellis. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Ellis served well. In the sense of many, she was the 436th Member of Congress. She helped to educate not only new persons who were here in administrative capacities, but also Congresspersons. She helped us to understand what Congress was all about. I am honored tonight to say some kind words about her and to acknowledge a colleague who is here and will be saying a word as well. To my right is a photograph of my very dear friend and former coworker, Jacqueline Ellis. She was born in Mobile, Alabama. She was born at a time when persons of African ancestry could buy a hat, but they couldn't try it on; at a time when persons of African ancestry would have to step aside so that others could step forward; and at a time when persons of African ancestry were relegated to certain places in life, certain schools, and certain places of business. They had to go to the back door for their food. They would drink from colored water fountains. She was born at a time when this country did not respect all of her rights. Who could have known that when she was born in Mobile, Alabama, that she would make her way from Mobile to Capitol Hill? There was no way to predict at the time of her birth that she would come to this Nation's Capitol and that she would serve three Members of Congress--one United States Senator and two U.S. Representatives: the Honorable Major Owens from New York's 11th Congressional District, the Honorable Senator Heflin. And, of course, she served in my office. No one could have known. I think, quite frankly, that this speaks to the greatness of the country, that we have moved light years away from some of the circumstances that we had to endure earlier in the history of this country. Notwithstanding all that has been done, there is still great work to be done. Tonight I want to say to you that this person born in Mobile during very difficult times has received an indication from the President of the United States of America that he was saddened to learn of her demise. I include in the Record a letter from the President. The White House, Washington, September 28, 2016. Mr. Chris Ellis, Bowie, Maryland. Dear Chris: I was deeply saddened to learn of the loss of your sister, Jacqueline. My heartfelt condolences are with you as you reflect upon her life. May cherished memories help temper your grief, and may you find comfort in the support of loved ones. Please know you will remain in my thoughts. Sincerely, Barack Obama.