Al Green

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief. There is great concern in the real estate community. It is very difficult to acquire flood insurance at some of the prices that are being quoted. I think it is exceedingly important that we adhere to the words of Ranking Member Waters: What is the rush? Why not get the study? Why not do that which we intended to do before we arrived at this position in our history? My hope is that we will heed her words.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert my statement into the Record in support of extending unemployment insurance for 1.6 million Americans instead of this radical Republican assault on women's health care rights.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker and friends, it is no coincidence that President Johnson declared a war on poverty within 6 months after Dr. King gave his ``I Have a Dream'' speech on the Mall in Washington. Whether by accident or whether by design, Dr. King and President Johnson worked in tandem with each other. They had something in common: they were both intelligent in their own right. But intelligence without courage can be intelligence wasted. They both understood the politics of their time, but understanding the politics of your time without courage can be an understanding wasted. It was courage that made the difference in the lives of people for decades after they each did what they had to do. I thank God that Dr. King and President Johnson acted in tandem and that they both had courage. The marchers on Washington had 10 demands. Number 8 on that list of 10 demands was a demand to raise the wage to an amount that people could make a living off of, $2 an hour. That $2 an hour, adjusted for inflation today, would be $13.39, more than $13 an hour. Mr. Speaker and friends, it is time to raise the wage. A UC Berkeley Labor Center report in 2013 connoted, denoted, and showed that families working in the fast food industry are subsidized to the tune of about $7 billion. It is time to raise the wage. That same report showed that 63 percent of all families receiving subsidies had a working member. It is time to raise the wage. Corporate welfare, corporations paying poverty wages, are indirectly subsidized with tax dollars when tax dollars provide food stamps, SNAP, Medicaid, and other assistance to workers. Indirect corporate subsidies will diminish and tax dollars will be saved when we raise the wage. Do you like trickle-down economics? If so, you ought to want to raise the wage because by raising the wage, we can assure that the earned trickle will get down to the worker that has earned it. It is time to raise the wage. Do you think people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps? Then raise the wage, and people will be able to pull themselves up out of poverty with their economic bootstraps. Can we afford to raise the wage? Mr. Speaker and friends, yes, we can. On February 13, 2013, The Washington Post reported that the United States has one of the lowest minimum wages among developed countries, even though we are among the richest countries in the world. One out of every 60 persons is a millionaire. One out of every 11 households is worth $1 million. According to the AFL-CIO, CEO pay has gone from $42 for every $1 a worker made in 1982 to $354 for every dollar a worker made in 2012. It is time to raise the wage. According to Forbes, the top 25 CEOs of hedge funds--the top 25 earners at hedge funds--earn more than all 500 of the top CEOs in the Fortune 500 combined. It is time to raise the wage. In 2007, one CEO made $3 billion; $3 billion is $400 a second. It would take a minimum-wage worker working full-time 198,000 years. Some things bear repeating: it would take a minimum-wage worker 198,000 years to make what that CEO made in 1 year. It is time to raise the wage. If we can pay CEOs $400 a second, we can raise the wage. If we can pay corporate CEOs 354 times what workers are making, we can raise the wage to $13 an hour.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I was participating in a Congressional Delegation trip to South Africa to honor the life and legacy of President Nelson Mandela and missed the following votes: 1. H.R. 2019 Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act of 2013, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on this bill. 2. H.R. 2319--The Native American Veterans' Memorial Amendments Act of 2013. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. 3. S. 1471--Alicia Dawn Koehl Respect for National Cemeteries Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. 4. H.R. 3212--Sean and David Goldman International Child Abduction prevention and Return Act of 2013, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. 5. H.R. 1992--Israel QME Enhanced Act, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. 6. Journal Vote--Had I been present for the journal vote, I would have voted ``yes''.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I was participating in a Congressional Delegation trip to South Africa to honor the life and legacy of President Nelson Mandela and missed the following votes: 1. H.R. 3521--The Department of Veterans Affairs Major Medical Facility Lease Authorization Act of 2013, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. 2. H.R. 1402--VA Expiring Authorities Extension Act of 2013, as amended. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I want to thank Congressman Christopher Smith of New Jersey for leading a codel to the Philippines. I, along with Congressman Trent Franks, were members of the codel. And I want people to know that there is still great work to be done for our friends in the Philippines. This picture depicts some of the damage that we were able to see while we were there in Tacloban, which is a province in the Philippines. This is another picture that shows actual homes. This is a USAID sign. And these are places where people are actually dwelling at this time. The number one problem that they have right now is shelter. I will also add that our military has done an outstanding job. I had an opportunity to meet with many of our military people who were there with heavy equipment, and I commend them for what they have done. Finally, I would like to say this. We have a bill, H.R. 3602, which would accord people from the Philippines in the United States a temporary protective status. This would allow them to stay here, as opposed to going home where the income is less than $2 a day for more than 40 percent of the people. My hope is that we can pass H.R. 3602. It does not give any pathway to citizenship. It will only allow them to send money back home while they are here working in the United States.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today, I missed the following votes: H.R. 2061--Digital Accountability and Transparency (DATA) Act of 2013. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill. H.R. 272--To designate the Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense joint outpatient clinic to be constructed in Marina, California, as the ``General William H. Gourley Federal Outpatient Clinic: A Joint VA-DOD Health Care Facility. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on this bill.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I am continuing the mission of mercy that started right after the typhoon hit the Philippines. Madam Speaker, I am here to express my gratitude to the President of the United States of America. I just heard him speak of how the United States would do all that it can to help the people of the Philippines. I am also grateful to the members of my community. We have approximately 40,000 persons of Filipino ancestry living in the Houston area. A good many of them are persons that I represent. I am honored to tell you that they are working tirelessly to do all that they can to help their brothers and sisters in the Philippines. These are difficult times, but I am honored to say it is my belief that, with our help, we will be able to help the people of the Philippines get through this tragic circumstance. There are two resolutions. H. Res. 404 is sponsored by Members Engel and Royce, ranking member and chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee. H. Res. 408 is sponsored by Members Speier and Honda. I want to compliment them for what they have done.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a mission of mercy, with a message of gratitude. I am grateful today to members of the Foreign Affairs Committee; the chairperson, Mr. Royce; and the ranking member, Mr. Engel. I am grateful that they have filed a resolution to support the people of the Philippines. My mission of mercy is to ask for help for the people of the Philippines. This resolution, H. Res. 404, speaks to some of what we may be able to do, and it also addresses our sympathy for the people of the Philippines. It expresses our solidarity with the people of the Philippines. It expresses our continuing support for relief and reconstruction assistance for the people of the Philippines, and it goes on to commend the Filipino community in the United States of America for their efforts to organize and to help with the disaster relief. The Philippines are our allies. The people of the Philippines have been there with us through many struggles. They are the victims of a force of nature, but they can survive this with our help. I want people to understand that there is a special relationship between America and the people of the Philippines. They were there with us during World War II. They fought side-by-side with our troops. Many of them fought and died together. My hope is that this special bond, this special connectivity that started long before World War II but that continued through World War II, is something that will cause us to remember that these are our friends. They need our help. They were also there during this war at the Battle of Bataan. More than 70,000 troops marched in the Battle of Bataan. They were marched to a camp where they were to be incarcerated. Many died along the way. Many of them were Americans. More than 10,000 Americans were a part of that Bataan Death March, as it is called. We have more than 17,000 troops that are buried in the Philippines. These persons are the ones that took up the clarion call to answer the call to duty in a distant place. My hope is that we will remember that they sacrificed their lives and that the people of the Philippines mean a lot more to us than just a simple place on a map. I would remind us that on August 30, 1951, 62 years ago, we signed a Mutual Defense Treaty with the people of the Philippines. This is not defense in the traditional sense of defense, but it is defense in the sense that people are defenseless because they have been impacted by a force of nature unlike any other we may have seen on our planet. This force of nature, according to USAID, has caused 9.7 million people to be affected. It has caused more than 23,000 people to have their homes damaged or destroyed. It has caused more than 600,000 people to be displaced. It has caused more than 700,000 people to find themselves being evacuated. The death toll is still climbing. It is at more than 2,000. Today, I rise on a mission of mercy with a message of gratitude. The gratitude is to the United States of America and to this administration for sending in our troops. The Marines have landed, and more are on the way. We have an aircraft carrier, the USS George Washington, one of our finest. It will be there to provide support services and produce water. $20 million in aid is good, but the world has to come to the aid of the people of the Philippines, and we have to do more. I know that these are times of great austerity. I understand that we have cuts. I also remember something that happened in my family when a person who lived in our community lost their job. We were poor. We were not born into plenty. We were born into poverty. While we were poor, we still understood that someone who had lost a job merited some support. I can remember my parents talking between themselves about how we could help this family, notwithstanding our sense of poverty. When I say we were poor, I was telling a Member just yesterday that the subsidized public housing would have been a step up in life for us. We called it the ``projects,'' and we looked forward to moving to the projects. We never did, but we looked forward to it. My point is this. Even when we were poor and when we had little, we still made room to help others who had less, and this is what a great country does, I believe. A great country doesn't ask what will happen to us if we take up the cause of the people of the Philippines. A great country will ask what will happen to them if we do not take up the cause of the people of the Philippines. So I beg today that we do all that we can to help and that we sign onto H. Res. 404, expressing our sympathy for the people of the Philippines. God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. Let's pray for the people of the Philippines.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight because a sizable portion of my community is in mourning. In the aftermath of the typhoon that hit the Philippines on November 8, my community is in mourning and is looking for answers. As you know, we have had more than 1,700 persons pronounced dead; 10,000 are projected to die; 9.7 million people have been affected; more than 23,000 homes and infrastructure have been damaged; 2.5 million will need immediate food assistance. Mr. Speaker, while we are in mourning, I am grateful that the administration has sent the USS George Washington into the area. It will produce water. USAID has authorized $10 million. There are other agencies and organizations, as well as countries, that are being beneficial and helpful. I want to tonight announce that there is a lot more that will have to be done, and I want to do my part. I thank the administration for what is being done.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I do thank you for your indulgence. You have been liberal with the time. And I want to remind persons that while we do this on an annual basis in the month of October, we do want to make domestic violence awareness an everyday activity. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank the gentlewoman. And because time is of the essence, I will move quickly to the gentleman from the 41st District of California, the Honorable Mark Takano.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask so that Members may be aware. We have a few Members left to speak, and we want to make sure that every Member has some time. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to ask the Honorable Barbara Lee to move to the podium and consume an appropriate amount of time. She is my very dear friend from the great State of California, the 13th Congressional District, who sits on Appropriations and who has been a longtime champion of protecting women and protecting people and is truly a champion for the least, the last, and the lost. I might also add, Mr. Speaker, that she was the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, and I was proud to serve under her leadership.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank my colleague very much, and I thank you for your many words expressing what you actually witnessed. Yours was a testimony, not just a recitation, from something that was accorded you by some other person. You were there to see what happened, and you and I know that there is still great work to be done. In our State of Texas, in 2012, domestic violence caused 11,994 adults to need shelter, Mr. Speaker. It caused 14,534 children to need shelter, Mr. Speaker. It caused 36,831 adults to need nonresidential services, counseling, legal assistance. It caused 15,694 children to need nonresidential services. Unfortunately, 26.2 percent of the adults were denied shelter because of a lack of space. Mr. Speaker, there is still great work to be done, and I am honored to ask, at this time, another colleague to speak. However, would you kindly advise me as to the amount of time I have left.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank the gentlelady. I want to thank the gentlelady for the work she has done here in Congress over the years to eliminate domestic violence. This has been a bipartisan effort, Mr. Speaker. I am proud to tell you that S. 47, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, this bill passed the House of Representatives with bipartisan support. In the House the vote was 286-138. It passed the Senate with bipartisan support. It was 78-22. The bill had this bipartisan support because it embraced women not only who are known to us as people from our communities, but also there were some communities that were embraced that have not been traditionally a part of the bill. It helped American Indian women because at one time tribal courts could not take on persons who had sexually assaulted women because they were non-Indians. Well, the bill addressed this. It also addressed the LGBT community which had not been included. It doesn't matter what your sexual preference is, domestic violence can be imposed upon you. And when you are hurt, you need help. This bill provided the help needed for women regardless of race, creed, color, origin. Regardless of your sexual preference, you can get help pursuant to S. 47, which received bipartisan support. I wanted to tell you that annually my friend from the State of Texas, the Honorable Ted Poe, works with me and I with him. We alternate years of taking the lead on this issue. He has had a career that has paralleled mine. When he was a prosecutor, I was a defense attorney. He became a district court judge in Texas right around the time I became the judge of a justice court. Here in Congress, we have sought to work together on many bills and many pieces of legislation, but I am proudest of what we do on domestic violence. Domestic Violence Awareness Month is one where he and I have collaborated to work together to make sure that we get this issue exposed to the public so we can continue the process of elimination. I am proud to tell you that he represents the Second Congressional District of Texas, serves on Foreign Affairs as well as the Judiciary Committee, and I am proud to tell you that I consider him a friend, not in the sense that we politely say it here in Congress when we say ``my friend.'' I consider him a friend in the sense that he and I have developed a real kinship and relationship. Although we don't always agree, we always try to work together for the good of our State, city, and for the good of women who are being impacted by domestic violence. I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank you very much for your testimony. Actually, it is something that I believe will benefit a good many persons who are viewing this today. I would like to share just a few stories, if I may. Mr. Speaker, I practiced law in Houston, Texas, and my practice was one that involved a good deal of civil work. In the early 1970s, I can recall females coming to my office to receive assistance from a lawyer to file charges based upon abuse that had been imposed upon them. In some of the cases, the damage done to the person was physical and immediately seen; but as you talked to the person, you could see that this person had been suffering for years. Literally years of suffering would emerge from this person in a 30-minute, 1 hour, 1\1/2\ hour visit. And they would plead with me, Please help me get the charges filed. The plea was there because at that time it was considered a family issue. When women would go in to file charges, the police would say, Well, we will look at it. We will see if we can get somebody out there. But they didn't always respond to the evident need. The need was evident because of what the eye could see. Many of the women who would come in would bring a minister or some other person to corroborate the story. There was this belief that your physical appearance alone was not enough evidence to support the filing of charges. Unfortunately, society had so developed at that time that we would take this victim to intake and we would help with the filing of the charges and we would help get charges filed. The unfortunate circumstance was that the culture at that time was such that other family members would visit with the victim and encourage the victim to drop the charges; family members seeing and knowing about the abuse not only on this occasion for which charges were being filed, but also the abuse that had occurred through the years. And family members would quite often prevail; and, as a result, charges would sometimes be dropped. I regret that we went through this time in our history where women were not treated with the dignity and respect that they should be accorded. A lot of that has gone away, and I will say more about a lot of this in just a moment, but there is still enough of it for us to band together and for us to answer the clarion call for help that these women present to us on a daily basis. I am honored to tell you that we have with us now another Member of Congress from the 40th District of California. She serves on the Appropriations Committee, and I am honored to yield to the Honorable Lucille Roybal-Allard.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank my colleague from the State of Texas. I would also mention to my colleague that, unfortunately, one study concluded that 10,401 domestic violence victims reached out for help but were turned away because of a lack of resources. There is still great work to be done, and I thank you for continuing to do this great work. God bless you. At this time, Mr. Speaker, we have another Texan, from the 18th Congressional District in Houston, Texas, who serves on Homeland Security as well as Judiciary. We are going to ask that our friend, the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, move to the podium. And how much time remains, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, ending domestic violence is not a quixotic quest; it is a noble calling. This is why we have filed H. Res. 392, a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of October as National Domestic Violence Awareness Month, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Congress should continue to raise awareness of domestic violence and its devastating effects on individuals, families, and communities, and support programs designed to end domestic violence in the United States. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to tell you that we will have a number of speakers. At this time, I yield to the Congresswoman from the Fourth District of Maryland, the Honorable Donna Edwards. She serves on Science, Space, and Technology; Transportation and Infrastructure; she cochairs the Women's Caucus; and she is the chair of the Democratic Women's Working Group. She also cofounded the National Network to End Domestic Violence in 1994. She was its executive director.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I ask that Members govern themselves accordingly, with 6 minutes left.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank my fellow Floridian. I, of course, am from Texas now, but my roots are in Florida, and I thank you so much. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have left?

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank you--and I also thank you for raising the issue of domestic violence against men. We talk quite often about it being against women, and there is good reason. The overwhelming empirical evidence connotes that women are the largest group of victims of domestic violence, so I thank you for broadening the issue for us. Thank you very much. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I am honored to tell you that we have a Congressman from the State of Florida--I was reared in Florida, went to Florida A&M University. He serves the 18th District of Florida, serves on Financial Services, and he is committed to working across the aisle. He makes a concerted effort to achieve bipartisanship. He is a champion for fair play. I also want you to know that he understands that, as we do this, as we try to end this scourge on society known as domestic violence, that it is more than simply an issue of violence; it also has economic components to it. He has tried to cause us to understand some of these components, but also, that it is a moral issue. I would now ask my friend, who accorded me this tie that is purple-- the color purple in the tie, as I understand it, represents courage, survival, honor and dedication, dedication to ending domestic violence. Of course, purple is being worn today to spread awareness of domestic violence. I now yield as much time as he may consume to my friend, the Honorable Patrick Murphy.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am honored at this time to recognize another Texan, a Texan from the 23rd District, who served 22 years, Mr. Speaker, in the State house, a Texan who serves on the Agriculture Committee, a Texan who is a strong supporter of domestic awareness, who voted for the reauthorization of the VAWA, and I might say, a Texan who started his career in Congress extending his hand across the aisle. He is one who not only preaches bipartisanship, he practices it. I am honored to yield as much time as he may consume to my friend, the Honorable Pete Gallego.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, not everyone supports this legislation. Ranking Member Waters was mentioned. But she spoke eloquently today as to why she opposes H.R. 992. Mr. Frank is not here to speak for himself. So we cannot say that he, today, would support H.R. 992. It may be that we have the AFL-CIO opposing H.R. 992, as well Public Citizen, and the Commodity Markets Oversight Coalition. It may be that we have them opposing it because we understand, as do many others, that this weekend marks the 84th anniversary of the stock market crash of 1929. It was that stock market crash that gave us Glass-Steagall in 1933. Glass-Steagall provided the firewall between commercial banking and investment banking. It didn't let you use tax dollars in the sense that they are insured by FDIC to engage in investment banking. Well, it seems ironic that it took us 66 years to repeal Glass- Steagall, 66 years to repeal that firewall that separated commercial banking from investment banking, and has taken us now little more than 3 years to repeal, by way of evisceration, section 716 of Dodd-Frank. Section 716 provides a firewall. It is the firewall to protect investors--taxpayers, if you will--from those investors who engage in derivatives. This derivatives market that we are talking about is $600 trillion to approximately $1.2 quadrillion. No one really knows. Only God knows how big it is. But what we are doing is exposing tax dollars to this derivatives market, and it is my hope that we will not pass this legislation because it will set us back. Let's give section 716 an opportunity to function. Glass-Steagall functioned for 66 years. Let's not repeal section 716 in a little more than 3 years.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, like my colleagues, I mourn the death of Major Owens, but I also want to celebrate his life. My purpose for rising tonight is to do just this: celebrate his life. Major Owens was a person of character who had a great reputation. I had the honor of knowing him through my chief of staff, who was his chief of staff for 16 years. In working with her, she explained to me all of the many things that he was a party to over the course of the years, not only here in Congress, where he worked on legislation to help persons who had disabilities, but also back in his home district, where he was a person who championed the causes of people who were in need. It means something to me to know that he has this great reputation, but it is equally as important for me to share with people that he did have character. When I met with him to discuss the hiring of Jackie Ellis, my chief of staff, because she was working with him, and he was contemplating some other things and moving, he explained to me how important it was in this body to keep your word. He explained that, among your friends and your colleagues, your word is the thing that will give you the opportunity to continue to have support in the Congress of the United States of America. His words about character and integrity are still with me. I suspect that because he was a teacher--and as you know, teachers impact eternity--I will pass on to others what he has done because he passed it on to me, and what his chief of staff caused me to learn vicariously from him will impact my office eternally. I am grateful to him. I pay tribute to him. I want his family to know that he has been a blessing to me and to my staff and to the people I serve. God bless you, and thank you, Major. Congressman Major Robert Odell Owens Born--June 28, 1936 (Collierville, TN). Elected to Congress representing Brooklyn's 12th Congressional District from 1983-1992 (98th-102nd Congress). After redistricting--Represented Brooklyn's 11th Congressional District from 1993-2006 (103rd-109th Congress). Transitioned to Eternity--October 21, 2013 (Brooklyn, NY). Father of five children. First librarian elected to Congress. Chaired the Brooklyn chapter of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE). Past Commissioner of New York City's Community Development Agency. Served on the Education and Labor Committee throughout his tenure in Congress (From 1987-1993 chaired the Education and Labor Subcommittee on Select Education and Civil Rights). Served on the Government Reform Committee throughout his tenure in Congress. Chaired the Congressional Black Caucus Higher Education Braintrust. Floor manager and original co-sponsor of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990. Sponsor of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Authored legislation that prevented the Immigration and Naturalization Service from deporting the parents of American-born children under age 18 and legislation that extended citizenship to immigrant children under 12 who were in the U.S. without their parents. Founder and organizer of the National Commission for African American Education. Strong Organized Labor advocate--Championed the need for maintaining the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Lead sponsor of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act--Providing for major reforms in the Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) Program (Programs designed to aid community agencies in combating urban and rural poverty). Past chair of the CBC's Haitian Task Force. Has written several books including: ``Roots and Wings'', a semi- autobiographical book about his life. In 2006 was named a distinguished visiting scholar at the John W. Kluge Center at the Library of Congress, where he completed a case study of the CBC and its impact on national politics. Prior to his death, Congressman Owens taught at Medgar Evers College in Brooklyn, NY.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I had the preeminent privilege of talking to the Honorable Barney Frank just recently, the former chairperson of the Financial Services Committee. He called to my attention a speech made by the Honorable Maxine Waters, who is now the ranking member of the committee. This speech was a keynote speech at the launch of the Global Financial Governance and Impact Report. This is a very insightful message accorded by the Honorable Maxine Waters. It is, in fact, a critique of the World Bank, the IMF. She goes into the global sovereign debt restructuring issue, and she talks also about the problem of growing inequality. I would invite anyone who is interested in learning more about what I call the ``Waters Worldview,'' to peruse this document. Chairman Frank was eminently correct when he suggested that this might become a part of the Congressional Record, and I will place it in the Record tonight. Cong. Maxine Waters Keynote Speech at the Launch of the ``Global Financial Governance and Impact Report'' by the New Rules for Global Financial Coalition Introduction I'm very honored to be invited here today by the New Rules for Global Finance coalition to talk about governance of the international economy and the role of the world's major economic institutions in helping to shape and manage the global financial system. First, I'd like to say that I very much welcome this report by the New Rules coalition and the contribution it makes in calling attention to one of the most challenging issues we face today--how do we manage the global economy and how do we make our existing international institutions more effective in helping to preserve global stability and promote sustainable growth in a way that is broadly shared? In a world of sovereign states, the underlying challenge to effective global economic governance originates from the absence of a single global entity responsible for overseeing the system and establishing the rules necessary for its operation. The core infrastructure of the global economy will need to be based--in my view--on effective national rules coupled with increased international cooperation among nations, both through informal channels and through established multilateral institutions. Global Economic Institutions Given the importance of our global economic institutions in these efforts--and the fact that these institutions have no system of direct democratic accountability--it is all the more important that there be confidence in their governance-- and that they be transparent and accountable. Particular attention should be paid to the effectiveness of their policies and the impact they have on developing countries. Any examination of these institutions should first acknowledge how much progress they've made in many areas over the past 20 years--in large part due to pressure from civil society and individual governments. This is particularly the case with regard to the Bretton Woods institutions. Whatever deficiencies people might identify or perceive, one thing the international financial institutions cannot be accused of is being indifferent to pressure or impervious to change. Having said that, I believe the first set of governance reforms we need at the Bretton Woods institutions is a more effective voice for developing countries. These countries now represent a much larger proportion of world economic activity than when the World Bank and the IMF were created in 1944. Voice and representation reforms are imperative in order to re-establish the credibility of the Bank and the Fund as truly international institutions contributing to growth with equity and stability for all countries. World Bank I believe it is very much in our interest that the World Bank--as the world's premier development institution--remains strong, credible and effective. One of the important contributions the Bank has made to the vitality of development efforts is its emphasis on good governance--its commitment to democratic values and inclusive, participatory decision-making. Inspection Panel In fact, twenty years ago the Bank became the standard- bearer for democratic accountability at the multilateral development institutions by establishing the Inspection Panel. This marked a very important advance in the governance of international institutions. By creating an independent forum through which ordinary citizens who felt disadvantaged by Bank projects could submit their complaints and see them addressed--the Bank gave voice and standing to affected people. For the first time, an international organization provided a means through which individual citizens could hold the Bank accountable to its own standards. Today, the Inspection Panel continues to contribute in important ways to project quality and improved development outcomes. Racial Discrimination But the World Bank can only be effective in conveying a message of good governance if it is seen as having good governance itself. There must be a belief that its own governance conforms to the standards that it demands of others--including standards relating to the choice of personnel and due process. One of the Bank's most important assets is its human capital. It has created one of the most talented and qualified bureaucracies around the world. But the Bank has some serious work to do to ensure that its processes for hiring, retaining and promoting staff are free from discrimination. It must also ensure that staff have access to a justice system that they can trust will be fair and impartial. This is an issue that I will continue to follow very closely. Doing Business Report Another area where I'm optimistic we'll see permanent change is in the World Bank's annual ``Doing Business'' report, which ranks countries according to their attractiveness to business. Several years ago, the Financial Services Committee learned that the ``Doing Business'' report included a labor index-- the ``Employing Workers Indicator''--which downgraded countries in the rankings for any and all labor protections. This included factors such as having a minimum wage, maximum working hours, vacation days, or maternity leave. It was clear this had to change. Another area of concern in the Report was its ``Paying Taxes'' indicator--which gave countries a higher rating based on how close to zero their corporate tax rates were. In effect, this meant that the World Bank's guidance to developing countries was to gut labor protections and shift the funding of all government functions to workers and households. Of course, this would make it more difficult to fund social safety net programs, build a middle class, or empower workers. This was odd advice for an organization supposedly devoted to ending poverty. International labor groups such as the AFL-CIO, the International Trade Union Confederation, and the ILO all tried in vain to convince, shame, or bully the World Bank into eliminating the ``Employing Workers'' index. After our Committee held a hearing on the subject several years ago, we made it clear to the World Bank that its funding could be very, very slow in moving forward through the committee until this problem was resolved. The outcome was that in 2009, the World Bank suspended the ``Employing Workers Indicator'' from the ``Doing Business'' rankings--and it created a working group to develop a new indicator to measure countries' adherence to core labor standards. I'm confident that the anti-worker aspects of the Report will soon be permanently abolished altogether. Not doing so would greatly undermine the Bank's legitimacy and its relevance in the fight against global poverty. International Monetary Fund With regard to the IMF, I first want to thank Ms. LaGarde for her willingness to engage with me directly on issues that have been of particular importance to me. And I want to commend her leadership in focusing as much time and energy as she did on the country of Jamaica when the world was otherwise so focused on the turmoil in Europe. I believe the IMF has a very legitimate and indispensable function in the global economy--in monitoring the world's economies and responding to countries facing balance-of- payment crises. One mark of the vitality of an institution, in my view, is its ability to admit when it was wrong, to say that it had misjudged some things and made mistakes. The IMF has done that, and I think that adds to its legitimacy. For example, after the East Asian financial crisis in the late '90s, the IMF admitted that it was wrong in imposing too much austerity, which exacerbated debt crises. Over the past decade, the IMF has tried to pay more attention to the social aspects of its programs, including by protecting social safety nets and vulnerable parts of society. Last December, the IMF marked an end in the era of finance by reversing its long-held opposition to capital controls. The Fund announced a new official institutional view acknowledging that controls on volatile flows of capital around the globe can play an important role in helping to preserve the stability of the international financial system. Moreover, when Congress authorized an IMF quota increase in 2009, which included a limited amount of gold sales, the IMF agreed to use a portion of the proceeds to help the poorest countries. This included the elimination of interest payments on its loans to the poorest countries for five years. Labor Market Issues at the IMF However, there are areas where I believe the IMF needs to do a better job. First, it's clear that the Fund doesn't always strike the right balance between austerity and growth, which has had some very negative consequences. Second, I believe the IMF should stick to what it knows best: macroeconomic issues that bear most directly on balance-of- payment questions. For example, it's difficult to understand why monetary economists at the IMF should intervene in a country's labor market policies, particularly when they encourage labor market flexibility measures. Labor market flexibility is nothing more than a euphemism for measures that make it easier for firms to fire workers and dilute the power of unions to negotiate on behalf of workers. I understand that the IMF has recently recommended a number of these policies in Europe and elsewhere. The IMF should not be re-writing the social compact in countries that recasts the balance of power between labor and capital. Global Soverign Debt Restructuring Mechanism On a positive note, I'd like to add my very strong support for recent work at the IMF, and elsewhere, to study and encourage a more efficient approach to sovereign debt restructuring. The issue of sovereign debt is back at the center of economic policy debate. This is a result not only of the global crisis, but also because of recent court rulings that would give greater leverage to vulture funds, which could undermine future debt restructuring efforts. I favor an approach that would establish a formal, institutionalized, and politically recognized procedure for restructuring the debt of bankrupt sovereigns. It would extend legal protections to both the sovereigns and creditors involved. Under certain conditions, an international sovereign debt restructuring mechanism could allow for the orderly and swift resolution of debt crises in ways that would not only make crises less costly but would also encourage sovereign debtors and creditors to act more responsibly in normal times. There are a couple of principles that I think should underlie such a mechanism. For example, odious debt should be written off. This would include, for example, the kind of debt the Congo had as a result of Mobutu borrowing, or Ethiopia, which was given loans that paid for arms that went to Mengistu. Also, when loans were made with advice from international lenders--advice that was wrong and led to projects that were poorly designed--the lenders should bear some of the risk for bad lending. In any event, the recent court rulings allowing vulture funds to interfere with Argentina's ability to make payments to creditors that had accepted a debt restructuring have caused widespread concern. Both the World Bank and the IMF have noted that this will encourage holdouts and discourage creditor participation in future sovereign debt work-outs, which could pose a very real threat to global financial stability. The Problem of Growing Inequality This brings me to what I think is one of the central problems with the way we have approached international economic policy, through our trade agreements and through the policies of the international financial institutions. I believe our international economic policy has been too one-sided--too focused on elevating the interests and mobility of capital over all other considerations. This was based on the misguided belief that unfettered markets would not only create wealth and stability, but would also solve almost all social problems through a trickle down of benefits to others in society. But this isn't what has happened. Over the past 30 years, we have seen a growing increase in inequality in the U.S. and in other advanced and some emerging market countries. This was the case even during periods of sustained growth. In fact, today the United States has the highest level of inequality of any advanced industrial country. Although some degree of inequality is necessary for the function of a market economy, since it creates incentives to work hard and take risks, here in America and elsewhere, we have more much more inequality than is necessary for efficiency. Left entirely to its own, the market system will produce more inequality than is economically necessary. And excessive inequality not only undermines social and political cohesion, it has also been shown to have negative effects on growth. World Bank research has shown that growth alone is not sufficient in reducing poverty. You also have to pay attention to how the benefits of growth are distributed, so that its benefits are broadly shared. Recent research at the IMF has shown that inequality can also undermine growth, because it weakens demand and depresses consumption. Now, I believe in capitalism. I recognize the power of capitalism to create wealth, and I believe markets are the main engines of wealth creation in our country and elsewhere. But in order to be truly supportive of the free market, I believe you must also be supportive of government. This is because we need to have an appropriate set of public policies in place to reign in the excesses of the market, to help maintain stability, and to ensure that the benefits of capitalism are broadly shared. In fact, one of the most important lessons we have learned from the recent financial crisis is that markets must be deeply embedded in systems of governance. The idea that markets are self-correcting has received a mortal blow. Markets require other social and public institutions to support them. They rely on courts, legal frameworks, and regulators to set and enforce rules. They depend on the stabilizing functions that central banks and countercyclical fiscal policy provide. They also need the political buy-in that redistributive taxation, safety nets, and social insurance help generate. And all of this is true of global markets as well. What I'm saying is this: free markets and government are not opposites, they are complements. And if you don't want to believe me about the importance of government to the free market system--well, maybe you will believe the markets. In Congress, one of the biggest supporters of the IMF and the World Bank has been the US Chamber of Commerce. They understand the need for effective public intervention when countries are facing an economic crisis. Business has also been the biggest supporter of the U.S. Export-Import Bank, another government function. Finally, last week, after the Republicans shut the government down, business deployed an army of lobbyist to Capitol Hill to stress the importance of getting the government back up and running again. In Closing As I conclude my remarks, it occurs to me that perhaps this might not have been the most appropriate audience to hear my views on the importance of governance and the necessary and mutually reinforcing roles of government and markets. I think perhaps the House Republicans in Congress would have benefited more from this message than anyone else. Their insistence on shutting down the government--coupled with their apparent willingness to allow our government to default on its debt--reveal just how reckless and dangerously dysfunctional the Republican Party has become. Their actions show not only a contempt for government, but also an indifference to markets and the importance of stability. Taken together, the Republicans have shown the country just how profoundly misguided their understanding is of the role and responsibilities of elected officials in a representative Democracy.