Jeb Hensarling

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I find it fascinating that the ranking member says ``we have to protect the CFPB,'' the very same CFPB that the Federal Reserve's inspector general says, ``minorities underrepresented in upper pay bands''; the very same CFPB, ``minority applicants not hired in proportion to qualifications.'' She wants to protect the CFPB where ``minority employees receive lower performance ratings,'' wants to protect a qualified mortgage rule which the Federal Reserve says one- third of Blacks and Hispanics will no longer be able to qualify for mortgages. Yet the ranking member says we have to protect CFPB. No, we have to protect the American people from CFPB, the CFPB that is trying to take away their mortgages. I hear almost every week from some credit union or community bank, like the First Arkansas Bank and Trust, who wrote: ``Our bank has a long history of helping consumers, especially those who, for some reason, cannot qualify for secondary market financing at the time. Due to the fact that this type of financing is now overly burdened by the qualified mortgage standards, we have ceased this type of financing.'' This includes for mobile homes. That is low-income people, Mr. Speaker. We hear from the Reading Cooperative Bank, ``We have experienced a spike in loan declines to women,'' for their investigation identified that women attempting to buy the family home to settle their divorce and stabilize their family were being declined at a high rate due to the Dodd-Frank qualified mortgage rules and ability to pay. We hear this stuff all the time. We have to protect the consumer, and we protect the consumer by having competitive, transparent, innovative free markets that are vigorously policed for force and fraud and deception. It is not by having this vaunted CFPB. I am shocked that we have the ranking member again talking about discrimination, but, apparently, it is okay if the CFPB practices it. That is outrageous, Mr. Speaker. It is simply outrageous. The American people will not abide by it. We have to protect the American consumers in their opportunity for the American Dream of homeownership. That is why every single Member should vote for the legislation from the gentleman from Kentucky, which is so simple. It says, if you make the loan and you keep your books, it is a qualified mortgage, and you have your shot at the American Dream. I urge the adoption of the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill).

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), the distinguished chairman of the Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee of our committee.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's motion.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Emmer).

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 2036) to suspend the current compensation packages for the chief executive officers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and for other purposes.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the day where we can work to have a sustainable housing finance system in America, one that is sustainable for homeowners so they are not put into homes they cannot afford to keep; one that is sustainable for our economy, so that we promote economic growth and reduce our tendency to have these recessions; and certainly one sustainable for the taxpayers, because the taxpayers should never ever again be called upon to bail out government-sponsored enterprises to the tune of almost $200 billion. Regardless of how effective the current CEOs are of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, $4 million compensation packages are not part of a sustainable housing finance system. Again, they are under government conservatorship. The taxpayer is still at risk. This does not pass the smell test, it doesn't pass the laugh test, and it certainly doesn't pass the taxpayer protection test. So I am very happy with the work by the gentleman of California (Mr. Royce) that provided the House language that was underpinning the Senate language that we are debating tonight. I am glad that this is bipartisan. I don't often find myself in agreement with the administration, but I am prepared to take ``yes'' for an answer, and I urge all of my colleagues to adopt this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 2036, the Equity in Government Compensation Act. I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) for his diligent work to craft the language which is the basis for this bill. Mr. Speaker, S. 2036 will simply reinstate the limits on the salaries of the CEOs at the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that were eliminated earlier this year. Since entering a Federal conservatorship in September of 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have received nearly $187.5 billion in taxpayer money making the GSE conservatorship by far the costliest of all taxpayer bailouts due to the financial crisis. This is not the first time there has been public outcry over the compensation of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's CEOs during their conservatorship. Following several years of substantial salaries and bonuses, congressional and public concern caused then-FHFA Director Ed DeMarco to cap the compensation for the GSE's chief executives at $600,000. Earlier this year, now-FHFA Director Mel Watt repealed those salary caps allowing the GSEs to raise their CEO pay to as much as the 25th percentile of comparable companies. This ultimately allowed both GSEs to increase their CEO pay from the previous cap of $600,000 to $4 million annually, all at the expense of the American taxpayer who is still backing these institutions. Director Watt's decision to eliminate the salary caps has provoked disapproval not only from Members of Congress but the administration as well. Notably, both the Treasury Department and the White House opposed FHFA's decision to raise the GSE's CEO pay. Treasury recommended that ``existing limits on compensation continue given the taxpayers' ongoing backstop of both enterprises.'' Additionally, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest expressed the White House's opposition, adding that ``the reason that these entities are different than some of the financial entities that you see in the private sector is they benefit significantly from a backstop that is provided by the taxpayers. And because of that taxpayer assistance, I think it is entirely legitimate for the executives of those institutions to be subject to compensation limits.'' While some claim that the GSEs should be able to pay salaries commensurate with the private sector, these arguments failed to consider that the GSEs have yet to repay their debt to the U.S. taxpayers for their unprecedented bailouts. The 2015 New York Federal Reserve Bank Staff Report stated that taxpayers are entitled to ``a substantial risk premium,'' and the government has never collected the commitment fee taxpayers are owed. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew concurred in his June 17, 2015, testimony before the Financial Services Committee, which I chair, that ``the risk is being borne by taxpayers on an ongoing basis, and the conservatorship is not over.'' Mr. Speaker, while Congress continues to debate the best framework for comprehensive housing finance reform, enactment of S. 2036 is a positive step forward based on a simple principle: What people do with their money is their business; what they do with taxpayer money is our business. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in supporting S. 2036. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Congress of the United States, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC, November 16, 2015. Hon. Jeb Hensarling, Chairman, Committee on Financial Services. Dear Mr. Chairman: I write concerning H.R. 2243, the Equity in Government Compensation Act of 2015. As you know, the Committee on Financial Services received an original referral and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform a secondary referral when the bill was introduced on May 8, 2015. I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this legislation before the House of Representatives in an expeditious manner, and accordingly, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will forego action on the bill. The Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 2243 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. Further, I request your support for the appointment of conferees from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform during any House-Senate conference convened on this or related legislation. As you know, I introduced H.R. 1577, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Transparency Act of 2015, which makes those entities subject to the Freedom of Information Act when in conservatorship or receivership. The bill shares the same goal as H.R. 2243 in that it aims to ensure accountability, transparency and fairness within our Government-sponsored enterprises. The Committee appreciates your willingness to examine my bill and work towards its consideration by the full House. I would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on H.R. 2243 be included in the bill report filed by the Committee on Financial Services, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration, to memorialize our understanding. Sincerely, Jason Chaffetz, Chairman.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill), a very hardworking member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, so I urge all of my colleagues to support this commonsense, bipartisan bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3032, the Securities and Exchange Commission Reporting Modernization Act. I want to thank the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Sinema) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Hurt), for their very diligent and bipartisan work that resulted in the Financial Services Committee favorably reporting H.R. 3032 on a unanimous vote. I would also like to thank SEC Chair Mary Jo White and her fellow Commissioners for providing their unanimous recommendation to eliminate this reporting requirement, which the Congress previously repealed for all other regulatory agencies. No matter how modest the legislation may be, legislative efforts to eliminate unnecessary and otherwise extraneous reporting requirements are exactly the type of proactive suggestions our regulators should provide to the committee for consideration. Despite the Senate's unwillingness to pass equally bipartisan bills to spur growth, promote capital formation, and create jobs, I hope our colleagues in the Senate can agree that this exceedingly minor change is worthy of swift enactment. Again, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Sinema) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Hurt) for their bipartisan work. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3032) to amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to repeal a certain reporting requirement of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1317) to amend the Commodity Exchange Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to specify how clearing requirements apply to certain affiliate transactions, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1317. I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers), both very good members of the Financial Services Committee, as well as Ms. Fudge and Mr. Gibson from the Agriculture Committee, for their bipartisan work over, frankly, several years to clarify an important provision of title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act. H.R. 1317 is necessary to, once and for all, provide true relief for businesses that neither caused nor contributed to the financial crisis. The scope of Dodd-Frank's title VII, which governs the derivatives markets, captured thousands upon thousands of unsuspecting businesses who merely want to provide stable prices to their customers and ensure that there are predictable costs to produce those products. While we were able to address one of those negative impacts that Dodd-Frank was having on end users earlier this year as part of the TRIA Reauthorization, nonfinancial end users, regrettably, are still subject to the onerous and costly requirements of title VII. As long as a nonfinancial company uses a central treasury unit to consolidate their derivatives positions, H.R. 1317 will exempt the company's affiliates and subsidiaries from having to comply with title VII's many requirements. As many know, the House of Representatives last December unanimously passed a substantially similar bill to provide this desperately needed relief. Unfortunately, that bill met with the same fate so many other bipartisan bills that have been produced by the Financial Services Committee and the House: they passed on a good-faith, bipartisan basis but, unfortunately, have been disregarded by the Senate. Despite the significant differences between internal businesses or inter-affiliate derivatives trade and derivatives between unrelated counterparties, the Dodd-Frank Act treats all trades the same, which needlessly increase the cost of hedging risk for end users such as manufacturers, chemical companies, and utility companies, who, in turn, would do what, Mr. Speaker? Regrettably, pass those increased costs and market fluctuations on to their customers. In fact, Tom Quaadman, of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness, noted during the legislative hearing on H.R. 1317 that ``without this critical bipartisan language, end users and consumers would face increased costs, and companies may be forced to abandon proven and efficient methods for managing their risk.'' H.R. 1317 is not for Wall Street; it is clearly for Main Street, and I hope all my colleagues will join me in supporting this commonsense, bipartisan legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, but I just wish to urge all of my colleagues to support, again, a very bipartisan and very commonsense bill. This relief is needed for end users for proper risk management. It will indeed help these companies with economic growth. Again, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on this bill.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott), an outstanding member of the Agriculture committee.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. People are still hurting in this economy, Madam Chair. We all know that. We need to do everything we can, as the House, to promote economic growth. It is very difficult in this Chamber and in this institution to come by bipartisan legislation. But I am proud to say, in the House Financial Services Committee, we have passed numerous pieces of bipartisan legislation. They are modest because they are bipartisan. But they are, nonetheless, important and can make a difference in people's lives. There are 15 bills that have already passed the House Financial Services Committee either unanimously or near unanimously and then have gone to the House to be debated and have been passed, almost all of them, unanimously by voice vote or near 400-plus votes. They are bills like H.R. 2064, to help with emerging growth company regulatory reforms; H.R. 1525, that simplifies some of the Security and Exchange Commission disclosures; H.R. 432, the Small Investment Company Regulatory Relief Act; and a number of bills like these that have typically passed our committee 57-0, for example, 60-0, 53-0, and then have gone on to pass the House by voice vote. Again, these are bipartisan bills. They are modest bills, but they happen to be germane to this transportation bill because of the revenue stream, the funding source, the pay-for in the transportation bill. So because they have already been debated in committee, passed in the committee, debated in the House, passed in the House, we are simply packaging 15 of these bills together because there is an opportunity to have these become law and benefit the American people. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Transportation ought to be funded out of transportation fees. It shouldn't be funded out of the functional equivalent of a bank account tax. It should not be funded on the backs of home buyers, or particularly those taxpayers who are forced to backstop Fannie and Freddie. If we are ever going to have a sustainable housing finance system in America, these guarantee fees cannot be diverted. I want to thank the gentleman from Texas and the gentleman from Michigan. No, they didn't come up with the perfect solution, but it is far superior than this bank account tax and this home-buyer tax. It makes no sense whatsoever. So I urge the entire House to adopt the Neugebauer amendment and get rid of this terrible idea from the Senate.