Jeb Hensarling

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chair, regardless of any particular inquiries, the inquiry the American people want to know is: Where are the jobs? Now, what we have seen from the Democrats, our friends on the other side of the aisle, is an attempt to spend our way into jobs, an attempt to borrow our way into jobs and now an attempt to bail out our way into jobs. And what is the result? The result is the highest unemployment rate in a generation, the first trillion dollar deficit in our Nation's history, and a tripling of the national debt in the next 10 years. Bailouts do not work. The Democratic bill enshrines us as a bailout Nation. It still allows people to privatize their profits and socialize their losses. Section 1609(n) of the underlying bill creates a permanent bailout fund. Now, maybe some aspect of it is sunset, but nowhere else do you find a permanent bailout fund is going to be sunset. I assume you create the bailout fund for bailouts. This is what will happen. If the American people believe that we can bail out our way into more jobs and that somehow we will have less systemic risk, they ought to support it. If they are tired of the bailouts, they need to support the Republican bill that ends the bailout. Ultimately, under their plan, you will have more taxpayer bailouts. Now, they told us, the Speaker told us, if we would pass TARP, that she would make sure the taxpayers were repaid. What do we have? We have another TARP grab here by the chairman of the committee for yet another taxpayer-funded foreclosure mitigation plan, when every single other taxpayer-funded foreclosure mitigation plan has failed. The only one that will work is a job. That's what we need--jobs, not bailouts.

Mr. HENSARLING. As I listen carefully to this debate, I'm struck by the fact that this United States Congress doesn't seem to get it. The number one job of this Congress ought to be jobs. Again, I know some on the other side of the aisle take umbrage at the facts, and the facts are, we have double-digit unemployment, the highest unemployment in a generation. 3.6 million have lost their jobs since President Obama became President. Now, I was informed by the distinguished chairman of the Financial Services Committee that perhaps some, like myself, on this side of the aisle have amnesia because the problem really started in 2007, which conveniently coincides with the year that the Democrats took control of Congress. So apparently, amnesia does not know partisan bounds, Madam Chairman. So what we have here in front of us is an amendment to put even greater burdens on small business, the job engine of America. How many more regulations, how much more cost do you have to put on small businesses as they're struggling to meet their payrolls, as they're struggling to try to keep their businesses afloat? How many more jobs have to be lost, Madam Chairman? I hope no more. And we should reject this amendment.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding the time. This, in some respects, may be one of the few areas of agreement on both sides of the aisle that the rating agencies played a critical role in the economic turmoil that has been foisted upon our economy. We may differ on the remedy, though. What is needed here is more competition, not more lawsuits. And what happens is when you lower the bar for a lawsuit, you raise the bar, barriers to entry, and make it more difficult. We know that for all intents and purposes that the government created a rating agency oligopoly that prevented the market from enjoying more competition, and we had all of this AAA-rated paper, and we know what has happened. In many respects, Madam Chair, what we have seen now is the Democrats have tried to spin their way into more jobs than we have--our Nation's first trillion-dollar deficit; they have tried to borrow their way into more jobs--we're now borrowing 43 cents on the dollar and sending the IOUs to our children and grandchildren. The bill that is brought to the floor today creates a permanent bailout authority for Wall Street. They have tried to bail out their way to more jobs, and this particular amendment says maybe we can sue our way into more jobs. That is not the way it is done, Madam Chair. We need more competition, not more lawsuits. I urge the adoption of the amendment from the gentleman from California.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Madam Chair, I could not agree more with the speakers whom I heard or with the intention of the gentlewoman who offered the amendment that we certainly need greater transparency in these taxpayer-funded housing programs. I would also like to see that we include, maybe, HOPE for Homeowners, for which $300 billion has been authorized, but on the last date that it's available, which is dating back to July, only 1,000 applications and 50 loans closed. Yet $300 billion was authorized. In the HAMP program, there was $75 billion of taxpayer money for 650,000, apparently, temporary loan modifications on a program that was supposed to help 4 million homeowners. HARP, the Home Affordable Refinance Program, was supposedly going to help 4 to 5 million, and instead, there were only 116,000 loans. Now let's look at what those who actually own the loans have done. There have been 4.7 million workouts that have happened in the competitive marketplace without any interference by government with no taxpayer money expended. I mean, Madam Chair, this is the kind of transparency that we need. All of these taxpayer-funded foreclosure mitigation programs of this administration and of this Congress have been absolute abject failures. The only loan modification program, foreclosure mitigation program, that is going to work is a job, and we know what the record of this administration and of this Congress is: the highest unemployment rate in a generation and a double-digit unemployment rate. Until you get rid of the looming storm clouds of Obamanomics, the debt, the spending, and the bailouts, you won't get the jobs. If you don't get the jobs, people can't keep their homes. So I am happy that we will shine a little bit more transparency into this.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I guess at 5'6'' inches I am doing well simply to look over the 2,500-page bill that spends yet another half a trillion dollars of money we do not have. Since the Democrats have come to power, they have increased the deficit tenfold. We have our first trillion-dollar deficit, a budget plan to triple-- triple--the national debt in the next 10 years. Mr. Speaker, every page of this behemoth spending bill represents an IOU to the Chinese to be paid for by our children and grandchildren. Every single page of this 2,500-page, half-a-trillion-dollar bill crushes yet another job in America. Nobody is going to launch new jobs in America when they have to pay for this, Mr. Speaker. Our highest levels of spending, our highest levels of unemployment. Mr. Speaker, the Democrats don't get it.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Chair, again, what we have before us is the ``Perpetual Wall Street Bailout and Increased Job Losses Through Credit Rationing Act of 2009.'' No matter how much our friends on the other side of the aisle wish to deny it, the only reason to create a bailout fund is to bail someone out. The American people are sick and tired of paying for the bailouts. Now, my friends on the other side of the aisle say we're not really going to use this bailout fund, which kind of begs the question: Why are you creating it in the first place? Well, it's just going to be used for wind-down cost. Well, in bankruptcy, typically you use the assets of the bankrupt company to do that. So this $150 billion plus the $50 billion line of credit from the Treasury, what's the $200 billion being used for? Well, ultimately it's going to be used to bail out other Wall Street parties, the creditors, the shareholders, the counterparties, just like what was done in AIG. Now, again the distinguished chairman of the Financial Services Committee says, Well, our bailout fund is like a death penalty. Well, it may be a death penalty, but the death sentence has been commuted for up to 3 years. And, by the way, as it's commuted, just like in the AIG bailout, Societe Generale could walk away with $16.5 billion, a French concern, like they did in AIG. Goldman Sachs could walk away with $14 billion in the bailout like they did in AIG. Merrill Lynch could walk away with $6.2 billion. Deutsche Bank, a German concern, could walk away with $8.5 billion. UBS, a Swiss concern, could walk away with $3.8 billion. These are the counterparties on credit default swaps to AIG, and their legislation would replicate it, Madam Chair. There's nothing in their legislation that would prevent the entire AIG fiasco from repeating itself, and, if anything, they would triple it, up to 3 years, up to 3 years of bailout authority there. So not only is the death sentence commuted in their so-called bailout fund, but not unlike the GM and Chrysler cases, we could have a Lazarus-like resurrection. Not unlike old GM and old Chrysler, well, you flip a switch and all of a sudden you take care of your political allies, the United Auto Workers, and you've got new GM and you've got new Chrysler, and all of a sudden they just keep on trucking along. So it's an interesting metaphor to call this a death penalty. What it is is it is a bailout. Here we all are, Madam Chair, at a very tough time in our Nation's economy and 3.6 million of our fellow citizens have lost their jobs since the President told us if we passed his plan, his government stimulus plan, we'd only have 8 percent unemployment. Still, we know we have 10 percent unemployment. And yet here we have a piece of legislation that's ultimate impact is to make credit more expensive, less available when small businesses are losing jobs by the tens of thousands and thousands. Why, in the middle of one of the great credit contractions in our Nation's economy, would you want to make credit more expensive and less available? It's beyond me, Madam Chair. It is beyond me. Again, my fear is that under this type of legislation the big will get bigger. This is again Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, politically favorite firms given a political mission and that blows up. Now, again maybe the Merrill Lynches and the UBSs are taken care of. The school teachers in Mesquite, Texas, they're not taken care of under this legislation. They end up paying for the bailout in this political economy. The big will get bigger and they will be given a political mission. Again, your job will depend not so much on what you do at home but who you know in Washington. One of the great free market economists of our time, Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman said, ``Sooner or later, and perhaps sooner than many of us expect, an ever bigger government would destroy prosperity that we owe to the free market and the human freedom proclaimed so eloquently in the Declaration of Independence.'' That moment is here, and we must vote for freedom and against this bill.

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chair, at this time I would like to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Capital Markets Subcommittee and one of the true champions of economic liberty in Congress, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).

Mr. HENSARLING. I know that the distinguished chairman relishes this. And, again, I'm not here to suggest that the activity is illegal, was immoral, was even fattening. I'm here to suggest it is what a political economy is all about. I would suggest anyone else besides the chairman of the Financial Services Committee making that telephone call, that facility wouldn't be open today. Under this bill, Madam Chairman, Americans' job security will depend less on how well you perform your job at home and more upon who you know in Washington. That is what the political economy is all about. This bill represents an assault on the fundamental economic liberties of the American citizen. You want a home mortgage, you now have to get the approval of the Federal Government. You want to offer a credit product? The Federal Government. If you build a successful business, it can be torn down unless you go to the Federal Government on bended knee. Fewer jobs, more bailouts, more government control, less personal freedom. It is time to reject this bill.

Mr. HENSARLING. If the gentleman would just yield on that one point, I would say the results were seen immediately, and that is an additional 3.6 million of our countrymen lost their jobs under this program. I yield back to the gentleman.

Mr. HENSARLING. I yield the gentleman 2 additional minutes.

Mr. HENSARLING. Before yielding to the other gentleman from Texas, I will yield myself 1 minute. I heard the gentleman from North Carolina in a spate of candor say he didn't know what the solution was. I do know what the solution is. It's the Republican substitute. I would commend the gentleman to read it. It ends bailouts. Your bill will increase bailouts. It reforms the Federal Reserve. Your bill increases the powers of the Federal Reserve. This bill protects consumer rights. Your bill constricts consumer rights. Your bill was stone-cold silent with respect to the government- sponsored enterprises, but now you protect them. Clearly the GSEs are too big to fail. Our bill goes to the source of the problem. If the gentleman needs to know what the solution is, I would be happy to provide him with a copy of the Republican substitute. It is now my privilege, Madam Chair, to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer).

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chair, might I inquire how much time remains on both sides.

Mr. HENSARLING. At this time, Madam Chair, I would like to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Capital Markets Subcommittee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, section 4301 will allow it to decide, again, which credit cards, which home mortgages, and which car loans we are allowed to receive, and the list goes on and on and on. Madam Chairman, what this really leads us to is a bailout and job loss bill where the big get bigger, the small get smaller, the taxpayer gets poorer and the economy gets more political. Madam Chairman, what does a political economy look like? Well, we've seen it. We've seen it in the government-sponsored enterprises of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, where we give them these monopoly powers. They're allowed to grow these profits, but then they do a deal with Congress, oh, but you have to have an affordable housing mission. You have to have this political mission. And $1 trillion of taxpayer liability exposure later, we know how that turned out. That's what a political economy is about. How about GM and Chrysler? When they went bankrupt, all of a sudden, allies of the administration, the United Auto Workers, they end up with a sweetheart deal. And Chrysler, senior secured creditors received 29 cents on the dollars; but the United Auto Workers received 43 cents on the dollar, and they ended up owning the company. How convenient. That's what a political economy looks like. And look at individual Members of Congress, including the distinguished chairman of this committee. From The Wall Street Journal, dated June 5, 2009, quote, ``The latest self-appointed car czar is Massachusetts' own Barney Frank, who intervened this week to save a GM distribution center in Norton, Massachusetts. The warehouse, which employs some 90 people, was slated for closure by the end of the year under GM's restructuring plan. But Mr. Frank put in a call to GM's CEO, Fritz Henderson, and secured a new lease on life for the facility.'' Now, I respect our chairman. I'm not here to suggest----

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I rise tonight to oppose the Permanent Wall Street Bailout and Increase Job Losses Through Credit Rationing Act of 2009. If Congress had to abide by the truth-in- advertising laws that they impose on the rest of the Nation, surely this would be the official title of, indeed, this 1,279-page piece of legislation. Madam Chairman, it is section 1609(n), for those who may have written the legislation and forgotten it, that creates a permanent $200 billion bailout fund. To paraphrase a line from the famous Kevin Costner movie ``Field of Dreams,'' if you build it, they will come. The only reason to create a Wall Street bailout fund is to bail out Wall Street permanently. Now, the Democrats claim, Madam Chairman, that the bailout fund will not be paid for by taxpayers; but, Madam Chairman, these are the very same people who told us that the GSEs, the government sponsored enterprises, would never, never receive a dime of taxpayer money. And I guess, in a sense, they were literally correct. Instead, it's $1 trillion, $1 trillion of taxpayer money now committed to the failed government-sponsored enterprises. These are the very same people who told us that, hey, don't worry about the Social Security trust fund; it'll get paid back. Medicare is financially sound. The National Federal Flood Insurance Program will never need a taxpayer infusion. Madam Chairman, they were wrong then and they are wrong now. Besides creating a permanent Wall Street bailout fund, Madam Chairman, this bill represents the fourth piece of the Democrats' failing economic agenda. First was the $1 trillion stimulus, next the $600 billion national energy tax. After that, the $1 trillion government takeover of our health care plan. Now, we all remember the stimulus plan. The President told us if it was enacted that unemployment would never rise above 8 percent. Yet our unemployment rate is at double digits, the worst in a generation; and the legislation before us will cause even more job losses. In sections 4301, 4304, 4308, it will do this by empowering an unelected czar to unilaterally--give the power to unilaterally ban and ration consumer credit products, and then finance itself through hidden taxes on consumer credit and successful American companies. You heard the study alluded to earlier: interest rates paid by consumers would rise 1\1/2\ percent; new jobs would be reduced by almost 5 percent in our economy. More jobs would be lost, Madam Chairman, under the bailout authority which assesses $150 billion of taxes on large financial firms. Now, maybe those on the other side of the aisle wish to engage in the myth that somehow that won't be passed on to consumers, that somehow this won't impact credit lines at small businesses; but they are wrong. Increased interest rates. Increased fees, fewer loans to small businesses. Madam Chairman, once again, more jobs will be lost under the Permanent Wall Street Bailout and Increase Job Losses Through Credit Rationing Act of 2009. The United States Chamber of Commerce has said that if this act is passed, it would have a significant adverse effect on small businesses by restricting their access to credit. Some would lose credit altogether. Madam Chairman, I talk to a lot of good community bankers in my part of Texas. I have heard the chairman allude to the ICBA, and I certainly respect those who have Washington ZIP codes. Frankly, I respect those who have Texas ZIP codes a little bit more. I talked to a man who helps build Palestine, Texas, Kev Williams, East Texas National Bank. And he said, Congressman, if I have more compliance costs and the Federal Government in going to limit the types of customized credit products I can offer, we will lose jobs in Anderson County, Texas, that I have the privilege of representing in Congress. I heard from a small businessman in my district, from Jacksonville, Texas, ``As a small businessman the restriction on credit may very well mean the end of my company.'' Madam Chairman, why should we pass any legislation that will harm the ability of small businesses to access credit in the midst of a credit contraction? After 3.6 million of our fellow countrymen have lost their jobs since President Obama took office, I ask my Democratic colleagues, how many more jobs have to be lost? How many more? And, Madam Chairman, next the government takeover. Again, after proposing the $600 billion tax on our energy sector, a $1 trillion takeover of our health care system, the Democrats now bring us the next chapter in the narrative, and that is the takeover of huge portions of our consumer credit and finance markets. They will create a huge new, complex government bureaucracy and grant it sweeping draconian powers. Section 1104 will allow it to break up successful companies like Dell Computer or American Airlines. Section 204 and 4306 will allow it to dictate the pay structure, all the way down to a bank teller in east Texas making $25,000 a year.

Mr. HENSARLING. I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman from California for yielding. I've listened to my friend from Colorado say that under their plan, they are done with the bailouts. Well, Mr. Speaker, it kind of begs the question: Why do they have a bailout fund? Why do you have a bailout fund if you're not going to bail people out? My wife and I started a college fund for our children, and the reason we are having a college fund is because we intend to send our children to college. Why is it, Mr. Speaker, that the Democrats have a bailout fund, but now they expect us to suspend disbelief that they won't use it? If I can paraphrase a line from the famous Kevin Costner film, ``Field of Dreams,'' ``if you build it, they will come.'' If you create a bailout fund, people will come for bailouts. That's what this is. This is the TARP bill in perpetuity. So, Mr. Speaker, if the American people like bailouts, our friends on the other side of the aisle certainly have the bill for them. But as I talk to my constituents in the Fifth Congressional District of Texas, they are tired of the bailouts. The school teacher in Mesquite, the fireman in Malakoff, the farmer in Henderson County--they are tired of the bailouts. They are tired of paying for this. And yet they create a $200 billion bailout fund. Worse than that, Mr. Speaker, this is a job-killing bill. It is a bill that creates a huge Federal bureaucracy to ban and ration credit. I mean this is the group of people who have brought us double-digit unemployment, the worst unemployment in a generation. I would just ask my friends on the other side of the aisle, how many more jobs have to be lost under your plan? Small business needs credit. You're going to crush it. Reject the rule. Reject the bill.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, we all know the sad news that under this administration and this Congress, our Nation has the worst, the worst unemployment rate in a generation. Over 3\1/2\ million of our fellow countrymen have lost their jobs since President Obama has come into office. So what have our friends on the other side of the aisle tried to do? Well, they have tried to spend their way into job creation with a $1.1 trillion government stimulus plan, a $410 billion omnibus spending plan, and a threatened trillion dollar takeover of our health care system plan. Well, that didn't get us any jobs. So they have tried to borrow their way into prosperity. Now we have the first trillion-dollar deficit in our Nation's history, a spending plan to triple, triple the national debt in the next 10 years. So borrowing didn't work. Spending didn't work. So here's the latest plan, Mr. Speaker. Let's have a perpetual plan to tax people when they die. Maybe that will create jobs in the economy. Mr. Speaker, it doesn't work. It doesn't work. As the gentleman from Texas said, it is time to put the death tax to death. People have already paid. We will not start new businesses when you tax small businesses. It's time to get rid of the death tax once and for all. It's an unfair tax. It ought to be an illegal tax.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, government-run health care is government-rationed health care. Today in America when our loved ones need health care, they wait hours, maybe days; but in Britain and Canada, they wait weeks, months, perhaps even a year. Mr. Speaker, since I have been age 5, I have gone fishing with my father. Those are moments I treasure. But 15 years ago he went to see his doctor about a chest pain; 48 hours later, he had triple bypass surgery. And guess what? At age 81, we are still fishing. But had he been in Britain, had he been in Canada, there might never have been another fishing trip. My children might have never known their grandfather because health care delayed is health care denied. Government-rationed health care will mean our loved ones will suffer. They will languish, and perhaps even perish. We should never support a children-bankrupting, health care-rationing, freedom-crushing $1 trillion government takeover of our health care system. Let's support the Republican plan to give the American people the health care they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, since the President and the Democrats took control of Congress, they have passed a $1.1 trillion stimulus plan, a $410 billion omnibus spending plan, they have passed appropriations bills that have increased spending 10, 20, 30 percent. They passed our first trillion-dollar deficit in our Nation's history. They passed a budget that will triple--triple--the national debt in the next 10 years. And now today, a $1.3 trillion government takeover of our health care system. Mr. Speaker, you cannot improve the health of a nation by bankrupting its children. There are a trillion reasons, a trillion reasons, to defeat this government takeover of our health care system. Let me give you one more: government control is the rationing of our health care. Think about your loved ones. Think about your constituents. Think about your fellow countrymen. Reject this trillion-dollar takeover of our government health care.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, today I recognize Kaufman County Veterans for their tremendous work in procuring a replica of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall. The memorial wall, which will be permanently located at the Kaufman County Veterans Memorial Park, will be a lasting tribute to those who not only served in Vietnam, but to all the veterans of Kaufman County. As we prepare for Veterans Day on November 11th, let us remember those throughout our nation's history who have sacrificed so much so that we may be free. Freedom is not free; it comes at an incredible cost. Veterans and their families, more than any other group of Americans, understand that cost. President Coolidge once said, ``A nation which forgets its defenders, will itself soon be forgotten.'' This park and wall in Kaufman, Texas, will forever be a reminder of the sacrifices our fellow Americans and their families endured so that we may enjoy the freedoms that have made our country so great. As the Congressman of the Fifth District, I would like to thank everyone who played a role in building the Kaufman County Veterans Memorial Park and bringing the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall to Kaufman County.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Speaker, today I am pleased to recognize the Sunnyvale Pecan Harvest Festival and the first ever Sunnyvale Pecan Queen. The Sunnyvale Pecan Harvest Festival was a vision of Sunnyvale Chamber of Commerce Chairman Terry Reid and has been brought to fruition through her tremendous efforts, as well as that of other Chamber members, local businesses and the Town of Sunnyvale. This festival is the first of its kind in Sunnyvale and is sure to be a popular community event for years to come. A festival would not be complete without a Queen, and Sunnyvale has chosen a wonderful lady to serve as the first ever ``Pecan Queen.'' Ms. Leona Fischer has been a resident of Sunnyvale for more than 40 years and continues to contribute to her community as much today as she did when she first moved there. As the director of the Douglas and Michael Kindergarten and Day School, Ms. Fischer would bring the children attending the school out to her property in Sunnyvale for camping, swimming and fishing. When she moved to Sunnyvale permanently, Ms. Fischer and her husband started antique and real estate businesses and continued to contribute to their community. While her antique shop has since closed, Ms. Fischer can still be seen around Sunnyvale, running her real estate business. Ms. Fischer makes towns like Sunnyvale a great place to live and work, and I am proud to represent Ms. Fischer and congratulate her on this well- deserved honor. With a Classic Custom Car and Truck show, live music performances-- including a special guest appearance by Grammy winner Art Greenhaw and the awarding of the ``Beth Bassett Music Achievement Award''--the baking and photo contests and the food and shopping opportunities, the First Annual Sunnyvale Pecan Harvest Festival is sure to be an outstanding event for the families of Sunnyvale. Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Fifth District of Texas, I am privileged to recognize Terry Reid, Leona Fischer, the Sunnyvale Chamber of Commerce and the town of Sunnyvale for all their hard work and dedication. I wish them great success.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I reserve my time to close.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the chairman for his clarification. Again, I believe that ultimately this is an amendment that would simply impose price controls for a limited duration of time, contrary to what some of us were led to believe. But again, the most important aspect of this legislation has to be put into the context of the $1 trillion government takeover of our health care plan to be voted on Friday or Saturday. This will make credit more expensive and less available. It should be defeated. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. I have only 60 seconds, but yes, I will yield a short time to the chairman.