Jeb Hensarling

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz), chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee that held a number of key hearings on the Export-Import Bank.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds to quote President Ronald Reagan on March 23, 1985: ``Why won't the Congress stop its export subsidies to a handful of corporations which account for less than 2 percent of US exports?'' I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney), another important member of the House Committee on Financial Services.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. DeSantis).

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), the distinguished chairman of the House Budget Committee.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining on each side?

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy), the chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the Committee on Financial Services.

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

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

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

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

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta), another great member of the House Financial Services Committee.

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 submit extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume simply to say, Mr. Speaker, at one time this administration told us, if you liked your doctor, you could keep them. Now this same administration is telling us, if you like your financial adviser, you can keep them. The first promise was broken, and now they are in the process of breaking the second promise due to something called the Department of Labor fiduciary rule. It will take away investment advice from hundreds of thousands, if not millions of low- and moderate-income people all around the Nation who rely upon this advice to save for retirement. This is something that should be considered by the Securities and Exchange Commission, and there has been outstanding work by the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner) who has been at the forefront of protecting retail investors, the small moms and pops planning for their retirement. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner).

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett), the distinguished chairman of our Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams), another outstanding member of the House Financial Services Committee.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, this amendment essentially guts the Retail Investor Protection Act and puts the Department of Labor, once again, in the driver's seat to deny potentially millions of our fellow countrymen, low- and moderate-income people, the right to have their own financial adviser, the right to have financial advice on a commission basis. In many respects, the gentleman's amendment just gives us an opportunity to vote on the same matter twice, so I am not sure exactly what is being attempted to be achieved with this. Again, Mr. Speaker, it is competition, it is innovation that has brought us something called the $7 trade. And my guess is, Warren Buffett doesn't necessarily need a $7 trade, but there are a lot of good folks, small business people, factory workers in Mesquite, farmers out near Mineola, Texas, good folks in the Fifth Congressional District, when they are planning for their retirement security, when they are trying to preserve their 401(k), their IRAs, they need that. Again, if we adopt the amendment of the gentleman from Massachusetts, we are right back to where we are--denying the ability for low and moderate-income people to have a choice in how they receive their financial advice, even if they will receive it. That is unacceptable, and I would urge a rejection of this amendment. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner), the author of H.R. 1090, the Retail Investor Protection Act.

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

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), chairman of the Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. First, Mr. Speaker, I want to recognize the gentleman from Tennessee and the passion that he brings to this debate. He has long been a champion of the Export-Import Bank. We have had a respectful disagreement over the substance of the issue, but at this moment I don't care to spend much time on the substance of the issue because we are debating a discharge petition. Mr. Speaker, it was an interesting history lesson that my colleague and friend introduced the House to, and I have no reason to doubt that it is an accurate history lesson. I will note for the Record that apparently somehow Mr. Cannon managed to get a building named after him. But the point I would make is this: whether the gentleman from Tennessee and others have disagreed with process at the Financial Services Committee--I know that they do--but the question before us, Mr. Speaker, is why punish the entirety of the House? Those who are bringing forth this discharge petition had the opportunity to allow Members on both sides of the aisle to offer amendments. People who were not on the Financial Services Committee could have had the opportunity to offer amendments, but not under this particular discharge petition. So, Mr. Speaker, the real complaint I have here is, regardless of what complaints or beefs they may have against me personally or against the process of the Financial Services Committee, why punish the entirety of the House? We hear so much about regular order and about empowering rank-and- file Members. Well, then, why aren't rank-and-file Members, then, empowered to offer amendments? We were told that it was simply to discharge a single piece of legislation. Then why not, at this point, let the House work its will? Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, that doesn't appear to happen. I perfectly understand that one man's economic development is another man's corporate welfare, and I think that debate will happen tomorrow. But here, right now, simply because there is a rule to have a discharge petition that would disqualify any Member from offering an amendment doesn't mean we should necessarily avail ourselves of it. The Constitution allows us to create debt. It doesn't mean it is a good thing for us to do that as we face yet another debt ceiling vote in front of us. So, Mr. Speaker, I would simply hope that Members would vote down this discharge petition, and if they believe strongly in it, then bring back another one, but at least allow Members on the floor to offer amendments. Republicans, Democrats, and people from all committees should be able to offer the amendments if that was the purpose of the discharge petition. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert), a valued member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. HENSARLING. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.