Bill Huizenga

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've got a radical idea, a radical idea for the people of America. Let's use Harbor Maintenance Trust Funds for harbor maintenance. For 25 years, we've been robbing Peter to pay Paul, but in reality that $7 billion that we have taken away from that has really been robbing places like Manistee, Michigan, where this weekend in my district a ship ran aground and had to get towed off and the damage that happened to it. We have 11 harbors in the Second District, hundreds in the Great Lakes and countless in the Nation on both of the coasts and the Gulf of Mexico. Enough money has been collected every year to pay for all of this maintenance that has to happen, but unfortunately Congress has been skimming it to help pay for other programs. I appreciate my friend from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany), his leadership with the RAMP Act, and Chairman Upton from Michigan in leading this in the Great Lakes. We know this is the right thing to do for America and for our transportation needs, our infrastructure needs. Our Great Lakes need it. The coasts need it, our harbors need it, our economy needs this to happen. I strongly support this amendment today.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 133, had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' personal explanation

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a massive new branch of government created under the Dodd-Frank Act, fails to safeguard proprietary information given to the Bureau by regulated entities. I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 4014, which will create more peace of mind for financial institutions while offering more oversight and consumer protections to hardworking taxpayers. If you remember one thing, remember this: we all agree on stringent consumer protections. This bill is a commonsense measure that adds necessary oversight to the Bureau. Specifically, H.R. 4014 would immediately close a loophole in the law that was created during the creation of the CFPB. Currently, information collected by the CFPB from financial institutions is not protected by the same confidentiality provisions that other financial regulators are required to provide. Additionally, we must ensure parity between State bank supervisors and other State regulatory agencies that oversee nonbanks at the State level and make sure they are afforded the same protections. We need a real solution to ensure that privileged information will not be intentionally disclosed to any third party. H.R. 4014 would protect that data that depository and non-depository institutions provide during an oversight exam, therefore, enhancing the Bureau's supervision process and giving financial institutions the much-needed certainty that the information will be kept private. Unlike current statutes regarding other Federal agencies assessing relevant information, the Dodd-Frank Act failed to provide such protections despite the CFPB's claim that they won't or wouldn't share such information. The simple truth is that if we don't pass H.R. 4014, the CFPB could legally share privileged information with third parties. Absent this specific congressional legislation, the courts have permitted this practice of sharing in the cases of other Federal agencies. Although the Bureau has said that they are prepared to take all reasonable and appropriate steps to protect proprietary information, we cannot be sure. Therefore, we must pass this bill to restrict them from doing so. Even President Barack Obama's appointed director of the CFPB, Richard Cordray, recently testified that this was an ``oversight'' and that he would be ``supportive'' of a legislative solution to ensure privileged information is not leaked to third parties through the CFPB. My bill is that real legislative solution. This is a commonsense fix that will put an end to the needless uncertainty and legal costs to both the CFPB and to financial institutions. Mr. Speaker, while I believe this issue must and will eventually be addressed in the Dodd-Frank Act, this is a very important step. I urge the swift adoption of this important legislation to restore genuine accountability to the CFPB and to deliver a more efficient and effective government for America's hardworking taxpayers. I look forward to working with my Senate colleagues to see that this omission in the Dodd-Frank Act is quickly rectified and sent to the President for his signature.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address the House and to address the Nation today. As a small business owner, I know the importance of fostering and creating an environment that promotes job creation, economic security and opportunity, and allows especially small businesses to grow. I also know that Americans and Michiganders and those in the Second District in my home State of Michigan and across the country are looking for real solutions that will grow jobs now. That's why I support the JOBS Act. It will jump-start our economy and restore opportunities for America's primary job creators: our small businesses, start-ups, and entrepreneurs. Now, I've been around long enough in my first year here, Mr. Speaker, to unfortunately see that sometimes you have to repackage ideas and put a different colored bow on it for people to accept it because what we're going to be passing has been passed. I sit on the Financial Services Committee. We've passed a number of these bills--and all of these bills, I believe. That's part of the America's Job Creators Plan that the House Republicans have put forward. But what we're doing today is we are going to be putting this JOBS Act; it's compromised of six bills that have been approved by the committee. Very quickly, those six bills are: One, Reopening the American Capital Markets to Emerging Growth Companies Act. What that's going to do is it's going to allow temporary relief from some of the onerous SEC, or Securities and Exchange Commission, regulations that are on those small businesses. Number two, the Access to Capital for Job Creators Act is going to allow small companies to raise capital by, again, removing some of those regulatory bans that are in there and that say that a small business can't use advertisements to go try to get and attract investors. Well, in an age of Internet and those kinds of things, that has a huge impact. It also brings along a concept that's been out there called crowdfunding. That's the third bill, Entrepreneur Access to Credit Act. It is also going to ease the requirements that allow things like crowdfunding, people being able to go and spread this out on Facebook and Twitter and Internet and to their friends, to pull in those small-dollar investors that are going to be able to give them the capital that they need to launch that innovative idea. Well, the fourth is the Small Company Capital Formation Act. It allows small businesses to go public by elevating the threshold that companies are exempt from $5 million to $50 million. That is going to be able to really, truly impact those small entrepreneurs and small business owners who are looking to take their business to the next step. The fifth one is the Private Company Flexibility and Growth Act. That's expected to give small companies more room to grow before having to go public. Currently, there's a regulation that says you can have no more than 500 investors in your small company. This doubles that. This says you can have up to 1,000. We believe that that is also going to be able to allow those small businesses who are in transition, who are in that acquisition mode, who are in that growth mode, to be able to go up there and be successful. Finally, number six, the Capital Expansion Act would increase the number of shareholders allowed to invest in a community bank from 500 to 2,000. Why would we include this part? Well, community banks really are the backbone of many of those small investors. They're the ones that they go to church with and shop at the grocery store with. They know their businesses. They may know that it's been a long-term relationship with that local community bank. By being able to expand the footprint of those community banks, we're going to be able to expand their lending power as well to those small businesses. Well, it's interesting that here we actually have a bipartisan package of bills. This isn't just something that's the Republicans' ideas. In fact, in the Financial Services Committee, we had this as bipartisan votes. And really, it truly is going to help create a healthier environment for small businesses to hire and expand. In fact, President Obama's administration released what's called a Statement of Administration Policy yesterday supporting this very act. We welcome his support and recognition of this bill's innovative solutions to ensure that small businesses can access capital needed to expand, hire, and invest. And again, that's because you, the American people, we here in the House of Representatives are looking for those real honest solutions. Well, it's far time that we get government out of the way of small businesses as well, the engine of our economy. We need to focus on the real economy, and our priority has to be that focus. According to the Kauffman Foundation, start-up companies created nearly 40 million jobs, 40 million jobs since 1980, and the Small Business Administration shows small businesses generate over 60 percent of all the new jobs created here in the U.S. Sixty percent of all those jobs that we are hoping to have in this country are created by these small businesses. In fact, even the World Bank has a report. It's called ``Doing Business,'' and it showed that the United States has fallen to 13th for the ``ease of starting a business.'' So with that, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this as a key to lasting, honest economic recovery. And we need--America needs--these real jobs, real solutions, and real results right now.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of national school choice because we need to offer our children effective education opportunities. And in Michigan, despite spending just shy of $10,000 annually to educate each child, we need to look at a couple of facts. One, only 31 percent of eighth-graders are actually considered proficient in math. The other element that is very disheartening to me is the fact that one child drops out of school in America every 26 seconds. We have an obligation to give parents the tools and resources to get their children out of bad educational environments and into better ones. As a Member of Congress, I support school choice and allowing States to even opt out of the No Child Left Behind program and use educational resources in a way that will best meet their local needs, not the demands of Washington, D.C. It should be up to parents--not governments--to choose what's best for their children. Better traditional schools, public charter schools, private schools, virtual education, and homeschooling. I personally advocated for these opportunities when I sat on the board of a public charter school in Michigan. I served as the director of development at Zeeland Christian Schools, and most importantly, as a parent along with my wife, who homeschooled our children. Those of us in Congress must continue to encourage and champion school reform.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. I, too, want to rise today in recognition of this 39th year since this decision has come down from the Supreme Court, and it is something that has affected my family, my life. I think we have all known somebody who has had an abortion, whether she felt forced into it or whether she made that choice. Every single one of them, I know, has regretted that. This issue of life became very personal for my wife and me as we had to move forward through troubled pregnancies and after losing quite a few pregnancies, struggling with that whole notion of ``what is life?'' and of ``what does that mean to have that life growing in you?'' We firmly came down on the side of this being a gift from God, that creation that happens. That's something that we want to protect. I can tell you that the hardworking taxpayers don't expect their dollars to go towards procedures such as this and that it's something that this House has continued to fight for. I hold this issue very dear, and my wife, who now serves on the board of a crisis pregnancy center back in west Michigan, also holds that very near and dear. I will continue to fight for that sanctity of life and for that dignity of life at the beginning as well as at the end as long as we're here in Congress.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this time to come and report back to this body and to the people of the Second District about my very quick but very informative weekend trip to Afghanistan where I was able to be cautiously encouraged by the progress that the Afghan National Army is making there. Mainly, my goal was to go and say ``thank you'' to the men and women of all the different branches and to let them know that they will not be forgotten by me, by my constituents or by the rest of us here in this body. I especially want to say ``thank you'' to our international partners--the Brits, the Aussies, the Germans, the Dutch, the Romanians--who are there with us along with many others who are pushing this effort forward. I also want to say ``thank you'' to the Embassy staff for their fine work and to the men and women of the Air National Guard, who are there sacrificing, especially those men and women from the 82nd Airborne, who hosted us in Kandahar. I also thank the marines at Camp Leatherneck in Helmand province. I have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, I now proudly carry this challenge coin given to me by a new friend, a sergeant major from Michigan. I carry this in my pocket every day, and I want them to know that they will not be forgotten.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Thank you, Chairman Camp, I appreciate that. I'm a little confused myself. I saw one of our Senate colleagues from New York on television this morning talking about how we needed to pass this 2-month extension, and he would be the first one on an airplane back to Washington, DC., so that we could negotiate a yearlong deal. I'm confused. Why don't we just do that right now. That's what the American people expect. The American people expect us to get this deal done right now and to provide them some certainty for an entire year versus 2 months. Now, this Monday morning I had a breakfast with my joint Chambers of Commerce in Holland and Zeeland, and we had almost 500 people there. And when I asked the question, who here thinks this 2-month extension is a good idea? Not a single hand went up. I said, okay, maybe I need to ask this a little differently. Who here thinks that this is a dumb idea to do a 2-month extension? Virtually every single hand in that breakfast went up. The American people are looking for long-term solutions. Employers are looking for long-term solutions. It's called quarterly reports. I'm a small business owner. Oftentimes people have to file quarterly reports. We're not even doing them the service of giving them a full quarter to change their paperwork; we're doing 2 out of 3 months. Now, you want to talk about a burden on small business, I can tell you it is. It's time for this House to go to work, which we have done. It's time for our Senate colleagues to do the exact same thing. Because guess what? My three employees--Irv, Dirk, and Larry--they're all at work today. Why isn't that good enough for the Senate? There are two things that fundamentally need to be included in this. First and furthermore is 12 months of certainty. Let's get through that debate of how we are going to offset the costs and how we are going to make sure that this works for the employee, the employer, those with a job and those without a job. We also need to make sure that we don't lose sight of the Keystone pipeline in here; an immediate 20,000 jobs that can be provided here in the United States, 20,000 jobs that could come to this country and help alleviate the need for these systems, the need for unemployment insurance. And it's the right thing to do.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to implore my colleagues in the Senate and to the President, it's time to stand with the American worker. We're talking about adding 20,000 jobs as we approved the Keystone pipeline coming from Alberta, Canada, down to the gulf shore. But Canada's already a leading source of our oil. They actually give us more oil and produce more oil than Saudi Arabia. Michigan is actually an excellent example of what happens with that partnership. Enbridge, which is actually a competitor to TransCanada right now, is already looking at increasing its capacity and expanding its pipeline; Marathon Refineries, looking at expanding its capacity to be able to handle these Canadian crudes. We know that this inflow of Canadian oil is a positive thing. Zero taxpayer dollars are going to be used for this, and it will be put thousands of our American workers back to work at a crucial time. The oil will be extracted. The question is: Where is it going to go? Is it going to be shipped to the United States and create U.S. jobs, or is it going to Asia to help fund the engine to compete against us? It's time to stand with the American worker, Mr. President.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. I rise today with a twinge of sadness in my heart as I pay tribute to Frederik Meijer, a friend to the entire west Michigan community and one of America's most entrepreneurial spirits, who passed away this week just shy of his 92nd birthday. Fred was born in Greenville, Michigan, in 1919, and was known as the ``father of the super store.'' His innovation and entrepreneurship will live on in his Meijer grocery stores, with over 200 stores in five different States. Mr. Meijer will be remembered in west Michigan for his philanthropy, his friendship, and care of the community he lived in and its residents. He and his wife, Lena, gave back and invested millions in west Michigan, and created what would become one of the State's top attractions, the Frederik Meijer Gardens and Sculpture Park. Despite growing one of the most successful businesses in the country and revolutionizing the retail model, Mr. Meijer remained a typical west Michigan down-to-earth person who once remarked, ``Money is only a tool'' and ``Money doesn't buy happiness.'' He truly knew what was important and kept that in the forefront: friends, family, a strong relationship with his neighbors and community. The thing he loved to do the most was to hand out ``Purple Cow'' cards--free ice cream cards to kids in his stores. That will be remembered by my family as well. Again, I rise to pay tribute to him, his family, and the innovation and entrepreneurial legacy he leaves behind. Mr. Meijer, you will be missed but you will not be forgotten.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask the American people to let their voice be heard. Our crushing national debt and our out-of-control spending is something that has been made aware of for so many, but it is time to do something about it. As part of the House Republican plan for America's job creators, we have a stated goal: to pay down America's unsustainable debt burden and start living within our means. Madam Speaker, when I served in the Michigan Legislature, we had to live under that same requirement of a balanced budget according to the Michigan Constitution. It made for some very, very difficult decisions. But you know what, Madam Speaker? The American people are not only ready, they are asking for this reasonable step to be made for us to insert this balanced budget amendment into the United States Constitution as well. They need to do it in their own lives. It's time government do it as well with theirs. Living within our means is a requirement in their lives. It is a requirement for a vast majority of the State governments. It's time that the Federal Government do that as well. It's time for your voice to be heard. And, frankly, Madam Speaker, it's time for the American people to hold accountable those who will not listen.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, today we recognize Dutch American Heritage Day, a day that honors the strong friendship between our two countries and the many contributions of Americans of Dutch descent. It was the Netherlands who first officially recognized the flag of the newly formed United States of America on this day in 1776, and later, The Hague would become the first American Embassy in the world. Today, the United States and the Netherlands share a very robust economic relationship. The Netherlands is the third-largest investor in the U.S. Between exports and this investment, our partnership helps to generate over 700,000 jobs in the U.S. In 2010, the Netherlands ranked seventh among all the trading partners the U.S. exports goods to. The Netherlands has been a strong ally as well. Dutch troops fought beside Americans in occupied territory during World War II and in conflicts since, as well as serving together in peacekeeping missions across the world. The contributions of many great Dutch-Americans have helped shape U.S. history, including three presidents, Martin Van Buren, Theodore Roosevelt, and Franklin D. Roosevelt, as well as numerous cultural figures, including Thomas Edison, Humphrey Bogart, Walter Cronkite, and, more recently, General David Petraeus. While a destination for many immigrant settlers, the Dutch have left an influential mark on the Second District of Michigan, both economically and culturally. From cities and villages with Dutch namesakes like Borculo, Drenthe, Holland, and Zeeland, to traditions like the Tulip Festival and Sinterklaas parade, Dutch settlers have shared their heritage proudly with their neighbors. Today we celebrate not only a common heritage, but also a friendship that has helped shape America since its birth. We are thankful for the contribution of Dutch-Americans not only in West Michigan, but throughout the United States, and look forward to a strong partnership for years to come.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. At this time, Mr. Chair, I yield to my fellow Congressman from Michigan, Representative Dan Benishek.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. At this time I yield to my colleague, Chairman Tom Petri from Wisconsin.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. I rise today in support of my amendment, along with the co-leads, Chairman Tom Petri from Wisconsin and Congressman Dan Benishek of Michigan. Today we're talking about a particular ship, the SS Badger located in Ludington, Michigan. It travels between Ludington and Manitowoc, Wisconsin. This particular ship has been operating on the Great Lakes for over 50 years, most recently coming back into service in 1991, using all private dollars to make that happen. Its uniqueness is recognized by the designation of the National Register of Historic Places and by both the States of Wisconsin and Michigan. Its propulsion system is recognized as a mechanical engineering landmark by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. The Badger is currently operating under special rules developed by the EPA in 2008. These rules are set to expire at the end of 2012. Without certainty provided by this amendment, the Badger could very easily, frankly, be forced off the Great Lakes at the end of 2012. With an annual economic impact of roughly $35 million between two small port cities both in Wisconsin and Michigan, keeping the Badger operational is absolutely vital to our communities. I urge all of my colleagues today to join us in recognizing the historic significance of these Great Lake steamships by supporting the Huizenga-Petri-Benishek amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1965. We missed that number by one. It should be 1964, because 1964 was the last time that they actually updated these registration numbers. That is a very long time. I can tell you, at age 42, it was a number of years before I was even born the last time that this happened, and it's high time that it does happen. I can also tell you, Mr. Speaker, that here with the Republican Americans' Job Creators Plan, the first thing on that list is: Empower small businesses and reduce government barriers to job creation. And I really hope that this bipartisan bill doesn't become part of that lost 15 over in the Senate. This is a very proactive, bipartisan step that this body is taking that as it goes over across to that next Chamber needs to be addressed. We need to do this because we must modernize; we must update; we must do these things to remain competitive on a world market. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity and am pleased that I could rise in support of that bill.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. I appreciate the leadership of my friend from Pennsylvania, who has been stalwart on this issue. Really, what we're seeing, folks, is a sleight of hand. They want to talk about jobs, and they want to talk about Big Oil because they don't want to talk about the preciousness of life and how this procedure takes the life of an innocent. It has been labeled an ``extreme'' bill when, actually, this is a reasonable step that codifies what this President says is his own position. I have a brother-in-law who is a doctor down in Cincinnati. A little earlier today, I called him to talk to him about what he went through in his training and what he had to deal with as to this particular issue. When I described to him what we were trying to do about allowing him and any other med student and any other person who is going through that to conscientiously object from putting forward a procedure that they don't agree with, he said, Of course, that makes sense. When I started talking to him about some of the rhetoric and about some of the demagoguery that's surrounding this, he sarcastically said, Boy, that doesn't sound political, does it? That's exactly what it is. The American people who are watching this right now need to understand that this is about life and protecting that life and making sure that our health care providers have the ability to say ``no'' to a procedure that they don't want to do.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, we're talking about common sense. Unfortunately, I don't think we're hearing much of that coming out of the other side because they're talking out of both sides of their mouth here. How in the world does a 20 percent reduction in the number of cement plants in the United States, out of the 100 that we have, how does that 20 percent loss, or estimation of 18 to 20 cement plants, equal more jobs? I'm a little lost. I know I'm a freshman here, but I'm lost as to how, when we're shutting down businesses, that equals more jobs. I'm also curious about how in the world we can call this a Maximum Achievable Control Technology when people in the industry and people outside the industry say it's not achievable. We might as well call it the ``maximum dreamed-up control technology.'' We've got to introduce some common sense to this. Now, we can solve all of our pollution issues coming out of cement plants by shutting every single one of them down. We can shut every single one of those 100 plants down here in the United States. I do not think that India is going to shut theirs down. I don't think China is going to be shutting theirs down. I know Indonesia is not going to be shutting theirs down. I'm betting our friends and neighbors in Canada aren't going to be shutting theirs down. So we can shut down every single cement plant. That's not going to solve our problems, though, because we have to keep going further. We've got to shut down every power plant. We've got to stop driving every car, every bus, every train. We might as well ban campfires, grilled foods--and cancel Christmas while we're at it. There has got to be some common sense involved here. Ontario tried this a few years ago when they were going to shut down all of their coal-fired power plants. Their goal: get rid of them all. The outcome: not a single one--zero--was shut down because they know that it wasn't possible. And we're seeing here a proposed regulation that is five times more stringent than what our friends in the European Union are talking about, and in Canada: five times more stringent. How is that going to make the United States more competitive, and how is that going to retain jobs here? Mr. Chairman, we have got to make sure that, instead of using the ``maximum dreamed-up control technology,'' we actually use the Maximum Achievable Control Technology. And that is what we have today. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2681, and I just want to talk a little bit about the real-world effects that have been alluded to. I have firsthand knowledge. My family's company, now owned by my cousins, but a company started by my father and my uncle has been in the Redi Mix concrete business for over 40 years. I own a sand and gravel company back in Michigan. I just want to point out that this is actually not an attack on clean air, as some of my colleagues on the other side have said. This stops an attack on the American worker. Let's talk about some of those real- world effects. We will be buying more cement from outside the United States, as has been pointed out, and it is much dirtier produced over there. What are the challenges that we have been seeing in this industry over the last few years? We know that a soft economy means less construction. Other challenges that we have been dealing with: increased fuel costs, increased health care costs under ObamaCare and other requirements, increased unemployment insurance requirements, increased labor regulations, now even greater costs with little or no benefit directly coming to us. I don't quite understand what my colleagues on the other side think is going to happen when we are talking about building roads. Do they want to drive on wooden roads? Do they want to live in mud brick hovels and shiver in the cold? I mean, we have got to have concrete and cement as the backbone of the recovery here that we are going to be having. We will simply be forced to buy that cement from outside the United States, and I don't understand why this administration insists on attacking the engine of our recovery. This stops an attack on the American worker and job creators, and I support the bill.