Patrick McHenry

Mr. McHENRY

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Federal employees impacted by the government shutdown and express my support for Federal regulators and financial institutions supporting consumers in need of assistance in the event there is a lapse in Federal funding. We just passed a continuing resolution to keep the government open earlier today. So the good news is, this fall does not look like storm season for Federal employees, and, hopefully, the contents of this act won't have to be used. I think that is a good thing. I think we can all agree that is a good thing. On a bipartisan basis, we should agree that it is a good thing. Whether it is a missed credit card payment or an unexpected medical expense, government shutdowns can leave Federal employees, contractors, and other individuals facing economic hardship through no fault of their own. Madam Speaker, if you look at the government shutdowns under the Carter administration, the Reagan administration, and the Clinton administration, the lapse in funding impacted people's lives, and we don't want Federal employees to be held hostage due to the inability of Congress and the executive branch to come to terms on Federal funding. H.R. 2290 requires Federal financial regulators to issue guidance encouraging institutions to work with individuals impacted by a government shutdown. It also requires the regulators to provide Congress with a report analyzing the effectiveness of that guidance. It is proper. I remind my colleagues that guidance does not constitute a formal rulemaking. Unlike a rule, guidance is nonbinding. This bill sets out best practices for both regulators and financial institutions, and they should take that guidance seriously. I also want to reiterate that this legislation conveys no new authority on Federal financial regulators. Let's make that clear. I know that many financial institutions and financial regulators are already implementing the best practices contemplated by this legislation. Six months or 7 months after the Federal Government shutdown, I think we have already seen that the regulators have taken action. Institutions have historically been cognizant of the needs of consumers who find themselves in these types of unforeseen situations. In fact, last fall, more than 100 banks took it upon themselves to offer loan modifications, payment deadline extensions, payroll advances, or low- or zero-interest rate loans, among other accommodations, to those impacted by the shutdown. Those are positive actions. We know that those positive actions made a difference during that period of uncertainty. Federal financial regulators have also played an important role in ensuring fair treatment for consumers affected by a shutdown. In January of this year, the FDIC, the OCC, the National Credit Union Administration, the Federal Reserve, the CFPB, and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors partnered to encourage institutions to work with consumers who were negatively impacted. They took it upon themselves to do that, and they had the authority to do so. In a related financial institution letter, the FDIC encouraged all supervised institutions to consider prudent arrangements that would increase the potential for creditworthy borrowers to meet their obligations. While I agree with my colleagues across the aisle that we should encourage banks to work proactively with consumers affected by a shutdown, we must also encourage financial regulators to provide some type of clarity as well. This bill ensures exactly that. I think this bill is sufficient. It deals with the four walls of governance and the data held within government, and I think it is a good piece of legislation that codifies existing practices. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague from Texas-- though new to this legislative body, she has shown experience in how she has legislated here--and the willingness of the Democrat majority staff on the committee to work with my staff to ensure that we have a bill that is functional and right and can get wide support, as it should. So I thank the gentlewoman for this, which it may be her first legislative undertaking through the committee, and I want to commend her for the work that she has done. I address the Chair in saying that, but I think it is important that this body understands that there is good legislating that happens on our committee, and bipartisan legislating. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), the ranking member of the Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital Markets Subcommittee, and my friend and colleague.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his comments. Certainly, there is a diversity of thought among our colleagues on this bill. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Whistleblowers provide an important function. We want to make sure that there are legal constraints on this, obviously. The Securities and Exchange Commission have shown themselves good actors in terms of implementing the whistleblower law that we currently have on the books, and I anticipate, with the capacity for implementation, that there could be that like kind of coordination between PCAOB and the SEC in order to implement this bill. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise to speak on H.R. 3625, the PCAOB Whistleblower Protection Act. I thank the Congresswoman from Texas for her leadership on this bill and for her work on the committee. Madam Speaker, businesses have a self-interest in detecting and eliminating illegal activity as swiftly as possible within their organizations. As such, businesses, including audit firms and clients of audit firms, generally strive to comply with the law because, ultimately, violating the law hurts investors and, thereby, hurts their business and hurts their reputation. Violating the law is bad for business, right? It hurts the company's reputation, its value. It keeps business partners away. It breeds distrust in the marketplace. We know all of these things. However, sometimes, businesses need someone to call out bad behavior or illegal activity. Whistleblowers play an important role in rooting out bad behavior that harms the markets, that harms Mr. and Mrs. 401(k), average, everyday investors, which most of us are. Moreover, it is important to appropriately incentivize whistleblowers to either report potentially unlawful activity internally or to appropriate government authorities. That is why we have whistleblower statutes. That is why this is a good piece of legislation. To that end, I am glad to see that this bill, which will establish rewards for certain whistleblowers whose tips lead to PCAOB--or Peekaboo, as we call it on the Financial Services Committee--monetary sanctions. This builds on the structure of the SEC's whistleblower program in a recent bill that we passed out of the House in the month of July that protects internal whistleblowers as well. Additionally, I want to note that the provision in this bill that states that, to the maximum extent possible, the PCAOB shall coordinate with the Office of the Whistleblower at the SEC in carrying out the law under this bill. The SEC whistleblower has been around for quite a while. They have the good regard of both parties, I think, in terms of how they respond. We want to make sure that experience is well coordinated with this new whistleblower authority at PCAOB. I hope that, where possible, the SEC's Office of the Whistleblower can provide significant assistance to the PCAOB, if not handle all these whistleblower claims itself. They have that type of experience. I think it would be proper for that agency to do that and to ensure that it is done in the most cost-effective manner for the taxpayer and for the investors as well. This legislation is good, in that it provides flexibility for that best delivery system as the SEC and Peekaboo go about this. Again, I thank my colleague from Texas for her hard work on this bill and for bringing an important piece of legislation that is good for taxpayers, good for investors, and really good for the stability of the markets and the belief in the stability of the markets. I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close. Madam Speaker, on a personal note, on my team on the House Financial Services Committee and when I was chief deputy whip of the House, I had somebody work with me on my team named Phil Poe of Maryland. Phil, out of college, was inspired by the stories of World War II merchant mariners and inspired by a family member, as well, to get licensed as a merchant mariner. He spent a little time as a merchant mariner and then paid his way through graduate school as a merchant mariner. So I want to commend his willingness to serve, but I also want to note that, for the Record, these stories of World War II merchant mariners are having an impact generations later. That inspirational story of the risks that they were willing to take, plus the family connection and inspiration he heard from those stories, have made a major difference for him. That work ethic that he developed and learned on that ship really steeled him to do better in graduate school, and by the time he came to the Hill, it was all easy compared to what he had been through. So these stories we hear from long ago of merchant mariners and their sacrifice still have an impact today, and I am glad we have a Congressional Gold Medal and legislative recognition around the sacrifices that merchant mariners made during World War II. Madam Speaker, I urge adoption, and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY

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

Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to first start by taking just a few minutes to recognize a dear friend of mine, a member of the Financial Services Committee, Congressman Sean Duffy of Wisconsin. Sean has been a good friend of mine since the very beginning of when he started running for Congress, and I have had the pleasure of serving with Mr. Duffy since he came to Congress in 2011. As we say on the committee, known for his punctuality, it is kind of amazing that he is here now. This might be the first time he has been on time in all his 9 years of service in the House. Sean has been a huge asset for the Financial Services Committee and his constituents in the Seventh District of Wisconsin. He has worked on national issues of importance, like flood insurance; large issues, like international regulation of insurance agreements; as well as important, smaller issues that are very important to people's lives, like mold and lead-based paint remediation and providing better options for residents of public and assisted living or assisted housing. He has been a great advocate for his constituents, and I have been honored to work with him as a colleague. He has led three separate subcommittees on the Financial Services Committee. He has had a meaningful impact on public policy. He has developed meaningful relationships on both sides of the aisle in this institution and has been willing to have some of the bigger debates on policy that, perhaps, were divided in the party. He has always done so with a joyful heart and a fantastic capacity for communicating. At some points, to the dismay of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, including the chairwoman of the committee, the debate can sometimes get rough-and-tumble, but he always does it with a smile on his face; and you can have a conversation with him afterwards, no matter how difficult or challenging the conversation or debate. While Sean has been a colleague, I have counted him as an adviser and a friend and somebody I knew I could talk to even in the toughest of times. Sean is leaving because of his family. He has made a decision that it is the right thing for his family, to depart our institution and our schedule and the challenges of public life at this time in his family life. He has got a beautiful family, some of whom are here behind me today. So we wish Sean and Rachel Duffy the best, and we will keep them, certainly, in our thoughts, but forever in our prayers and in our hearts. I thank Sean so much for his leadership. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 239, the Christa McAuliffe Commemorative Coin Act of 2019. I would like to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the dean of the Michigan delegation, who has the bill here in the House, H.R. 500, and who has gathered more than 309 cosponsors on this bill to see it across the line. We know the story of Christa McAuliffe. In fact, one of my first memories of understanding what NASA did was to see the tragedy of the loss of the shuttle and the human tragedy of somebody who is such a dedicated public servant, dedicated to her classroom, to teaching, but, also, her willingness to put herself on the line to be a greater advocate for teaching and for education. Christa McAuliffe had a meaningful impact on people's lives, and this is a representation of that. It is a fantastic undertaking that we have had here today. Due to the great work of Congressman Upton, we have wide, bipartisan support for this important and meaningful act before us. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, if I may inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. It is amazing how a teacher can touch lives. Christa McAuliffe touched lives, not just for the students in her classroom, not just in her community, but by what she means to the American people and how her contribution is marked in the American psyche of what teachers are and what they represent in such a significant way. The Challenger tragedy was a massive loss for us as Americans in terms of human life, certainly. But it is marked in American history, and it is marked in American history in a very special way and has a quite different feel because of Christa McAuliffe. The work put in to bring a coin bill to the floor is extraordinary, and I have to say this: The challenge to get a coin bill to the House floor is enormous under our rules. Under a bipartisan understanding, we have a massive hurdle in order to get here. It is not a normal process to bring a bill to the floor. It is an onerous and difficult one. That is why we have so few bills to strike new coins that come across the House floor and get enacted into law. It is a proper thing to make it onerous and difficult because, when it happens, it shows what we are trying to represent with that coin, whether it is a person, a community, an action, that what they did was so pure, so perfectly American, and that what they did, that person, that group, what they did should be noted in American history and should be noted in a meaningful way, a meaningful enough way that it was how the Romans marked who their emperors were. This is our way of saying in a very special way that Christa McAuliffe was a wonderfully special human being who made a significant mark as an American. I thank Congressman Upton for the massive amount of passionate work that he put in to make this day possible. I thank my colleagues across the aisle for this process and for the outcome that we have here today. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the dean of the Michigan delegation.

Mr. McHENRY

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. McHENRY. Yes, in its current form.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, this is a final amendment to the bill. This amendment will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended. You know the drill on a motion to recommit. I stand here before the House today to get an affirmative vote that we stand together against the anti-Semitic notion of the BDS movement. The BDS movement is an effort to weaponize the world's economy against one simple State, one State, the great State of Israel and the Jewish people. They are trying to weaponize our economy, our dollars, against our only ally in the Middle East that is a democracy. This is an effort for us today--today--to say that we will stand against this movement. This movement is about anti-Zionism. Anti- Zionism is anti-Semitism. Let us speak with one clear voice today that we as the American people will not stand for this economic warfare. We will stand with our ally, and we will stand with the Jewish people in the Israel State. Why weaponize our economy against Israel? To destroy Israel, to choke off economic growth, to choke off economic opportunity, and thereby weaken the State of Israel so they get rolled into the sea. That is unacceptable. That is the notion of the BDS movement. It may be polite in certain company to say you boycott, you divest, you sanction the State of Israel. It is not polite to say that you are anti-Semitic. But what the BDS movement says is that you are anti-Semitic. What you say by supporting the BDS movement is that you are okay with discriminating against people because of their faith; you are okay discriminating against the Jewish people because you don't like--well, let me stop there. This body has a long history of working together in a bipartisan fashion. I have worked for 3 years to hammer out a bipartisan approach to stopping the BDS movement. That got rolled into the bill that was passed in January in the Senate. Seventy-seven Senators joined together and sent a bill over here to the House. We have waited 4 months, with no vote on that bill, and it is not because we don't have bipartisan support to stop the BDS movement. We do. We do. In this Chamber, we have stood together in a bipartisan forum to stand against hate and to stand against anti-Semitism, but the leadership over there doesn't want us to have a vote on that bill. So, today, we are saying let's have the vote. Let's stand up for the State of Israel. Let's stand against hate. Let's stand up against this anti-Zionism and the anti-Semitism that underlies it. Let's stand up for our Jewish friends and allies, and let's speak with one voice that the BDS movement is anti-Semitism. Vote ``yes'' on this motion to recommit. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. McHENRY

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Chair, this bill, this amendment, reinstates an older form of regulation of HMDA data. This is the data that is collected when you have a home mortgage. It is required data. Under the old regulation, there were 48 pieces of data that had to be collected. Under the new regulation, it is 23. That is a modest change that was agreed upon by a bipartisan vote of this House and the Senate and signed into law last Congress under S. 2155. A changed regulatory structure, still collecting the data. The most important thing this bill does, however, is it subjects small credit unions and small banks to a higher level of regulation than contemplated under the new regulations and the new law. We are rolling back to an older form, whereby community institutions, small banks, and small credit unions have been disproportionately disadvantaged in the mortgage marketplace. They have been given a higher regulatory burden, a higher cost structure, which means that they are out of the home mortgage game. The net effect of this amendment is that you will have small credit unions and small banks not being able to participate as fully as under existing regulations in home mortgage making, and I think that is one of the deep flaws of this amendment. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. McHENRY. I am opposed to the amendment. I would ask the amendment's author, if I am reading this correctly, that on a quarterly basis they will disclose the previous 12 months' action. Am I reading the legislative text?

Mr. McHENRY. I yield to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment. This rolls back to an older form of regulation, not a new, modern form of regulation. We still collect very important data from mortgage makers, those that are actually in the mortgage marketplace. What we did was right-size our regulation so that small financial institutions like community banks and credit unions could be in the mortgage marketplace once again. This amendment rolls back those reforms and hurts small community banks and hurts small credit unions in a way that this body, I don't think, wants to support. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Chair, I think the gentleman from Wisconsin has authored a very good amendment. It is a constructive amendment in this legislative process to make a bad bill less bad. It strikes the findings sections, not the legislation contained therein. It is the egregious findings and the personalities in the first 21 pages that the gentleman removes and says we should use the arm of Congress to look at those findings of fact and to get a report from the General Accountability Office on those matters raised in the findings section. I urge my colleagues to support this very good amendment.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Chair, this amendment will direct the CFPB to appoint representatives of the military- and veteran-serving financial institutions to advisory committees. It is another step in ensuring servicemembers, veterans, and their families have a voice in consumer protection. Military- and veteran-serving financial institutions are unique and can provide the CFPB advisory boards with insights into the biggest risks facing veterans, servicemembers, and their families. I do concur that there should be more military representation across all fronts at the CFPB and across the government. Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHENRY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, in closing, I want to commend the author of this amendment, who is using this opportunity to highlight his support of fair lending enforcement by the CFPB. I commend him for that. I commend my colleague for that. I believe he is a thoughtful legislator. I reluctantly oppose this amendment, given the fact that we have already provided in law and regulation an annual report of this same data, and I believe that resources would be better spent on protecting consumers directly around fair lending violations rather than reporting on a monthly basis what they do on an annual basis. Madam Chair, while I oppose this bill, I certainly commend my colleague for his passion, his care for consumer protection. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.