Gwen Moore

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. I am opposed.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 137, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a great woman, Tamara Grigsby. She was a social worker, family counselor, instructor, state legislator, administrator and advocate for children, women and social justice. Ms. Tamara Grigsby passed away on March 14, 2016. Tamara Grigsby was born in Pullman, Washington and graduated from Memorial High School in Madison. She received an undergraduate degree from Howard University and Master's Degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I am honored to pay tribute to Tamara Grigsby, she was a leader extraordinaire. She taught at Carroll and Cardinal Stritch Universities, as well as UW-Milwaukee. Tamara served as program manager at the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families prior to running and winning a seat as one of my successors to serve as representative for Wisconsin's 18th Assembly District. In fact, I encouraged Tamara to run for this seat. After her retirement from the state legislature, she worked for both the Milwaukee Public Schools and Madison Public Schools. At the time of her death, she was the Director of Dane County's Department of Equity and Inclusion. As a legislator from 2005 to 2013, Tamara proved prolific. She both introduced and passed a large number of meaningful legislation to secure equality, fairness, and opportunity for Wisconsin's citizens. In fact in 2010, she was 18 for 18, passing 18 bills the same number as the legislative seat that she held. She also served admirably as a member of the prestigious Legislature's Joint Finance Committee. When she endured a life-threatening health battle in 2011, she fought back with the same vigor as she had exhibited on behalf of her constituents. Tamara Grigsby received many awards including the Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin most prestigious recognition, the Rebecca C. Young Legislative Leadership Award and the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Emerging Leader Award. Further she was named as one of the The 30 Most Influential Social Workers Alive Today in 2014 by the Social Work Degree Guide. I am proud to have called Tamara Grigsby my friend; she made a positive impact on all of Wisconsin. She leaves behind many friends, former staffers, admirers and family members to mourn her passing including her dear parents: Dr. E. Howard Grigsby and Bettye Grigsby. I was captivated by her passion and commitment to improving the lives of Wisconsinites. She was a fierce opponent of policies aimed at hurting public schools, health care and stronger communities. She fought to address racial and ethnic disparities in our criminal justice system, and advancing equality of rights for all. Mr. Speaker for these reasons I rise to pay tribute to an amazing woman, Tamara Grigsby. While her time with us was a short 41 years, she leaves behind an enduring legacy for future leaders to follow.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join in the celebration of the 55th Anniversary of the Peace Corps. Since the program's establishment on March 1st, 1961 by President John F. Kennedy, the Peace Corps has been working to promote peace and friendship, and to help nations tackle some of the most pressing challenges they face. As we celebrate, let's remember that the Peace Corps is now active in over 130 nations and its volunteers remain committed to tackling issues such as climate change, pandemic disease, food security, and gender inequality and empowerment. In the 55 years since its' founding, over 220,000 U.S. citizens, including current Members of Congress, have served their nation in the Peace Corps. And many more are eager to serve. In 2015, the Peace Corps received its highest number of applications (over 23,000) since 1975. Peace Corps volunteers go abroad for deployments of 2 years aid in the social and economic developments in some of the world's poorest countries. They serve as teachers and health care providers in communities that lack access to various necessities like food, water, education, healthcare, equality and disease prevention. They also help our nation by becoming the face of America to those they interact with while themselves gaining a better understanding of the culture and people of other nations. Volunteers often immerse themselves in the communities that they are sent to and play a unique role in shaping the lives of the individuals permanently living there. I want to take a moment to congratulate the 22 residents of my congressional district who currently serve as Peace Corps volunteers. They have been deployed to South Africa, Indonesia, Ethiopia, and Ecuador, just to name a few. I wish these young men and women the best of luck as they begin to make a difference in the communities they have been deployed to. And I have no doubt that these talented and skilled young people will make an incredible difference as Peace Corps volunteers. I strongly support the Peace Corps. The Peace Corps represents the best of America and the undimmed potential of ``soft power'' initiatives that help make our world a better place. In the midst of poverty and through war and conflict, the Peace Corps has shown the world a hopeful, uplifting side of America that reflects our fundamental values of peace, prosperity, and progress. The Peace Corps will be a vital part of the U.S. diplomatic and development response and a sign of our nation's long term commitment to help alleviate suffering around the globe. Let us work to keep this program strong and in business for another 55 years.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. I thank the gentleman so much for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in praising Mr. McGovern for his leadership on this issue. Of the many people who are hungry, none of them have the money to lobby folks--the kids, the disabled people, the seniors, the elderly-- but we have a champion in this House, Jim McGovern. With the few seconds remaining, I want to talk a little bit about our economy. We have a capitalist economy, and it is countercyclical. The SNAP program works to provide a safety net so that when we have a Hurricane Katrina or when we have a Hurricane Sandy, the food stamp rolls go up, and when there are jobs, the food stamp rolls go down. It ain't broke, you all, so let's not try to fix it. I am very, very disturbed that when the Budget Committee meets next week, it will try to make structural changes to the SNAP program, to throw it into a reconciliation process where only 51 Members of the Senate have to vote for it, out of this body, in order to change the structure of it so that it is not responsive to people during economic distress. I am concerned about the numbers of people who are going to ask for a waiver to limit the number of benefits, in a 36-month period, that those who are unemployed can receive. People who are unemployed don't have any control over our economy. When unemployment is up, the SNAP program, as it is currently structured, is responsive to unemployment, and we ought to stick to that.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I thank Ranking Member Waters for yielding. I rise in support of H.R. 3700, as amended by Ranking Member Waters. This is what you call regular order, folks. This bill came out of committee with a significant flaw that would have had a very negative impact on families and children and the ability of low-income people to deduct childcare expenses. If it were not fixed, it would have effectively raised rent on thousands of low-income families with children. I just want to commend my colleagues, Ms. Waters and Mr. Cleaver--Ms. Waters in particular--for really catching this flaw. But I also want to commend the Republicans who, instead of just taking their position as being in the majority and saying ``we don't have to listen to you,'' continued to engage with us to fix this. Literally, the math did not work out. I can tell you as once a single parent and as a grandmother, I know about the budget-busting cost of child care. I also know how central housing policy and access to child care is critical to positive social outcomes for children. So often we demand that poor people, and especially women, pull themselves up by their bootstraps. We have programs that are designed to help them. But then what we do is we put program features in place that really cancel out the benefits of these programs. But this bill, H.R. 3700, as amended by the ranking member, eliminates the unintended consequences for poor people who are raising children. Ranking Member Waters and subcommittee Ranking Member Cleaver have both been powerful advocates for affordable housing on the Financial Services Committee. I am so pleased to join them in fighting for these changes. H.R. 3700 is supported by the National Association of Realtors, the National Alliance to End Homelessness, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, among the over two dozen groups supporting it. I urge adoption of the legislation, as amended by Ms. Waters.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate my colleague for that exhaustive explanation and definition of scope. Common sense just ain't common, so we cannot rely on common sense. I just want to say that the courts already require a plaintiff seeking class action certification to make substantial showings that they have, in fact, been injured. That is our argument, that they have to have the same scope and that we need to reserve the benefits for those at the top so that women who are discriminated against in a firm--we are only concerned with those women who are going to lose the most money because they didn't get a management position. We are not going to be concerned with the women who worked in the janitorial services and were discriminated against. I think that there is a smoking gun here when you hear our opponents make these furious arguments and regale us with definitions of scope, where the courts have already done that. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would exempt pay equity lawsuits arising from title VII of the Civil Rights Act or the Equal Pay Act. Today, the wage gap for women is a very real experience, not only for those women, but for families in the United States workforce. According to the National Women's Law Center, the gender wage gap amounts to over $10,000 a year in median income. But this bill, H.R. 1927, takes away one of the only effective tools that women in the workplace have to narrow the wage gap. That is through class action suits filed under title VII of the Civil Rights Act or the Equal Pay Act. This bill would, to borrow Judge Posner's term, really drive a stake through the heart of the Equal Pay Act or the Civil Rights Act. This bill will make it harder to certify members of a class in pay equity cases because each detail relating to the type and scope of the damage is often unique to the woman who was injured. For example, a woman involved in a class could have a different type of job, different number of years working for a company, different wages, different benefits, and if the company is discriminating against all women, across all the job categories, they would not be certified as a class unless they made exactly the same pay, worked there exactly the same number of years, which, Mr. Chairman, is ludicrous. This bill would also make it harder for women in pay equity cases because, at the certification stage, women wouldn't have the same information about each other to know whether or not they could be in the same class. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would exempt suits arising out of the Fair Housing Act or the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. I offer my amendment today, Mr. Chairman, out of a real concern about the consequences the bill will have on social justice issues. One of these issues that is very dear to me is the disparate access to financial products for African Americans. That is the reason that I, before I became a Member of Congress, created a credit union for my area in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. We are still seeing discrimination in housing and auto financing and insurance products in my home district of Milwaukee. This is not something, Mr. Chairman, that happened in the good old days. We have witnessed discrimination in mortgage loans as recently as 2012. As a member of the Financial Services Committee, we have learned about the CFPB's role in cracking down on auto lenders who discriminate against minorities. Folks who have the same credit score, if your name is Rodriguez or Barack Obama Jones, suddenly your auto loan would be at a higher rate. Class actions are an important tool to fight back. For example, in Adkins v. Stanley, a class action suit was filed against Morgan Stanley for practices through a mortgage lender that had a significant impact against an entire African American community. In Detroit, Michigan, from where our distinguished ranking member hails, the practices led to filling these communities with high-risk subprime loans, leading up to the 2008 housing crisis. I would commend any of you to go to Detroit and see the result of that discrimination where entire communities have been eviscerated. Actions helped to uncover and fight back against auto finance lender practices that used these subjective criteria, whether your name was Rodriguez or Barack Obama Jones, to determine creditworthiness. This practice was found to have a disproportionate impact, charging these higher interest rates for minorities compared to White borrowers with the exact, similar credit ratings. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, that argument is not a good argument because when you think of the example of just, say, Morgan Stanley, if there was someone who, in Detroit, Michigan, lost their house through the subprime lending, that has as much impact on that person as the person next door who was underwater and couldn't sell their home and couldn't repair it because of the impact on their next-door neighbor. This notion that they have to be injured in exactly the same way really flies in the face of logic and, of course, flies in the face of justice. I would ask Members to adopt my amendment. It is common sense. It is just. There are so many cases against minorities, in particular, that would be adversely impacted through this legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, over the years, I have heard some rather absurd comments from my Republican colleagues about abortion. Some have compared Planned Parenthood to drug dealers, abortion factories, and the Ku Klux Klan. I have even heard grown men debate ``legitimate rape'' on live TV. I have even heard a Republican lawmaker put forth the claim that, if women are allowed to have abortions, men should be allowed to rape. After nearly 30 years of public office, nothing really surprises me anymore, Mr. Speaker. So you can imagine my lack of astonishment when my dear friend and colleague from Wisconsin, Sean Duffy, rolled out abortion statistics among African American women to lecture Black legislators like myself about defending the welfare of our constituents. Since the United States Supreme Court ruled in 1963 that women are guaranteed the privacy and power and right to make medical decisions concerning their own bodies, anti-choice legislators have been trying to end safe and legal abortion. A tactic that has been part of their strategy is to use inflammatory, racial arguments, and deceptive claims to stigmatize abortion in communities of color. I don't expect Representative Duffy to understand why his comments are offensive, but what he and so many of his Republican colleagues fail to acknowledge is the underlying context behind high abortion rates in African American communities. High rates of abortion are related to poverty and lack of access to quality care. The war on women's health centers has resulted in multiple barriers to accessing quality, affordable health care, which could lead to higher rates of both unintended pregnancy and abortion. Representative Duffy's hypocrisy on this issue is as predictable as it is offensive. If he truly, truly wants to fight for the hopeless and voiceless, he should join us.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I must tell you how disappointed I am that we are not starting the new year here with fresh, new, bipartisan initiatives to create jobs and to move our economy forward. I just feel like this is for auld lang syne. This is our 62nd vote to repeal or undermine the Affordable Care Act. And, Mr. Speaker, I expect you to break out in a few verses of ``Auld Lang Syne'' anytime now. Is it for auld lang syne that 22 million Americans might actually lose their health insurance if the President would somehow sign this into law? Is it for auld lang syne that the Republicans and you, Mr. Speaker, are proposing that we attack women's health once again and take away the primary care physician for poor women, 4 out of 10 who say is their only source of health care? Is it for auld lang syne that Planned Parenthood visitors--men and women--who have incomes of 150 percent or below the Federal poverty level will lose their health insurance? Is it for auld lang syne that the 62nd repeal vote is taking place so that half of the health centers are in rural or medically underserved areas? Let's get to work, Mr. Speaker, on fresh, new ideas and not auld lang syne.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Sharon Adams, a mentor, community leader, and administrator. She is the Founder and Director of Programs for Walnut Way Conservation Corp and after 15 years of service transitions from her position on December 21, 2015. Sharon Adams moved back to Milwaukee in 1997 from New York and found the once-vibrant Lindsay Heights neighborhood where she grew up lined with boarded-up houses, trash-filled lots, gangs, prostitution and drugs. This spurred her and her neighbors to organize Walnut Way, a grassroots association whose motto is to ``Reclaim, Restore, and Repurpose''. The organization's headquarters is a former drug den and 100 year old structure that has been restored and transformed into the community's nerve center. Ms. Adams and Walnut Way pushed for the revitalization of North Avenue and the Lindsay Heights Community. The blight is now gone, replaced by restored and newly built houses, rain and vegetable gardens and fruit orchards, youth trained in urban agriculture, a bee aviary to harvest and sell honey, a tree nursery to expand the canopy, and work with police to improve safety. They run an award winning business called Blue Skies that employs youth and others from the community for their landscaping operation. Sharon has capped off her remarkable urban renewal effort with the completion of The Innovations and Wellness Commons. The Commons will serve nearly 8000 residents living in and surrounding the Lindsay Heights neighborhood. Funds for this venture include significant dollars from federal, state and local governments, the Zilber Family Foundation, and many others. Nearly 30 jobs were created for low income workers by this project. The Commons include Outpost Natural Foods Coop that operates four large organic grocery stores in the Milwaukee area, the Juice Kitchen, a business operated by experienced entrepreneurs specializing in vegetarian meals all sited in a setting that allows for holistic approaches to healthy living such as healing circles, fitness classes and meditation. This economically distressed area is no longer a food desert but a haven providing an environment for healthy living and jobs. This is Sharon Adams' second retirement, she left the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee in 2008 as Director of Service Learning to head Walnut Way. She helped create other neighborhood organizations, including the Lindsay Heights Neighborhood Health Alliance to reduce health disparities and the Lindsay Heights Neighborhood Quality of Life Plan, part of the Zilber Neighborhood Initiative, a $50 million program to revive low-income Milwaukee neighborhoods in 10 years. Sharon Adams is also the Wisconsin 2010 Social Innovation Prize Award Winner, an award given to an individual over age 50 who addresses critical social problems. The prize includes $5,000, as well as, another $5000 to be designated by the winner to an organization. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to recognize Ms. Sharon Adams who leaves a legacy of advocacy and compassion. She is a true trailblazer who has labored to attract investment and lead the Lindsay Heights Neighborhood to prosperity and good health. The citizens of the Fourth Congressional District, the State of Wisconsin and the nation have benefited tremendously from her dedicated service. I am honored for these reasons to pay tribute to Ms. Sharon Adams.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, small businesses owned by disadvantaged minorities (DBEs) are significantly affected when they are not promptly paid for the work that they do. Lack of prompt payment constitutes a very real barrier to the ability of DBEs to compete in the marketplace. Non-DBE small businesses are also affected by late payment problems. That is the reason the Department issued its Prompt Payment regulation in the first place. Under this regulation, ``Payment is required only for satisfactory completion of the subcontractor's work.'' So we are not talking about cases where the prime and subcontractor have a disagreement about the work that was done. In a recent briefing to my office, the Department of Transportation Inspector General cited the case of a DBE from Florida that got certified as a DBE, bid and won work on an airport project, and satisfactorily completed the work. However, she didn't get paid in a timely manner and eventually was sued by her suppliers who she couldn't pay. A prompt payment requirement for all subcontractors is a race-neutral measure that assists all subcontractors if they are complied with. However, the concern is that they are not and small disadvantaged businesses which have small margins already, are further squeezed when they aren't paid in a timely manner for work already performed. In its recent report, the Department of Transportation's Inspector General reaffirmed that failure to promptly pay DBEs continues to be a major barrier and obstacle for these small businesses in the transportation arena. According to that report, ``for several firms we interviewed, payment delays caused cash flow problems, prevented them from paying subcontractors and suppliers, and subjected them to costly lawsuits.'' That report further noted oversight weaknesses of prompt payment issues raised by DBEs to the FAA. This is not just an FAA issue. Those same concerns are applicable across the Department. Despite progress in this area, major barriers impede the success of new and existing disadvantaged firms. One of those is delayed payments. If these small businesses don't get paid on time, their likelihood of remaining a viable business drastically decreases. That is why I am grateful for the inclusion of my amendment to H.R. 22 calling on the Department of Transportation to enforce its current rules better. With that bill now law, I urge the Department to make this a priority and to strengthen efforts to make sure that these small businesses get paid on time for doing the quality work they contracted to do.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, as the ranking member of the Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3189. Sometimes you can disagree on a bill, and it doesn't really make much difference. But this bill is extremely dangerous for many reasons. I want to focus on just two provisions--my time is limited--that would be absolutely disastrous for the U.S. economy: One is the political audits of the Federal Reserve. And, second, the computer model monetary policy, so-called Taylor rule. Now, people think, well, what is wrong with auditing the Fed? The Fed is already audited, including an external audit, which all Americans can review online. This bill creates a mechanism for political audits of the Fed. Injecting politics into monetary policy and undermining the independence of the Central Bank would be an absolute disaster. I am thinking just recently of the transportation bill that we passed out of here--and I voted for it, hoping that it can be fixed in conference--where the Fed is required to provide $60 billion--that is billion with a B, Mr. Chairman--and then is not being allowed to replenish its money supply. This is more than just tinkering in our economy. There is overwhelming evidence and academic research that demonstrated an independent central bank anywhere in the world making economic decisions and not political decisions delivers lower inflation, higher employment, and better economic results. Currently, the U.S. enjoys low borrowing costs, and our debt is considered the gold standard. The U.S. dollar is literally the reserve currency of countries around the world. If adopted, this bill would potentially undermine the exalted status of U.S. debt.

Ms. MOORE. Does anyone in America think that Congress is going to be more confident at conducting monetary policy than an independent central bank? Let me remind you, under the stewardship of the Republican leadership of this House, we have seen government shutdowns, U.S. debt default threats, and fiscal austerity measures that hamper the economic recovery. As to this Taylor rule, I doubt that anybody over there can explain the Taylor rule to you. But I tell you, had we had the Taylor rule in place in the 1980s when Volcker was here, he would not have been able to stop the rampant inflation that we experienced. The assumptions that it is based on have not accounted for Volcker's inflation fighting or Bernanke's aggressive recovery status. They couldn't have done it under this Taylor rule. And, furthermore, banks, Wall Street, all the investors, would set their models to the Fed commuter model, and then it would set up all kinds of economic disruptions if the Fed would ever deviate from the model. It would take the discretion away from the Fed. I strongly oppose the bill, and I urge my colleagues to reject this dangerous legislation.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. I thank the ranking member. Mr. Chairman, I do rise to oppose H.R. 1737. I have listened very carefully to my colleagues, and I am very sympathetic and empathetic to their desire to help their auto dealers. Too bad this legislation doesn't do that. I also agree with the proponents of this bill that the CFPB can't directly regulate auto dealers, and I don't think the CFPB wants to regulate auto dealers. The problem with this bill is that it doesn't help auto dealers, and it is not a response to CFPB regulatory overreach. What the CFPB does have jurisdiction over is the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. A few years ago, the Bureau noticed a funny thing: that minorities were paying higher markups on auto loans, even when you control for credit risk and other factors, discounts. They noticed if you were Jesus Rodriguez or Barack Obama Jones that somehow you paid a higher price for the car. Now, the problem is that this legislation attempts to free the auto dealers from discrimination. Of course, discrimination is a violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The CFPB and the Department of Justice brought actions against these lenders for violations of ECOA. We heard from the other side that there was no evidence that these car dealers had done anything wrong. No, because it didn't go to court. That is why there was no evidence. It went to settlement, and they settled for $140 million. Pretty simple, the CFPB protected borrowers from discrimination and then put out helpful guidance. So why are we here today, Mr. Chairman? We are here considering this legislation so that auto dealers can violate the ECOA.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 629 and 630, had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' and ``no.''

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 511. When Congress originally passed the National Labor Relations Act in 1935, Congress exempted Federal, State, and local governments from the definition of employer. What we have seen since then, Mr. Speaker, is that local units of government have allowed labor unions to develop, and we have seen the growth and the development of the middle class because labor unions have been in place. Nowhere in the NLRA are Indian tribes mentioned. For nearly 60 years, the NLRB treated tribes as local units of government and the Board declined to apply the NLRA over tribal activities in Indian Country. However, in 2004, the NLRB abruptly reversed course with the San Manuel ruling, asserting that the NLRA does apply to tribal enterprises. The ruling meant that tribes would no longer be treated as local units of government. H.R. 511 is a narrow legislative fix that simply adds tribal governments to the list of other governments that are specifically excluded from the definition of employer in the NLRA. This bill simply ensures that the American Indian tribes are treated with parity, as our other local units of government are treated. As a longtime labor advocate, I support this bill because I believe in tribal sovereignty. I have seen tribes afford their workers good pay, good health care and benefits. I respect their sovereignty, and I respect them to do as our cities and our States do. Sovereignty means respecting the individual authority and the decisionmaking of our country's first nations. That is what H.R. 511 does.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am so happy to join the chairman of the Financial Services Committee and Ms. Sinema in overwhelmingly supporting H.R. 3032. This bill, of course, will relieve the SEC from unnecessary administrative burdens and enable the already overwhelmed agency to focus resources to other, more mission-critical tasks, examinations, and enforcement. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Sinema) to talk about her great legislation.

Ms. MOORE

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, we understand that FHFA Director Watt is doing everything in his power to conserve the assets of the GSEs. However, I agree with the chairman, Mr. Hensarling, that we disagree that the CEOs of these two companies in conservatorship, whose operations are controlled by their regulator, should be paid multimillion-dollar compensation packages. The Treasury, which is the GSE's largest shareholder, opposes these proposed pay packages for the GSE CEOs, and so do we. So, Mr. Speaker, I therefore support S. 2036 and would urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers. I yield back the balance of my time.