Daniel Maffei

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in order under the rule.

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank Chairman Frank and Representative Maloney for all their work on this pressing issue. Today I am offering a simple amendment to make all provisions of the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights effective immediately upon enactment instead of waiting until December 1. Now why should we care about enacting the bill a matter of just a couple of weeks earlier? Well, earlier this year we worked diligently to pass the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights. It was a necessary piece of legislation to protect consumers from the abusive practices that many banks had made standard practice. While we were working on that legislation, I heard from banks that they could not possibly enact all of the changes by the deadlines we proposed. The banks claimed that to ensure quality customer services they would need months or even years to make the proper changes. Well, that was just last May; and I am frankly disappointed to have to address this situation again today. Since we passed and enacted the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights, credit card companies attempt to fleece customers and hope that Congress didn't notice or have time to act. The same companies that were in my office that claimed that they needed months at least to make changes to their systems apparently only needed in some cases days to find ways to raise interest rates and decrease credit limits on customers across the country. One caseworker in my Syracuse office watched her card go from 6.9 percent last year to 13.9 earlier this year to a whopping and punitive 29.9 percent in the past few weeks. She carries a balance on that card. But with an interest rate that is suffocating her finances, she almost certainly will not be able to pay that off, so she can't even close the card. She is not alone. Every day I hear from more and more constituents who tell me they have good credit, that they pay their bills on time, but that the credit card issuers have found a way to raise the rates to extraordinarily high levels. That is why I want to make all provisions of the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights effective immediately. Customers, especially in this economy, cannot wait any longer for these protections. The credit card companies apparently are able to make any changes in interest rates and procedures instantaneously, so why not demand that of them today? If we give them a week or two, they will slam our constituents with even higher rates, trying to squeeze more blood from a stone in the middle of a recession. We are not allowed to pass legislation retroactively, even though the card companies have retroactively raised rates on consumer balances. What we can do, Mr. Chairman, is make sure that we enact this legislation immediately. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 90 seconds to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York, the sponsor of the bill and the chair of the Joint Economic Committee, Mrs. Maloney.

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, in closing, I admire the gentleman from Texas, because to try to defend what the credit card companies are doing is essentially indefensible, so he very artfully tries to change the subject. But I truly believe that this bill just addresses the abusive practices. It would actually make it a lot easier for people who have credit. They would understand exactly what they are getting and exactly what they are paying for. Now in terms of the effective date of this particular amendment, some say it would be unreasonable to impose this effective date immediately, but not as unreasonable as the credit card issuers have been with their own customers. Mr. Chairman, the time for delays is over. We gave the credit card companies a chance and they took advantage of our constituents. We can't take the chance of giving them even a week or a day to do it again. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Madam Speaker, I come before you today in unison with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in support of H.R. 3763, to amend the Fair and Accurate Credit Reporting Act to provide an exclusion from Red Flag Guidelines for certain businesses. I'm proud that the lawmakers and the FTC are actively combating the serious problem of identity theft. The Red Flag Guidelines outlined in the Fair and Accurate Credit Reporting Act directs businesses to establish, by August 1, 2009, a plan for protecting their customers from identity theft. We must remember, however, that regulations like the Red Flags Rule have serious consequences for our nation's small businesses. Small businesses are leaders in their communities and work hard to establish personal relationships with their customers. We cannot simply adopt a one-size-fits-all system that applies the same regulatory standards to a large corporation as it does to a small community health care provider or a small law firm. I commend my colleague from New Jersey for recognizing the undue burden these regulations will have on small businesses and for introducing legislation that provides a more viable solution to identity theft prevention. I am proud to have worked with him in drafting this bill. H.R. 3763 returns to the original intent of the FTC regulations. This bill recognizes that law firms, health care providers, accountants, and other businesses which provide repeated face-to-face service and/or have fewer than 20 employees are not vulnerable to identity theft in the same way as other businesses. These types of businesses were not intended to fall under such FTC regulations and should not be included in Red Flag Guidelines. H.R. 3763 would provide an exemption for such businesses, saving the small business community tremendous undue financial and administrative burden.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak on H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act. By establishing a road mapping process for solar research, development, and demonstration, the bill provides essential aid for the solar industry. I offer my enthusiastic support. Solar technology presents one of our most promising renewable energy sources. In fact, in my own district, the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF), is conducting innovative research pertaining to solar energy and putting it to use. Several of the buildings on campus have solar panels that provide electricity for the school. The 40-kilowatt photovoltaic array on the roof of Walters Hall, made possible by state incentives, has the ability to generate electricity even on overcast days. Thin film PV technology and molecular PV technology are of particular importance as they are the future of photovoltaic technology. By using this second generation of solar technology, we will be able to significantly lower costs while increasing conversion efficiencies. I also specifically encourage demonstration projects in the 1 to 2 megawatt range. Increasing the energy productivity on these technologies, I believe, will have the greatest impact on the solar industry. I congratulate Representative Giffords on her innovative legislation and look forward to seeing its effect on our renewable energy future.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Madam Speaker, I would like to express my support for H.R. 3619, the Coast Guard Authorization Act. This is an important bill with many essential provisions, and I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for all of their hard work. This legislation authorizes $10 billion in Fiscal Year 2010 funding for the Coast Guard, while also including several important provisions such as cruise vessel safety and port security. Congress has instructed the Coast Guard to do more and more in recent years, yet has not provided them the funding necessary to accomplish these objectives. This legislation provides the Coast Guard with the resources to meet Congressional directives. Unfortunately, I was unable to vote on this legislation, as I was on official business back in my district with HUD Secretary Donovan. I assure you that, if I was able to be here in Washington, I would have voted for this important legislation. H.R. 3619 does a great deal to improve national security. The legislation improves on port security, and directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report on the threat of a terrorist attack on gas or chemical cargo shipments. Additionally, the Coast Guard Authorization Act combats alien smuggling by authorizing punishment for anyone who is bringing in people who are considered to be in the United States illegally. Provisions such as these are important for protecting our country from the threat of terrorism and ensuring our citizens are safe. Once again, I would like to commend Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member Mica on this strong legislation, and voice my support for H.R. 3619, the Coast Guard Authorization Act.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about some of the recent investments that the Recovery Act has made in my home district in upstate New York. A few weeks ago, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu came to Syracuse to tour some of our innovative renewable energy research facilities. When he was in town, we announced more than $1.4 million in funding for energy efficiency programs in the city of Syracuse alone. The doors, windows, heating and cooling system at City Hall will be switched to a high efficiency, energy saving model. This is a great investment, because not only does it provide for lower carbon emissions, it will actually reduce the energy bills that Syracuse taxpayers will have to foot. This weekend, I announced energy efficiency funding for the town of Irondequoit. Irondequoit has already had an impressive energy plan in place, so they will make the most of the $440,000 grant. Irondequoit will pursue projects like replacing lightbulbs at often-used public parks and creating a Deputy Commissioner of Public Works for Sustainability. In my district, Mr. Speaker, the Recovery Act is making smart short- term and long-term investments. It is giving communities in my district the flexibility of making improvements and creating jobs.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of H.R. 3590, the Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act. It is important that the brave men and women currently serving our country have an opportunity to take advantage of programs such as the First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit. I was proud to introduce similar legislation with the same goal of extending the opportunity for service men and women to take advantage of the tax credit for twelve months. I ask that all my colleagues Hon. support the Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act. Currently, there are approximately 190,000 U.S. troops fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are making the ultimate sacrifice for their country. These brave men and women are putting their lives on the line every single day, and we, in Congress, must do all in our power to ensure that they are not excluded from participating in programs like the First-time Homebuyer Tax Credit because they are overseas. In fact, a constituent of mine called my office to ask if anything was going to be done to ensure his son, a soldier, could benefit from the First-time Homebuyer Tax Credit. While these brave men and women are sacrificing to serve our country, we must ensure that they can take advantage of the same economic recovery resources the rest of us are enjoying. The Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act also makes sure that members of the armed services are not required to pay back the tax credit if they are forced to sell their home because they have been deployed to a different location. This legislation, like mine, shows Congress's commitment to our troops, and I encourage other Member's to join me in supporting the Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Madam Speaker, today I rise in support of House Resolution 707, expressing support for the week of September 13, 2009, as Adult Education and Family Literacy Week. Syracuse, NY, in my district, is considered the ``home'' of the adult literacy movement. It was in Syracuse that Dr. Frank Laubach established Laubach Literacy International to combat this ever growing problem. In my district, ProLiteracy continues the fight to encourage adult literacy in order to improve the lives of adults, their families and communities. ProLiteracy, the world's largest organization of adult literacy and basic education programs, provides advocacy, professional development, training, technical assistance, and materials to the programs that help adults learn to read, write, perform basic math, use technology, and communicate in English. Fourteen percent of adults nationwide cannot read at an 8th grade level, that number rises to twenty two percent of adults in the state of New York. The ability to read is a key component for overcoming poverty, maintaining good health, finding a job that pays a living wage and preventing crime. Almost 63 percent of all inmates in state and federal prisons are almost totally illiterate. For example, Carl Sodeberg from Minneapolis, Minnesota had a learning disability that made it difficult for him to read. When Carl was in high school, he was called to the front of the classroom to read something from the blackboard. When students and the teacher mocked him, Carl lashed out at the teacher verbally and was suspended from school. He never went back. Over the next 20 years Carl found himself in and out of work. He developed a drug problem and ended up in jail. When he finally realized he needed to learn to read, Carl was in his mid-40's. Carl worked with an adult literacy program in his community-- he learned to read, earned his high school diploma, and then went on to get a paraprofessional's license that enables him to work as a teacher's aide. He's now employed by the high school from which he was suspended, working with students who have fallen behind in their studies due to reading problems. It is stories such as Carl Sodeberg's that remind us the importance of encouraging adult literacy and the mission of organizations like ProLiteracy. I encourage other Members to join me in supporting H. Res. 707 to designate the week of September 13 Adult Education and Family Literacy Week.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, It does not promote civility to have a party line vote and spend an afternoon debating whether Mr. Wilson's apology for what he said during the President's address last week is `good enough.' Clearly, Mr. Wilson thoroughly embarrassed himself. And while I disagree with Mr. Wilson and I strongly support the President, I think we should be moving on and not piling on. As Voltaire wrote, `I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.' We all agree Mr. Wilson's behavior was inappropriate, now it is time to get back to work.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Thank you very much, to the distinguished chairman of the Science and Technology Committee, Bart Gordon. I also want to thank my colleague on the Financial Services Committee, a very distinguished new Member of the House, Gary Peters, the sponsor of this bill. By increasing the power of alternative and renewable energy, we have the opportunity to break our addiction to foreign oil, reduce global warming and create millions of new jobs in the process, ones that cannot be shipped overseas. In my own region, we are doing research in alternative fuels such as butanol at the School of Environmental Science and Forestry in Syracuse, and we have hydrogen fuel cell technology in Rochester institutions of higher education, as well as at a Delphi plant there. We're already using these new fuel vehicles, the ones that have already come out. On Monday I stood at an old train station in downtown Syracuse which had been abandoned for years, creating an eyesore. But using stimulus money, the Clean Communities Group will turn this building into a charging station for electric cars as well as an alternative fueling hub for CuseCar, an alternative fuel car sharing company in Syracuse. Under this bill, it can become a center for research on the practical use of these advanced technology vehicles. Our energy policy, Mr. Chairman, is heading in the right direction, and the Advanced Vehicle Technology Act ensures that we are charting the right course for our new energy future.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, today, we are faced with a rare problem. We have a program that has proven to be working, and all we need to do is to keep it working. Getting gas-guzzling vehicles off the road and replaced with new fuel-efficient vehicles is helping our environment. It is putting money directly into the pockets of middle-income families. It is a ray of hope for auto dealers in this country, a ray of hope for the U.S. auto industry and a ray of hope for our economy. Finally we have a bailout, not for the big businesses, not for Wall Street, but a bailout for Main Street. As the lead sponsor of a bill to help protect the legal rights of auto dealers, I can tell you this is a godsend for the auto dealers in my district. Don't stall what's working. Give it a fill-up, and let's get Cash for Clunkers back on the road.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, earlier today I welcomed to the Capitol Dr. Sharon Brangman from my district, who was recently named the next president of the American Geriatrics Society. This morning she told me and other Members how physicians who work with the elderly are spending an overwhelming majority of their time providing primary care often without appropriate compensation through the current Medicare formulas. The extra year of training and additional expertise actually mean less pay, which is one of the reasons why we have an acute shortage of geriatricians in America. Mr. Speaker, baby boomers entering into the later stages of life will cause America's older population to double in the next few years. We must reform our health care system to adequately compensate doctors for providing preventative and coordinated care to patients in every stage of life. If we do it right, it will save money because many superfluous and harmful treatments will be eliminated and seniors will not only live longer but better lives.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, I hosted a town hall meeting in my district in Syracuse, New York. The town hall was extremely well attended, with over 400 constituents from across central New York in attendance, and everyone was interested. I think there may have even been 400 different opinions in the room. The ones who were the most passionate, of course, were the ones on both sides of it and the extreme sides of it. There was the crowd that wanted a government-run, single-payer health care system and wouldn't settle for much else, and then there were about an equal number equally convinced that the government should have absolutely no role in health care whatsoever and that any role at all would be socialism. I think most of the people in my district, though, are somewhere in the middle. I would like to share just one story from my town hall. At the end of the evening, after some pretty heated rhetoric, a man named Doug West of Skaneateles, New York, came down to the front of the auditorium to show me his monthly insurance bill and how it went from about $350 about 6 years ago to more than $800 today. Doug is a retired engineer from a local company, and unless there are is some dramatic changes, Doug is not going to be able to afford that rising cost forever. Doug and his family are examples of the constituents that I will be focused on in my advocacy for higher quality and more affordable health care.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Madam Speaker, I rise to ask Chrysler and General Motors to continue to honor their commitments to auto dealers in this country. Chrysler and GM should not deprive economic rights to profitable dealerships across this country. Yesterday, I joined with Representative Frank Kratovil of Maryland and introduced the Automobile Dealer Economic Rights Restoration Act of 2009. The act claims to restore the economic rights of GM and Chrysler dealers as they existed prior to each company's bankruptcy. We want to preserve GM and Chrysler car dealers' rights to recourse under State law and, at the request of an automobile dealer, require GM and Chrysler to reinstate franchise agreements in effect prior to those companies' bankruptcies. These are bankruptcies negotiated with Federal officials, and taxpayer dollars are helping to maintain both companies. Therefore, these bankruptcies should not be used to change the rules that dealers have been operating under. I first wrote a bipartisan letter with Representative Chris Lee of New York and more than 65 of our colleagues to the auto task force in May asking them to work with the companies to reconsider the forced closings. Since then, thousands of dealers have been informed by GM and Chrysler, through a seemingly arbitrary system, that their relationships were ending essentially immediately, leaving some dealers with millions of dollars invested in car stock with no options for consolidation and little leverage for liquidation. In my home district in upstate New York, there is a dealership, Lewis Goodman Chrysler, which has been the cornerstone of one of our communities for 50 years. Mr. Goodman opened his dealership in 1959 in Syracuse. Two years ago, at the age of 82, Mr. Goodman passed away, but his dying wish was to make sure the dealership reached the half century mark. His widow promised to keep their dealership running at least through its 50th anniversary, which was just last week. Lewis Goodman Chrysler received a letter on May 15 informing them that Chrysler was severing their relationship. The letter gave no indication as to why this particular dealership was targeted, just that the relationship was ending. I visited Mrs. Goodman last week to celebrate the 50th anniversary. This is a dealership that is profitable, partly because of selling preowned cars. It employs dozens of people and has been loyal to them for years. It is exactly the kind of small family business that we in this House claim to want to help, not close. We all recognize that the economy is not favorable to the auto industry right now and especially not in certain sections of the country where the population can no longer support an extensive dealer network. We have already seen layoffs from parts manufacturers in my district, plant closings, and a Chapter 11 among one of their suppliers. In this context, across central New York 11 dealerships have closed on their own since 2007, and we expect to see other dealerships consolidate and close this year. But we do not, in the middle of a recession, need to take a hatchet to local, family-owned businesses that have supported our communities for decades when market forces are already at work. These dealerships employ hundreds of people across my district. They sponsor our local little league teams, our pancake breakfasts, and they buy ads in our local newspapers and local TV newscasts. They have been the cornerstone of our community for generations. I have also signed a letter with Congressman Chris Van Hollen, Majority Leader Hoyer, and over 100 of our fellow Members, and we sent it to President Obama talking about our concerns, the total lack of transparency and how this system is shutting down profitable dealerships. And we want to know, from both sides of the aisle, whether we can get more transparency and an indication of how this, indeed, saves money. The auto companies, who are buoyed by taxpayer dollars, should be honest with the dealerships and with the American people about how these decisions are being made, and the dealerships should be negotiated with on how to consolidate dealerships in a way that will help to find a soft landing for the workers and communities, not just in my district, but across the country.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of sending this critical bill to the President for his signature. Enactment will stop deceptive and unfair practices by credit card issuers that have taken advantage of honest consumers. I thank the chairman for his leadership, and I want to especially thank Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney. When she started in this effort, the odds were dead set against her, and it was likely her efforts would run into stiff partisan opposition. Thanks to her leadership and hard work, this bill has very bipartisan support, passing this House this year by 357-70 and, yesterday, being approved by the Senate with an overwhelmingly bipartisan 90-5 vote. Each time I am at home in my district, without fail, people share stories about their times with credit cards. One woman, Diana Lynn, from Baldwinsville, near Syracuse, recently noted that, in the fine print of her credit card, her interest rate had been raised from 14.25 to 21.5 percent for no reason, which was applied to her already existing balance. Diana runs an animal protection nonprofit and is taking care of her mother, who is in intensive care. Now, she is confident that she will eventually pay off this balance and will still maintain her good credit, but she is worried about those less well off, who are at the mercy of the credit card companies. Hers is just one of the hundreds of stories that my office has heard. Today, we take action on their behalf. Under this legislation before us, Diana would have been protected. For too long, the credit card issuers have taken advantage of American families, of small businesses and even of churches that are too responsible to run away but are too poor to pay off their balances. The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights means that credit card companies will no longer be allowed to act as loan sharks. The enactment of this bill is just the beginning. Just as the Bill of Rights in the Constitution provides a foundation for all of our laws that protect citizens' liberties, this bill will create a solid foundation for Congress to build upon in order to provide a needed floor for the industry to improve their practices and to highlight the need for consumer responsibility. This bipartisan coalition will continue to push for more transparency and fairness for consumers in upstate New York and throughout the country.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I would consume. Mr. Chairman, this is a very simple amendment that would require the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, to work with funding recipients to promote opportunities for individuals enrolled in Job Corps to gain employment experience on modernization, repair, and construction projects funded under this act. The amendment would also require the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, to work with recipients of funds to promote appropriate opportunities for individuals enrolled in a junior or community college. This is, I think, a pretty noncontroversial amendment that just allows additional help in getting people to work, young people to work, and giving them needed skills. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. I rise to offer an amendment that enables job opportunities provided under the 21st Century Green High-Performing Schools Act to be accessible to students enrolled in Job Corps and community colleges. The Maffei/Schwartz amendment adds to the existing requirements of the bill which requires the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, to work with grant recipients under this Act to promote opportunities for participants in Youthbuild programs to gain experience on projects funded by the bill. In the state of New York and through a nationwide campus network, Job Corps provides a complete range of career development services to at- risk young women and men, ages 16 to 24, to prepare them for successful careers. Job Corps differs from Youthbuild in that it targets at-risk youth and operates programs at residential facilities. Job Corps is a critical program that reaches young adults who need opportunities by providing them with academic training and vocational opportunity. My district is in Upstate New York and includes Syracuse, where each year we place approximately 400 at-risk youth into the Job Corps program. There are real success stories from this program, and by allowing funds from the Green Schools Act to be utilized for the Job Corps program, we will bring opportunity and hope to more vulnerable youth in my area and across the country. Community Colleges are an important generator of trained, skilled students who can enter the workforce in critical fields. In my district, Onondaga Community College has created the Sustainability Institute. The institute will train students in installation of geothermal and wind systems, which are both expanding fields but severely lack adequately trained workers in Central New York. The Sustainability Institute has been endorsed by the New York US Green Buildings Council because a green workforce is our future, but we are woefully under-trained and -prepared to embrace this new economic engine. Renovating, modernizing, and constructing green schools offers hands- on learning opportunities for students, ensuring that they are provided opportunities to learn new techniques, new trades, in a new green economy. This amendment will help to further ensure that our nation's young people are prepared for the jobs of the future. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. The Fraud Enforcement Recovery Act of 2009 gives the Department of Justice the resources it needs to better combat and prevent the kind of financial fraud that has put our economy on its heels. As I discussed with the bill's sponsors on this legislation in the House, however, I do have concerns about amendments like those included in this package that expand the reach of an already powerful weapon-- the civil False Claims Act. Often enforced by whistleblowers and their private counsel when the Department of Justice steps aside, the civil False Claims Act reaches beyond traditional fraud to impose treble damages and per claim penalties of $5,500 to $11,000 on individuals, corporations, and other legal entities who submit false claims for government program funds, knowing or recklessly disregarding the falsity of those claims. The power of the False Claims Act comes from its broad terms, low burden of proof, enabling the government to impose penalties and recoup funds lost not only to frauds, but to less culpable schemes that abuse government moneys. But there's also a danger in this. Not all whistleblowers and their lawyers have the same view of the statute as the Department of Justice and the risk of penalties, treble damages, and attorney fees. In many cases, the defense costs can cost some defendants to settle charges they would otherwise be able to defend. One of the things this legislation does is expend that powerful weapon to reach schemes that defraud the government of money it pays by mistake--of ``overpayments'' that come into the possession of an entity, like a university or a research institution, through no fault of its own, that the entity keeps and maybe hides rather than notifying the government or returning it to the government. Drafting language to pursue unlawful retention of an overpayment proved difficult, however. When we considered similar legislation in committee, I learned that hospitals, universities, and other research institutions are among various entities that function in government programs where the program rules do require those entities to account for overpayments. They do so in the form of periodic reports prepared according to agency rules that account costs incurred and payments received. This allows them to reconcile overpayments and underpayments and, when appropriate, repay those overpayments. But the drafting problem we faced was avoiding language that would impose liability on research institutions or hospitals for holding on to overpayments at a time when the applicable rules would allow them to do so pending repayment through the normal process. This would include reconciliation processes established under statutes, regulations, and rules that govern Medicare, Medicaid, and all sorts of other various research grants and programs. So, as a courtesy to my colleagues, I withdrew an amendment that addressed these issues and commenced negotiations to see that any amendments to the False Claims Act-protected entities that rely on those processes in good faith in handling their accounting, protecting them from unwarranted investigations and litigation concerning overpayments, they were, in effect, entitled to keep for at least a small period of time. As reflected in the committee report, the Senate version of this bill was amended to afford that protection. A new subsection of the False Claims Act will not impose liability for the mere retention of an overpayment over the course of the reconciliation period. Rather, the new subsection would require proof of a knowing false record or statement, of knowing concealment, or of knowing and improper acts to avoid or decrease an obligation to pay money to the government. So, if a person or entity receives an overpayment from the United States and fails to return it immediately and instead takes steps to return the overpayment through an applicable reconciliation process, then liability would not attach. However, if a person falsifies information during a reconciliation period or otherwise acts knowingly and improperly to avoid the payment, liability would attach. So it's vitally important that we pass this legislation to fight financial fraud. But it's also important that we not punish universities, hospitals, and other important research institutions when they're doing everything that they are supposed to do. We must have enforcement and also fairness.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. Mr. Speaker, last week, the House passed the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights with an overwhelming bipartisan vote. This week the House will take up anti-predatory lending and mortgage fraud legislation. These bills are the next step as we work to rebuild our economy in a way that is fair and consistent with our values. The Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009 will curb abuse in predatory lending, a major factor in the Nation's highest home foreclosure rate in 25 years. The bill would outlaw many of the most egregious industry practices that have marked the subprime lending boom, and it would prevent borrowers from deliberately misstating their incomes to qualify for a loan. But I would also like to get back to the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights, because that is such an important piece of legislation. As I mentioned, it passed 357-70 in this body, and I do urge that the other body take up this legislation as rapidly as possible. The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights has had such broad bipartisan support because these credit card issuers and companies have benefited from an uneven playing field for so long. Regular people across the country and across my district have been victimized by these unfair and abusive practices, and Congress has now finally heard their stories. One of their stories was featured today in an editorial in the Syracuse Post-Standard, my hometown newspaper. ``Temple Baptist Church in Baldwinsville is the kind of customer that credit card companies used to reward with lower interest rates, not higher ones. The church paid its credit card bill on time and always paid at least the minimum due. ``But without explanation, Advanta Bank raised the church's interest rate from 18 percent to a whopping 36.9 percent. The higher rate had already been applied to $8,000 in new purchases, according to the Reverend Aaron Overton. He was shocked, just like thousands of citizens who have found themselves in similar positions. ``Fortunately for Overton and other consumers, their outcry was loud enough for Congress to pay attention. Last week, the House of Representatives approved the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights, which would prohibit sudden and retroactive rate hikes.'' Then the editorial goes on to say later that this bill is good, we need to do more, and that ``Congress needs to carefully examine how credit card companies conduct business, the kinds of interest rates they charge and what other schemes are being practiced that hurt customers. Overton says he probably could have gotten a better deal from the Mafia than from his credit card company. It does appear that some companies are shaking down customers as the economy worsens.'' Mr. Speaker, I will include the full editorial for the Record. The point is this: We cannot any longer allow these kind of practices to occur. The model that makes this occur is the fact that at one point in our country, all lending, including credit card lending, was based on the fair principle that a bank or other institution would lend out money and then would make money on the interest and then the principal would be paid back. But these credit card companies have now targeted people that cannot afford to pay back that principal and instead continue to get higher and higher fees. Yet they are too responsible, like Reverend Overton, to run away. He is not going to go anywhere. That church is not going to go anywhere. So there is no excuse to raise those rates and to have those fees, except that the company wants to make more money. My concern, the concern of my newspaper at home and the concern of many of us, is that these credit card companies, before this bill fully takes effect, before the Senate is able to pass it, will take advantage of this all the more. But to them, Mr. Speaker, to them I have a clear message, and that is we have got our eyes on you and you shouldn't try it, because if you do, we are going to put this into effect much, much earlier, as our Chairman Barney Frank has said. I do not believe that you should have a lawyer to get a credit card. We have lawyers to get a new house, often when you have a house closing. But when it comes time to get a credit card, you shouldn't need a lawyer. These 30 page contracts, frankly, that people don't read, but I tell you, if you did read them, there is only a couple of sentences that matter. Those are the sentences that say the credit card issuer can do everything and the consumer can do nothing. This has to end. This practice has to end. We must assure fairness, and that means getting the Senate to pass a strong credit cardholders' bill of rights, and in both Houses and down the street at the White House we have to keep an eye on this industry and make sure they don't take advantage of the customers further during this recession. Mr. Speaker, I include the editorial from the Syracuse Post-Standard for the Record. Bad Credit Temple Baptist Church in Baldwinsville is the kind of customer that credit card companies used to reward with lower interest rates not higher ones. The church paid its credit card bill on time and always paid at least the minimum due. But without explanation, Advanta Bank raised the church's interest rate from 18 percent to a whopping 36.9 percent. The higher rate had already been applied to $8,000 in new purchases, according to the Rev. Aaron Overton. He was shocked just like thousands of citizens who have found themselves in similar positions. Fortunately for Overton and other consumers, their outcry was loud enough for Congress to pay attention. Last week, the House of Representatives approved the ``Credit Card Holders' Bill of Rights,'' which would prohibit sudden and retroactive rate hikes. The Senate is expected to pass similar legislation, according to Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who said the Senate bill would contain ``important protections for consumers and is a giant step forward for anyone who uses a credit card.'' Let's hope so. The credit card companies have been allowed to ride roughshod over their customers, employing jaw-dropping practices in a nation that supposedly operates by fair and transparent financial rules. In fact, Congress needs to go farther than the House did in its bill. As Rev. Overton pointed out, credit card companies should be made to refund the money they received from the outrageous fees. State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo was able to work out such a deal recently with JP Morgan Chase & Co. It refunded $4.4 million to 184,000 cardholders Cuomo said were wrongly charged a monthly $10 fee. Most of the regulations in the Credit Card Holders' Bill of Rights will not take effect until next year. But Rep. Dan Maffei, D-DeWitt, and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-Manhattan, sponsored an amendment that would ensure that one crucial provision takes effect within 90 days of signing that companies give customers 45 days notice before raising rates. Maffei says the House bill is just the beginning of stricter oversight of credit card issuers. As a member of the House Financial Services Committee, he says he has heard complaints about credit company practices throughout his district. He plans to hold hearings in Syracuse this summer. That's good. Congress needs to carefully examine how credit card companies conduct business, the kinds of interest rates they charge and what other schemes are being practiced that hurt consumers. Overton says he probably could have gotten a better deal from the Mafia than from his credit card company. It does appear that some companies are shaking down customers as the economy worsens. Lawmakers must put an end to such practices immediately.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, we must support this rule because the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act is really just the beginning, just the foundation of reestablishing basic rules that will protect consumers. A lot of these amendments are very, very good amendments and are needed to make sure that we don't need a lawyer like we do when we buy a house, you have a lawyer. But we don't need a lawyer in order to just get a credit card. The very nature of what credit card companies have been doing has become exploitive. They are going after Americans who may be too responsible to run away, but too poor to ever pay back their balance. They are making their money on unreasonable interest rates, fees, et cetera. And during a recession, this only becomes worse. Now, the other side is saying that there is competition. But how can consumers take advantage of this competition if they can't even tell which credit card is better because of all the deceptive practices that we are allowing? Thirty-page contracts containing all this fine print, raising interest rates, universal default which says if you are late on any card, then any other card can punish you. This credit card bill of rights is really just the beginning, and we must make sure that we also have a declaration of independence from unreasonable credit card interest rate and debt. Just as I just did with my credit card, we must get away from these unreasonable rates and unreasonable fees that the credit card companies are offering. This bill will give the consumers the tools to do that.

Mr. MAFFEI

Mr. MAFFEI. I want to thank Chairman Gutierrez for yielding and for all his leadership. I want to thank the chairman of the full committee, Barney Frank, as well. And especially I want to thank the former chairwoman of the subcommittee, Carolyn Maloney, for her persistence on behalf of American families. Mr. Chairman, I rise to ask for support of this very important bill, because I feel strongly that we must stop the deceptive and unfair practices that have taken advantage of honest consumers. For too long, credit card issuers have buried important details in the fine print or never showed consumers the 30-plus pages contract they are signing onto. Credit card issuers then hit consumers with rate increases and fees, always with the excuse, well, it's in the contract. I am okay with needing a lawyer to close on a house, but regular people shouldn't need a lawyer just to get a credit card. We must make sure credit cards have fair rules. I hear time and again from people in my district who have seen their interest rates substantially increased on their credit cards or the limits decreased for arbitrary reasons or no reason at all. This is an issue that crosses into every part of my district. Without fail, someone shares some story each time I am at home. One, for instance, is Reverend Aaron Overton of the Temple Baptist Church Baldwinsville, New York. He saw his credit card company raise the rate on his church's existing balance to more than 36 percent, even though he had evidence that his bill was always paid on time. And, believe me, this Baptist church showed no risk of default or of running away. The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights takes important steps to level the playing field. It provides that customers receive 45 days' notice of an interest rate increase. It institutes commonsense changes, such as requiring that every statement display a clear due date. Finally, and most important to my constituents, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights ensures that companies cannot raise rates retroactively on existing balances. Raising rates on preexisting balances means that issuers are raising rates on funds already disbursed to customers, and that's simply unfair. The credit card issuers have taken advantage of American families, small businesses and even churches that are too responsible to run away or default but too financially strapped to pay off their balance. This is unfair at any time. But during a time of recession, it is unconscionable. This bill of rights for credit cardholders will restore fairness to the consumers.