Michael Oxley

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time on Thursday, July 25, 2002, to consider a conference report to accompany H.R. 3763; that the conference report be considered as read; and that all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration be waived.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of the House of Representatives the work of the U.S.-Asia Institute, which plays an important role in improving understanding between the United States and China. This nongovernmental organization promotes an ongoing exchange of views between policy makers in the U.S. and China. Since 1985, a principal vehicle for furthering this dialogue has been the congressional staff delegation visits to the People's Republic of China organized by the U.S.-Asia Institute and hosted by the Chinese People's Institute of Foreign Affairs. These official visits serve to increase awareness, knowledge, and understanding of U.S. and Chinese policies. The 50th delegation will travel to China in August 2002. To commemorate this milestone, the U.S.-Asia Institute is hosting special events in Washington, D.C. in July 2002. The Chinese People's Institute of Foreign Affairs will reciprocate by hosting special events in Beijing in August 2002. Since its inception, this program has hosted more than 400 congressional staff members who have traveled throughout China--from Heihe in the north on the Russian border to Hainan Island in the south; from the dynamic coastal cities of Shanghai and Guangzhou to the remote city of Urumqi, an oasis on the ancient Silk Road; from Tibet to Kunming to Beijing and other places in between. Over 150 congressional office and committee staff members have benefitted from fact-finding and the opportunity to discuss in depth issues of mutual interest to our great nations. The progress of the U.S.-Sino relationship rests on dialogue and engagement, and this program provides participants with an unparalleled first-hand view of China, its culture, its government, and its people. In recognition of a program that promotes understanding, goodwill, and trade between the people of China and the United States, I commend the U.S.-Asia Institute and the Chinese People's Institute of Foreign Affairs for their work and hope that this long-standing partnership will continue for many years to come.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox), a valuable member of our committee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am constantly amazed. The minority party offered a motion to instruct that basically tells the House we ought to accept lower penalties instead of the higher penalties that this House passed just this week. I am frankly stunned at that. I want to make it clear that House Republicans support a much stronger bill and reject the kind of efforts to weaken this bill that our friends on the other side have projected. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers at this time. I would ask the gentleman if he is prepared to yield back the balance of his time and we could proceed to a vote.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Michigan has several speakers available in the bullpen. We are prepared to listen to their dulcet tones.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is correct.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), our good friend and a valuable member of the Committee on Financial Services.

Mr. OXLEY. Then we will continue to plod on. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets.

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

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker).

Mr. OXLEY. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the time remaining on both sides?

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), a valuable member of the Committee on Financial Services.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, having just seen this document, the motion to instruct, I would have to say to my friend, the gentleman from Michigan, that most of the issues that he talks about in his motion I have a great deal of empathy for. Certainly the issue over document destruction, of whistleblower protections, and the like, are all part and parcel of what ultimately I think this legislation needs to look at. I have some concerns, as the gentleman might expect, regarding the language of the extension of the statute of limitations in regard to lawsuits. As the gentleman knows, back in 1995, Congress, on a bipartisan basis, passed the Securities Litigation Reform Act. That was vetoed by then-President Clinton and was the only veto ultimately overridden. So, in fact, the House and the Senate spoke very loudly in 1995 on that issue. It is also true that Chairman Greenspan, when asked in the Senate yesterday, when he testified as to whether he saw any need to change the existing statute in regard to securities litigation reform, answered in the negative. So we are, on this side, somewhat perplexed that the minority would choose this particular issue, which was ultimately not part of the legislation that came out of the Committee on Financial Services, the committee of major jurisdiction, so I have some concerns about that part. On the other hand, it seems to me those are the kinds of issues that we need to work towards and to complete in a conference. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, this has been an enlightening debate. Let me just review the bidding, if I can. Back when Enron became a household word, and all of the scandals that developed, the Committee on Financial Services was the first committee last year in December to hold a hearing on the Enron scandal. Our committee, the committee of jurisdiction, passed strong legislation, the CAARTA legislation, Corporate and Auditing Accountability, Responsibility, and Transparency Act. It passed in the committee with a strong bipartisan vote, dealing with corporate scandals, dealing with accounting irregularities, directing our efforts at the real problem while preserving the ability of the marketplace to work very effectively. Then the bill came to the floor. It passed by a large margin, 334 to 90; 119 Democrats wisely voted for that piece of legislation. We waited and we waited and we waited for the other body to act, almost 3 months. Finally, when the WorldCom bombshell hit, the Senate finally decided to act, and act they did. In large measure, the Sarbanes bill and our bill are very, very similar. I applaud Senator Sarbanes, Chairman Sarbanes, for his hard work and his dedication. We are now in a process where we all ought to be, and that is to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate. That is what we do here. That is what legislators do. Those who would say we need to take the Senate bill lock, stock, and barrel and not worry about any of the potential problems in that bill, I think, denigrate our committee and the legislative process. So we are here to say, let us do regular order. Let us get to a conference. We can do this. The President said, let us get this done before the August recess. The Speaker said, get this done before the August recess. We are going to get this done before the August recess; and we are going to have a good, bipartisan bill that we can take to the President for his signature and send a strong signal to the American people and the investing public that the Congress has done everything possible to restore confidence to our public markets. We should take a great deal of pride on both sides of the aisle for the way that we have addressed this issue. I have been proud to work with my good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), the ranking member. We have had our differences of opinion; but at the same time, he has been a very strong advocate for doing the kind of reform necessary. I salute him in his last few months here in this great body. We are on the verge of a very positive approach to the scandals that have enveloped corporate America. Let us move on to the conference. Let us reject this unwise motion and move to a conference in good order. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I want to assure the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers) that is exactly what our goal is. The President has tasked this Congress to get a bill to his desk before the August break. The Speaker has done the same. I am committed, and I think all of us are committed, to getting that job done.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 3763) to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures made pursuant to the securities laws, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.