Michael Oxley

Mr. OXLEY

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

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to commend the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises, for his great leadership on the Stock Option Accounting Reform Act. His legislation strikes a significant compromise between those who believe that expensing options will help prevent some of the corporate governance abuses we have seen in the last few years and those who believe that expensing options will harm our most innovative companies, especially those in the high-tech industry, but not exclusive to them. Requiring publicly held companies to record as an expense options granted to the chief executive and the next four most highly compensated officers will help preserve broad-based employee stock options and, at the same time, addresses the corporate governance concerns voiced by advocates of expensing. Our most successful enterprises, many of which are small businesses and venture capital companies, would not be as successful as they are today but for their ability to attract and retain talented employees by giving them ownership in that endeavor. Ownership rewards due to one's personal contribution to a successful enterprise is the ethos of our capital markets system. While I have been, and continue to be, a strong supporter of FASB's independence, I am supportive of the gentleman from Louisiana's (Chairman Baker) legislation because I believe FASB's proposal, as currently drafted, would do harm to our most innovative companies. While I believe that FASB should be separated from the political process, and I have supported FASB's independence during all of my 20- plus years here in the Congress, its authority is subject to review by the Congress. In extraordinary circumstances, and I believe this is one of those rare occasions, FASB's rule-making should be halted when its proposal will do harm to our economy, and I believe that is the case here. The Congress is ultimately responsible for the economic well-being of this country. Policies that could create an environment that is hostile to innovation and entrepreneurship must be reviewed and altered accordingly. Therefore, I urge all of my colleagues to support the gentleman from Louisiana's (Chairman Baker) important legislation. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), who has been enormously helpful throughout this process and, in fact, testified before the Committee on Financial Services on this legislation.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me say this debate raged in the committee. I think the committee made a wise choice in defeating that. It only got 14 votes and 33 against because of some of the arguments that were purported from members on both sides of the aisle regarding the innate confusion the gentleman's amendment would cause to the investing public. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time as he might consume to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Ryun).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This has been an excellent debate, and I have great respect for the two gentlemen who have offered this substitute, the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski), but the issue here is whether duly elected public policymakers, that is, the Congress, have a responsibility to deal with issues that come into the realm of the economy, job creation, economic growth and the like, and I think clearly the answer is ``yes.'' How many arguments have we heard about outsourcing? How many arguments have we heard about the fact that we are falling behind in the technology gap with Asian countries? How many times have we heard the arguments about the number of engineers that are produced in other parts of the world compared to here or in science and the like? How many times have we heard about the competition out there for good quality people who have an idea, who want to bring that idea to fruition? That is really what employee stock options do. It gives them an incentive. It incentivizes these folks to work harder and to come up with more innovations because they have a piece of the action. They own part of that company, and this is clearly what it is. The fastest growing area for employee stock options is Asia, and among the Asian countries, the fastest growing country for creation of employee stock options is Communist China. When our American companies have to compete for talent with Japan and China and other countries in Asia, and at the same time we have politicians and pundits complaining about outsourcing and about our inability to be competitive, do we have to stand back as elected Members of Congress and say we are willing to allow those decisions to be made by unelected bureaucrats and the private sector? I say, no. So this idea that the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) came up with, which deals with that 30 percent, the top five people in a corporation, this deals directly with that. It says we are going to have them report those stock options. That is precisely the point behind this. If the argument is that somehow all of the business scandals resulted from the fact that people were abusing stock options, then this bill is the answer to that problem. I ask Members to oppose the substitute and for a strong bipartisan vote for final passage.

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

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The manager's amendment to H.R. 3574 makes an important clarification to the bill as reported by the Committee on Financial Services. The bill was never designed to prevent any company that either currently expenses its employee stock options or wishes to do so in the future from doing so. The manager's amendment makes it explicit that a company that wishes to voluntarily expense its employee stock options may do so based on the expensing rules that companies are using today to expense their stock options. The bill's requirement that companies expense the employee stock options with the five top executives would not apply to any company that voluntarily expenses all of its employee stock options under current rules. Mr. Chairman, this is an important distinction, because if companies feel it is important to expense these stock options, if they feel they may perhaps have a competitive advantage over competitors, they may choose to do so. It literally is a free country, and they have that obligation. This amendment simply clarifies that option that all companies, publicly traded companies, have; and I urge my colleagues to support the manager's amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as I say, we have debated this amendment in committee, and it was defeated on a vote of 13 ayes and 43 nays, precisely because while the gentleman's intentions I think are good, as debate in the committee clearly showed, this amendment, should it be adopted, would, frankly, confuse investors far more than it would educate them. An options value is estimated by applying an options pricing model at the date the option is granted. It was interesting that one national accounting firm, which incidentally supports expensing, wrote FASB last year to support zero volatility, something that the Sherman amendment would bring into question. ``We believe that using zero as the expected volatility of the stock price would increase the reliability of option values.'' So what we are trying to do with the underlying bill is not only provide the top five executives with the need to expense stock options, but also to give the investing public the kind of information they need so they can compare apples to apples in this regard; and unfortunately, the Sherman amendment does just quite the opposite. So for those reasons, I would oppose the Sherman amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me first say, while I oppose the amendment, the gentlewoman from New York has made an excellent contribution to the committee on a number of fronts, and we appreciate her efforts. We just happen to disagree on this particular amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) be permitted to control the remainder of my time for consideration of this bill.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3574, the Stock Option Accounting Reform Act.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember the Apollo 11 mission and honor a native of the 4th district of Ohio, Neil Armstrong. As mission commander, Armstrong was first to step on the lunar surface at 10:56 p.m., EDT on July 20, 1969. His immortal words--``That is one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind''--will resonate in our hearts and minds forever. Neil Alden Armstrong took his first steps in Wapakoneta, Ohio. Born to Stephen and Viola Armstrong, Neil developed an early interest in flying. At age six, he took his first airplane ride in Warren, Ohio in a Ford Tri-Motor plane nicknamed the ``Tin Goose''. He began taking flying lessons at the age of fifteen and had his student pilot's license before graduating from Blume High School in 1947. While in college at Purdue University, he was called up for active duty in the Navy and was sent to Korea as an aviator. During the war, he flew seventy-eight combat missions from the aircraft carrier USS Essex. Following the war, Armstrong joined the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics and was sent to the Lewis Research Center near Cleveland, Ohio (today the Glenn Research Center) where he was an engineer and test pilot. At Lewis and later at NASA's Flight Research Center in Edwards, California, Armstrong flew over 200 different models of aircraft while pursuing a master of science degree in aerospace engineering from the University of Southern California. In 1962, Armstrong was transferred to astronaut status and moved to El Lago, Texas, where he underwent four years of training for the Apollo program. He commanded his first space mission as pilot for Gemini VII, but his most famous mission came when Apollo 11 launched on July 16, 1969. Armstrong and the two other astronauts, ``Buzz'' Aldrin and Michael Collins, spent eight days in space and 2\1/2\ hours on the Moon's surface. For his work as an astronaut, Armstrong received the Medal of Freedom, the NASA Distinguished Service Medal, the NASA Exceptional Service Medal, and the Congressional Space Medal of Honor. Neil Armstrong went where no one had gone before and helped our Nation become the leader in space exploration. This man from rural Ohio paved the way for generations to continue to explore and dream of the far reaches of our universe. As our Nation embarks on future space travels, we need to take time to honor those explorers who carved out a new path for us to follow.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent from the floor during rollcall votes 360 (Hefley amendment to H.R. 4755), 361 (Sherman motion to recommit H.R. 4755), and 362 (H.R. 4755 final passage), taken last night. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall votes 360 and 361 and ``aye'' on rollcall vote 362.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1914, the ``Jamestown 400th Anniversary Commemorative Coin Act of 2003,'' authored by the gentle lady from Virginia, Mrs. Davis, and ask for its immediate passage. Madam Speaker, it is easy to lose sight of the importance of the founding of Jamestown. Of course, it was the first permanent European settlement in what is now the United States. But from its earliest days, Jamestown fused the cultures of Europe, of the natives of America, and of the Caribbean, establishing a tradition of diversity and respect for others, as well as the traditions of English common law. In a very important way, the colony was not only the toehold of Europe, but the seed from which a new and truly American--not a replica European--society was formed. It is for that reason that I wholeheartedly support this legislation. The educational efforts and the archaeological efforts that would be funded by the surcharges generated by the sales of the coins authorized in this legislation will be an important way to remind us, our children, and those who come long after of the importance of this colony. I would like to congratulate Mrs. Davis for her legislation and for all the hard work to get the co-sponsorship of more than two-thirds of this body, and as well thank Chairman Thomas for his help in expediting consideration of the bill. With that, I urge immediate passage of this legislation.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2768, the ``John Marshall Commemorative Coin Act,'' introduced by the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Bachus, and urge its immediate passage. Mr. Speaker, no school child of my age, or probably even of today, does not know of the famous Marbury vs. Madison decision, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, that established the principle of judicial review and made the Supreme Court, and the Federal judiciary, a co- equal branch of government. I think, though, that even law students probably do not know that as the country's first Chief Justice, John Marshall wrote more than 500 opinions, truly making the court the great institution it is today during his 34 years of service in that post. Just as importantly, I am certain that few know of the great efforts by the Supreme Court Historical Society, which preserves court memorabilia, provides docents for the court building and offers conservation for some truly valuable items held by the society--here I am thinking particularly of a striking portrait of John Marshall himself. Surcharge income from the sale of the coins authorized in this legislation will help preserve those items and preserve the true history of the court, a history for which John Marshall's own hand scrawled the first bold strokes. I would like to congratulate Mr. Bachus for his legislation and for all the hard work to get the co-sponsorship of more than 500 Members of this body, and as well to thank Chairman Thomas for his help in expediting consideration of the bill. With that, I urge immediate passage of this legislation.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3277, the Marine Corps 230th Anniversary Commemorative Coin Act, authored by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Murtha, and ask for its immediate passage. All of us know the grit the Marines have shown in the face of some of the worst of the fighting necessary to protect our Nation. All of us know the esprit de corps for which the Marines are famous. But, I think, few of us know all of the history of the Marines--that they were formed even before the United States became a country, for example. Passage of this legislation will help rectify that problem. Surcharges from the sale of the coins authorized in this bill will help fund construction of a facility at Quantico to house Marines memorabilia currently held in a 60-plus-year-old corrugated-metal building that isn't going to last forever. The Marine Corps Heritage Center that would be partially funded by surcharges and matching funds will provide a permanent center for preserving those artifacts, and a place to do research on the Marines. I would like to congratulate Mr. Murtha for his legislation and for all the hard work to get the co-sponsorship of more than two-thirds of this body, and as well to thank Chairman Thomas for his help in expediting consideration of the bill. With that, I urge immediate passage of this legislation.