Michael Oxley

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5011, the Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act. This legislation, introduced by my good friend Max Burns of Georgia, will protect the men and women who put their lives on the line each day for our Nation. Mr. Speaker, since the awful day of September 11, 2001, our country has been at war with radical Islamic terrorists. In the prosecution of this war, our armed services have performed heroically. Indeed, many have made the ultimate sacrifice for the cause of freedom. Sadly, at the same time, there are a few bad actors in the securities and insurance industries determined to take financial advantage of our service men and women. These unscrupulous companies and salesmen gain access to military installations and use aggressive, misleading, and often illegal sales tactics, to sell high-cost products of dubious value that are unsuitable for any investor. The Pentagon has issued several directives intended to curtail these abuses. But for a whole host of reasons, it is clear that the abuses will not stop unless Congress passes this legislation. H.R. 5011 prohibits bad products and bad sales practices, clarifies regulatory jurisdiction on U.S. installations here and abroad, adds strong consumer protections and disclosures, and ensures proper reporting systems between our military and the financial regulators to ensure that bad actors cannot continue their predatory behavior. It also makes the process of selecting a broker more transparent for all investors, by providing online access to background information-- including disciplinary actions--on broker-dealers. These are tough measures that will greatly enhance consumer protections for military services members, and make financial transactions on base more transparent and investor-friendly. Our Committee reported this bill to protect our service men and women on a unanimous 68-0 vote. This overwhelming bipartisan consensus is the result of strong leadership by Mr. Burns, the author of this legislation; by Mr. Emanuel for highlighting this issue for the Committee and working with us on a bipartisan basis; the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Mr. Baker, who led our investigation into the abusive practices and bad products; Mr. Jim Ryun and Mr. Israel who worked closely together on the reporting requirements of this bill; and last but not least, Congresswoman Ginny Brown-Waite for ensuring appropriate SEC oversight of broker-dealer sales practices on military installations. Their hard work and leadership is well-reflected in this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I am also including for the record an exchange of letters between myself and the Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services regarding their jurisdictional interest on this legislation. I want to thank the distinguished Chairman for his assistance in moving this legislation forward in an expeditious fashion. Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, October 4, 2004. Hon. Michael G. Oxley, Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, Rayburn House Office Building. Dear Mr. Chairman: On September 29, 2004, the Committee on Financial Services reported H.R. 5011, a bill to prevent the sale of abusive insurance and investment products to military personnel. As you know, H.R. 5011, as ordered reported, contained provisions within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Armed Services. Because of your willingness to consult with this Committee, and because of your desire to move this legislation expeditiously, I will waive consideration of the bill by the Committee on Armed Services. By agreeing to waive this consideration of the bill, the Committee does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 5011. In addition, should a conference be convened on this legislation, the Committee reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of the bill that are within its jurisdiction. I ask for your commitment to support any request for conferees by the Committee on H.R. 5011 or similar legislation. I request that you include this letter and your response in the Congressional Record during your consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. With best wishes. Sincerely, Duncan Hunter, Chairman.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, today, I stand in support of H.J. Res. 106, the Marriage Protection Amendment. I believe there are strong cultural, historic, and societal reasons for reaffirming the definition of marriage. For centuries, our society has been built upon the tradition that marriage consists of one man and one woman. The institution of marriage is not one made to discriminate, but was created to advocate an ideal home for children. This enduring and cherished institution is the healthiest way to raise strong families. We have to ask ourselves why we would want to change the institution of marriage after it has served human civilization so well over the course of time. My home state of Ohio has spoken very strongly on this. The state legislature has passed its own Defense of Marriage Act, and I have received hundreds of letters on the issue from my constituents in the Fourth District. I believe there is a strong majority consensus in Ohio for the traditional definition of marriage. It now appears that proponents have received enough signatures through petitions to put this issue on the ballot on Election Day. I do not take amending the U.S. Constitution lightly. But because of the decision made by activist judges in states like Massachusetts, there is no assurance that existing federal and state defense of marriage acts can remain intact. The American people deserve to be heard through their elected representatives, and that is why it is proper for the House to pass the Marriage Protection Amendment.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the attention of the U.S. House of Representatives to Carl G. Stoecklin upon the completion of his term as President of the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents (PIA). Carl Stoecklin is a pillar of the insurance community in the State of Ohio. As President of the Broze Insurance Agency of Cincinnati, he has spent his entire professional career advising consumers about obtaining the best insurance coverage for their needs. He has been honored as Professional Agent of the year by PIA of Ohio in 1995, and was the recipient of the prestigious Dow Reichley Award from PIA of Ohio in 1985. Carl has served in many positions of responsibility in PIA for the past quarter century, including as President of the Ohio affiliate of the PIA and for the last year as the President of the national association. His dedication to the highest standards of professionalism as an insurance agent has earned Carl the respect of his friends, associates, and business colleagues, and of the insurance industry as a whole. As Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, I recognize the essential and irreplaceable function that insurance provides in our economy. Carl G. Stoecklin deserves our commendations for his dedicated service to his consumers, profession, and community.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend to the attention of the U.S. House of Representatives the achievements of Dick Strahm, a great football coach, civic figure, and role model for our young people. Dick Strahm's accomplishments as the head football coach at the University of Findlay were formally recognized in August when he was inducted into the National Football Foundation College Hall of Fame in South Bend, Indiana. Simply put, Dick Strahm is Findlay football. In his 24 years as head coach for the Findlay Oilers, he compiled a record of 183-64-5 that included four National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) championships. His fourth and final national title came in 1997 when the Oilers were a perfect 14-0. During one remarkable ten-year run, his teams won nine Hoosier-Buckeye Conference championships. The team's record in the 1990s was the best in the country for NAIA schools. Dick is a 12-time NAIA District 22 Coach of the Year and four-time National Coach of the Year. With his induction into the National Football Foundation Hall of Fame, he joins such coaching legends as Woody Hayes, Knute Rockne, and Amos Alonzo Stagg. But while my hometown of Findlay is proud of Dick Strahm's record on the football field, it has even greater respect for the influence that he has had on the lives of the young men in his program and in his community. Because they do not receive athletic scholarships, those who attend NAIA schools truly are students first and athletes second. Dick Strahm always recognized that. He insisted that his players be as diligent in the classroom as they were on the field. By teaching the importance of commitment, discipline, and perseverance, Dick Strahm has prepared countless young men to become successful businessmen, public servants, and husbands and fathers. Dick Strahm will be honored at a dinner at the University of Findlay on Saturday, September 25. Findlay continues to look to Coach Strahm for advice and guidance. We are glad that the nation now knows what we've known all along: our community is blessed to have such a great teacher and leader in our midst.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and he will be pleased to know that I will not use the entire 18 minutes. Mr. Speaker, as the proud sponsor of the Video Voyeurism Act, I would like to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Chairman Coble) for their leadership in getting this bill through the committee, and also would like to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) for sponsoring this bipartisan bill with me. I would like to express my appreciation for Senator DeWine's work in passing the companion bill in the Senate. I have introduced this bill in the past 3 Congresses, and I am very happy to see it on the floor today. My original interest in this issue came from a concern that a constituent expressed in a letter. I had also just written the Child Online Protection Act, which is something we need to have implemented after years of legal delays. Video voyeurism is something that has been in the news a lot lately, in part, due to the improper use of the camera cell phones that have become so popular. For the victim, it is embarrassing and degrading to be photographed in a compromised position. It is an invasion of personal privacy. What we have seen in recent years is that technologically savvy predators have infiltrated high school locker rooms, department store dressing rooms and even people's homes using small concealed cameras. Women have even been victimized standing in line at the mall or an amusement park. What makes it worse now is that these pictures can be instantly posted on the Internet for millions to use. In fact, there are a multitude of Web sites devoted specifically for these types of pictures and videos. As is often the case, the law has not kept up with technology. Many of these cases have been tried under old peeping tom laws which were not written to cover photographic equipment, so a case either cannot be brought or the sentence does not adequately fit the crime. Although more States are passing laws to address this, our Video Voyeurism Prevention Act would create a comprehensive law that covers all forms of video voyeurism on Federal land, and it will serve as a model for States that either have not enacted or may not want to strengthen their own laws against video voyeurism. Mr. Speaker, it is a good bill that protects privacy and decency, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment. By seeking to undo regulations governing the proper application of State laws to national banks, this amendment goes to the heart of the Financial Services Committee's jurisdiction over banking matters. During this Congress, the Financial Services Committee has held two hearings addressing the OCC's regulations. The hearings revealed deep divisions between those who, like the proponents of this amendment, are critical of the OCC's regulations, and those who believe they represent a thoughtful codification of long-standing statutory and judicial precedents. I fall into the latter camp. Based on the Committee's hearings, it is clear that there is no consensus at the present time on the merits of the OCC's regulations. Legislation introduced by Mr. Gutierrez to invalidate the regulations under the Congressional Review Act has received little support. To attempt to legislate a resolution to this highly contentious issue in an appropriations bill--over the strong objection of the leadership of the Committee with jurisdiction over the substantive issue and with no opportunity for input from that Committee--subverts the regular order of this House. The rules that Mr. Gutierrez disagrees with were finalized earlier this year, after a lengthy period for public notice and comment. The rules have been in full force and effect for most of the year, and the dire consequences predicted by Mr. Gutierrez have simply not materialized. National banks continue to be closely monitored for compliance with applicable consumer protection laws, and the State banking system remains strong. Two Federal judges have recently dismissed legal challenges to the OCC regulations filed by States against national banks, upholding the OCC's exclusive authority to regulate the lending activities of national banks and their operating subsidiaries. Finally, it is unclear what effect--if any--this amendment might have. Given that the OCC is self-funded, and any litigation to enforce the regulation would be undertaken by the Department of Justice and not the Department of the Treasury, I am unclear about what effect this amendment might have. For all of these reasons, I urge Members--regardless of their views on the underlying OCC regulations at issue--to strongly oppose this amendment.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to salute the determined efforts of the crew of the Spirit of Galion and the 179th Airlift Wing of the Ohio National Guard in preventing a major disaster over the skies of Iraq earlier this year. On June 29, the six-man crew of the C-130 transport plane Spirit of Galion took off from Balad Airbase in Iraq with 59 Army soldiers on board. The soldiers were en route to the United States for a two-week break. However, the upbeat mood on board did not last for long. Major Bruce Fogle and Major Jeff Charette, the pilot and co-pilot, respectively, and both constituents of mine from Mansfield, quickly noticed that the right main landing gear would not retract after takeoff. The crew's two loadmasters, Senior Master Sergeant Mike Cyphert (also a constituent of mine from Shelby) and Staff Sergeant Mike Keller from Sycamore, examined the landing gear to discover what was wrong. They found that the gear was wedged at an angle, with one wheel fully retracted and the other almost all the way down. In that position, there was no way the plane could possibly land safely. Majors Fogle and Charette, though, with 28 years of C-130 flight experience between them, did not panic, even though the plane's fuel level afforded them very limited time to fix this major problem. Working with Captain Matt Muha of Dayton, their navigator, they decided to make their way toward the Persian Gulf, circling overhead until either the gear problem was fixed or their fuel level reached a critical level. Meanwhile, Technical Sergeant Shane Adams, the flight's engineer and a constituent of mine from Lima, worked with Sergeants Cyphert and Keller to free the jammed gear. The flight crew alerted experts on the ground as to their situation, working with ground crews in the region, at the 179th Airlift Wing base in Mansfield, and even with private sector aerospace engineers. Even with the combined efforts and suggestions of the dozens of people now troubleshooting the problem, none of the solutions proposed was successful in lowering the gear. With these options exhausted, Sergeants Adams, Cyphert, and Keller continued to rock the stuck wheels from side to side in an attempt to dislodge them. However, the Spirit of Galion was quickly running out of fuel. The pilots radioed Kuwait International Airport and requested clearance for an emergency landing. Just in time, however, the crew freed the gear, allowing it to drop freely. Even with the gear freed, though, there was no guarantee of a safe landing. The crew had no way of knowing if the gear would stay in place and support the weight of the plane on touchdown. The crew immediately went to work bracing the gear with heavy cargo chains strapped across the width of the cramped plane. The crew also had to rearrange the seating for their Army passengers to minimize the risk to them should the gear give way. The loadmasters helped to secure several of the soldiers to the floor of the airplane with cargo straps. With the gear secured and emergency crews in place near the runway prepared for the worst, Major Fogle brought the plane in. Despite the continuing tension and the knowledge that so many lives were potentially in the balance, it was a textbook landing, with Major Charette calling it the smoothest he had ever seen. Thanks to the dedicated efforts of the entire crew, the gear stayed in place. The six-man crew was greeted with cheers from their Army passengers and their crewmates on the ground around the world. Befitting their professionalism and dedication, though, they deflected these accolades, instead expressing their own thanks to the soldiers on board, the ground crews in Kuwait, their teammates at the 179th in Mansfield, and everyone else involved in the effort to bring the Spirit of Galion back safely. I am proud to add my commendations to the entire team that prevented disaster on that day--but especially to the flight crew on board. Using their years of experience and through their calm actions, they saved many lives in the air and on the ground that day. The Spirit of Galion and the soldiers on board could not have been in more capable hands than this crew, which knew that failure was not an option with so much at stake. Their devotion to their duty and their country is a credit to everyone at the 179th Airlift Wing and an ideal reflection of the bravery and skills of our reservists and guardsmen now serving the United States throughout the world.

Mr. OXLEY

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

Mr. OXLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me first commend the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) and the other cosponsors for this important legislation. In late August, our committee held a hearing on the 9/11 Commission recommendations. We heard from the Homeland Security Department, we heard from the Justice Department and the Treasury Department. A lead witness was our former colleague and good friend, Lee Hamilton from Indiana, who, as my colleagues know, was the vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, vice chair to Governor Kean of New Jersey. In his testimony, Mr. Hamilton made it very clear that FinCEN not only plays an important logistical and strategic position in determining and finding terrorist financing, but that their desire for new technology and a need for new technology was very much appreciated by the commission. As a result of that testimony, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly), showing excellent leadership having had a number of oversight hearings on terrorist financing, and indeed the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) is one of the real experts in this Congress on terrorist financing, she felt it imperative to introduce this legislation that would provide another $25 million so FinCEN could provide this kind of information in real-time, working with some 70 other countries to locate, identify, in some cases freeze, or certainly try to recapture those amounts of funding by terrorist groups. So I come to the floor not only as a cosponsor of the gentlewoman from New York's (Mrs. Kelly) amendment, but as chairman of the Committee on Financial Services to say that clearly Mr. Hamilton made the kind of point that all of us need to listen to. As we will begin our efforts in the Congress to adopt the 9/11 Commission report this month or early next month, this is a first opportunity we have in this vehicle, this appropriations measure to show that the Congress is serious about funding FinCEN with the kind of funding necessary for them to be fully implemented and fully up to speed in terms of technology. That is what this amendment is about, and I commend the gentlewoman. Twenty-five million dollars in the overall scheme of things in an appropriation is not a lot of money, but FinCEN is not a large government bureaucracy. It is a very effective, relatively small group that does an excellent job. So I stand here in strong support of the gentlewoman from New York's (Mrs. Kelly) amendment.

Mr. OXLEY. I would invite the gentleman and the gentleman from Texas to introduce a bill and to have it referred to the appropriate committee, the Committee on Financial Services.

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

Mr. OXLEY. I thank my good friend from California for yielding. Mr. Chairman, let me say, this bill was drafted in our committee. I was the lead sponsor of the legislation. We have fully determined the efficacy of using these matricula consular cards. By the way, it is not the only form of identification. As a matter of fact, matricula consular is not even mentioned in the statute, nor is it mentioned in the rules and regulations from Treasury Department.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, for my part in closing, I first want to say it has been a pleasure to work with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), my ranking member. I do not think any of us take a back seat, I know I do not, in fighting terrorism. And our committee was in the thick of passing the PATRIOT Act, and one of the proudest moments I have had as chairman was the section 326 and what we did in the Act, and to see the President sign that was indeed a real honor. This provision that we had is important in the fight on terrorism. And I regret some of the arguments that indicate otherwise because our committee had it right the first time, and what I regret, frankly, is the Committee on Appropriations stepping into an area that the authorizing committee has the knowledge and the expertise in.

Mr. OXLEY. That letter was dated today. The Justice Department clearly supports the Oxley amendment.

Mr. OXLEY. If the gentleman will continue to yield, let me just quote from the letter from the Department of Justice: ``The Justice Department supports the administration's determination to permit the acceptance of matricula consular cards by financial institutions under circumstances where financial institutions reasonably believe they can properly identify the new customer.'' That is from the letter of the Justice Department.

Mr. OXLEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I think there has been a very broad misunderstanding about the destruction of those photographs and/or records. The law clearly requires that the financial institutions keep those documents for 5 years. That is not a change in policy. Treasury has recognized that for a number of years. The law has recognized that for a number of years. Financial institutions have recognized that for a number of years. It is simply not accurate to say that those records are destroyed immediately by the banks. They are required by law to keep those records for 5 years.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), a subcommittee chairman of the Committee on Financial Services. (Mr. BACHUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself and the ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services, as well as a respected member of the Committee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe). Our amendment will strike ill advised language adopted in the Committee on Appropriations that, if allowed to remain in the bill, would prevent the Treasury Department from enforcing regulations implementing customer identification provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act that are critically important to combating money laundering and disrupting the financing of terrorism. I note at the outset that the Bush administration has issued a strongly worded statement of administration position opposing the language that the Oxley-Frank-Kolbe amendment would strike from this legislation. My colleagues are going to hear a lot in today's debate about what whether one form of ID is better than another; but as the author of the USA PATRIOT Act's anti-terrorist financing provisions and as a former FBI, agent, let me set the record straight. Today's debate is not about good or bad ID. It is about whether we are going to ask financial services customers for any ID at all. My amendment says yes; and the bill, as currently constructed, says no. By way of background, the regulations that the bill seeks to block were issued by the Treasury Department last year under section 326 of the USA PATRIOT Act, which I authored. That provision was intended to enhance the ability of financial institutions to detect and prevent money laundering and the financing of terrorism by requiring those institutions to develop comprehensive procedures for verifying customer identity at the time of account opening. Among other things, the provision requires financial institutions to consult lists of known or suspected terrorists or terrorist organizations when opening accounts for new customers. In implementing section 326, the administration ultimately decided to give institutions the flexibility to tailor their customer identification programs to the risks of money laundering or terrorist financing posed by their products, services, and customer base. Consistent with this risk-based approach, the final regulations give financial institutions the discretion to determine which forms of identification issued by foreign governments they will accept and under what circumstances. Make no mistake, the regulations do not mandate or require the acceptance of the matricula consular card. If financial institutions are concerned about their validity, they are free to reject the use of those cards as identification. These regulations were finalized only after two lengthy public comment periods, which included extensive input from the financial services industry, law enforcement agencies, and a host of other interested parties, and after careful analysis and study by the Treasury Department and other financial regulators. The regulations, effective last year, are currently being enforced by Treasury and the Federal financial regulators and implemented by financial institutions across the country. The so-called Culberson amendment throws into question the obligation of financial institutions to verify the identities of their customers and ties Treasury's hands in enforcing one of the centerpieces of the post-September 11 congressional response to the terrorist financing threat. Indeed, when he appeared before our committee last month, 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton, a former distinguished colleague of ours, singled out section 326 for particular praise, calling it a ``significant tool to assist fast-moving terrorism investigations.'' Failure to adopt this amendment will result in this critical tool being taken from the Government's hands. I would suggest to my colleagues that now is not the time to be unilaterally disarming in the financial war against terrorists. The Bush administration and the Treasury Department have registered their strong support for this amendment, arguing that denying access to the mainstream financial system serves only to drive consumers into the underground financial economy, making it virtually impossible to track their financial activity and frustrating the Government's efforts to enforce antimoney laundering and antiterrorist financing laws. In the words of Secretary Snow, if the section my amendment seeks to strike becomes law, ``it will be a step backwards in the financial war on terror.'' Let us be very serious and understand that that is what the PATRIOT Act is all about. This is an effort to repeal part of the PATRIOT Act that has worked so successfully in protecting American citizens. Finally, let me express my frustration with this kind of back-door legislating in appropriations bills. This is simply not the way we should be operating in this House. My colleagues have a simple choice before them: vote for our amendment and give our financial regulators the ability to track, seize, and freeze terrorist funds or vote against us and drive terrorist money laundering even further underground. The choice is clear. Support our fight against the funding of terror. Support the Oxley- Frank-Kolbe amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

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

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