Michael Oxley

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I was absent from the House floor during yesterday's rollcall votes on H. Res. 320, H.R. 3529, and the motion to recommit H.R. 3529. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on H. Res. 320 and H.R. 3529, and ``nay'' on the motion to recommit H.R. 3529.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention the care and concern that students at St. Charles School in Lima, Ohio are showing for children in Afghanistan. The students in Lima learned about the desperate condition of Afghanistan's children. Through no fault of their own, the children of this war-ravaged nation are facing a hard winter without many of the basic necessities of life. Their families often must struggle just to find their daily food. St. Charles School students took the initiative and collected $1000 to donate to the Afghan Children's Fund at the White House. They presented the check to my office during a school assembly. I, in turn, will make sure that the donation is delivered to President George W. Bush. Since the events of September 11th, the President has said many times that the United States is at war with terrorists--not with the country of Afghanistan, and certainly not with its innocent children. It is my hope that Afghanistan's new government will devote itself to building a peaceful society where children are able to lead normal lives free of war and hunger. The donation by the students at St. Charles School will bring comfort to needy children a half-world away. I commend them for the generous spirit that they have shown during this season of peace and goodwill.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3054, the True American Heroes Act and want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Maloney), and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) for their efforts in bringing this important legislation to the floor today. Because there was no report filed by the Committee on Financial Services on this bill, I am including for the Record the CBO estimate for the legislation. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC, December 12, 2001. Hon. Michael G. Oxley, Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: As you requested, the Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3054, the True American Heroes Act. If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew Pickford. Sincerely, Barry B. Anderson (For Dan L. Crippen, Director). Enclosure. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate H.R. 3054--True American Heroes Act H.R. 3054 would authorize the President to present a Congressional gold medal to the families of public safety officers, emergency workers, and other employees of state and local government agencies who perished while responding to the attacks on September 11, 2001, at the World Trade Center. The bill also would authorize duplicate medals to be presented to various officials of New York, as well as each precinct house, fire station, or other duty station that had a member perish in the attacks. H.R. 3054 would authorize the U.S. Mint to sell bronze duplicates of the medal, and allow the proceeds from those sales to be used to erect a memorial for the fallen emergency workers who responded to the attacks. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3054 would cost approximately $3.8 million in 2002, mostly for the cost of gold to produce about 550 medals. CBO estimates that the first gold medal would cost about $35,500 to produce, including around $5,500 for the cost of the gold and around $30,000 for the costs to design, engrave, and manufacture the medal. Funds collected from the sale of bronze duplicate metals would be available for the cost of a memorial to emergency workers killed in the attacks. CBO estimates that $1 million to $2 million would be collected and later spent as a result of such sales. Over a few years the net budget impact would be insignificant. Because the bill would affect direct spending, pay-as-you- go procedures would apply. H.R. 3054 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. The CBO staff contact is Matthew Pickford. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director of Budget Analysis.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, at a time when America has rediscovered the power of traditional virtues, I bring to your attention an inspiring project that students in Marion in the Fourth Congressional District of Ohio have undertaken. Students at the Elgin Junior and Senior High Schools have embraced President George W. Bush's ``Community of Character'' initiative. The Elgin Energizer Show Choir, under the direction of Tanyce J. Addison, is highlighting the theme of character during its music programs. The students are performing public concerts, including one entitled ``A Concert of Character,'' that have inspired children and adults alike. These performances are sending a positive message about the importance of good character and moral conduct. Setting an example for her students, Ms. Addison secured a $500 ``Music With Character'' grant that has allowed students to share their musical gifts with the community. Other projects have included a concert with a drug-free message, and a collection of student essays and poetry. According to Ms. Addison, these events ``have been tremendously accepted by the students and the community. We have many more activities planned to continue on.'' In praise of this project, the principal at Elgin High School, Robert A. Britton, wrote, ``We here in the Elgin Local School District are making a serious attempt at instituting the message that President George W. Bush was delivering to an elementary school in Florida on September 11, 2001.'' I have informed President Bush that he will find, in Marion, a shining example of a community embracing the values that have kept America strong through every challenge. The students at Elgin are a source of pride for the community, and serve as an example for the nation. As Marion's representative in Congress, I am pleased to be able to take this opportunity to recognize the work of the students, Ms. Addison, and the Elgin Local School District.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, a vote in favor of Trade Promotion Authority today will be a vote in favor of U.S. workers, it will be a vote in favor of increased exports, and it will be a vote in favor of economic growth. This bill will have a positive effect on all aspects of the U.S. economy, not the least of which will be the services sector. Last year the U.S. exported $295 billion in services, compared to imports of $215 billion, leading to an $80 billion surplus in services trade. Between 1989 and 1999, 20.6 million new U.S. jobs were added to the economy in service related industries. These knowledge-based jobs account for 80% of the total private sector employment in the U.S. Today we have the opportunity to either expand this number by voting in favor of H.R. 3005, or to begin to erode these impressive figures by denying the President the tools he needs to negotiate strong free trade agreements. As Chairman of the Financial Services Committee I understand how important this bill is to maintain our competitiveness in the international arena. Earlier this year, the Committee held hearings in which representatives from the insurance, banking and securities industries testified that barriers to overseas markets will severely affect their ability to compete with foreign based financial service providers. Financial services firms contributed more than $750 billion to U.S. Gross domestic Product in 1999, nearly 8% of total GDP. Over 6 million employees support the products and services these firms offer. TPA will eliminate impediments to foreign markets and enable financial service providers to continue to act as the engine that drives economic growth. Approximately 80 percent of the world's GDP and half of the world's equity and debt markets are located outside the U.S. More than 96% of the world's population resides overseas, with India and China alone accounting for 2.3 billion people. Many of the best future growth opportunities lie in ``non-U.S.'' markets. If U.S. service providers cannot access these markets or operate on a level playing field overseas we will be left behind by foreign financial service providers. I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3005. Our workers need it, our exporters need it and our economy needs it.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to speak on granting Trade Promotion Authority to the President. Free trade is good for our overall economy; but as chairman of the Committee on Financial Services, I would like to focus this morning on how important trade is to our country's vital financial services sector. Ambassador Zoellick gave a compelling presentation to our committee just recently on the advantages of trade and services. Note, for example, that our financial services trade surplus was $8.88 billion last year. That is a surplus. Financial services exports have seen an overall net increase of 273 percent over the last 10 years. Clearly, we want to encourage continued growth in this vital industry. In my home State of Ohio, Columbus has had the distinction of being one of the fastest growing cities in the country, partly because of its emergence as a financial services center. But U.S. exports of financial services also help to promote the development of capital markets, open economies and democracy across the world. When the President does not have Trade Promotion Authority, other countries are reluctant to enter into new agreements with the United States, so it is more difficult to get the kind of trade agreements that open up new markets for our financial services companies; and ultimately, that threatens U.S. preeminence in the international financial world. We cannot afford to lose that standing. It is just one reason why this Congress needs to approve TPA tomorrow.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, this week, the House is scheduled to vote on Trade Promotion Authority legislation. Granting the President this authority once again is one of the most important actions that we can take to strengthen the U.S. economy and promote global prosperity. The attack on the World Trade Center was a symbolic assault on the free and open capital markets that underpin development throughout the world. By approving TPA, we can reaffirm our commitment to a free and open international global economy that will lift living standards across the world. I commend to your attention this Wall Street Journal article of November 29 by the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson, Jr., entitled ``Congress Should Put Trade on the Fast Track.'' Congress Should Put Trade on the Fast Track (By Henry M. Paulson, Jr.) The House of Representatives will soon vote on the question of granting the president Trade Promotion Authority, also known as fast-track approval. Some in Congress have argued that now is not the time to take up legislation that has encountered such fierce protectionist opposition in recent years. But in the wake of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 and the current economic slowdown, it is all the more important that Congress move quickly to approve this vital measure. This bipartisan action would inspire confidence in global capital markets. It would allow America to be seen as continuing to lead the open trade and globalization that has been so vital to the prosperity of both developed and developing countries. And it would send a powerful message that the president and Congress speak with one voice, and are committed to advancing freer trade as part of the war on terror. Indeed, approval of TPA would signal that the U.S. is not only seeking a military coalition, but an economic one. The benefits of trade hardly need illuminating. America's exports accounted for approximately one-third of our extraordinary economic growth over the past decade, and exports now support over 12 million American jobs (nearly three million more than a decade ago). Jobs supported by exports typically pay 13% to 18% more than comparable employment. Trade brings real economic benefits to the U.S. The North American Free Trade Agreement, and the completion of the previous round of trade negotiations (the Uruguay Round), now generate annual income gains of $1,300 to $2,000 for the average American family of four. Trade is also fundamental to economic growth in the developing world. A recent World Bank study shows that nations open to trade grow 3.5 times faster than nations closed to trade. The recent experience of countries such as South Korea, China and Chile underscore that trade is a pathway to prosperity. Trade is a two-way street, and imports also benefit the U.S. They provide consumers with more choices and lower prices on a wide variety of goods. Imports also force our industries to constantly improve and innovate in order to remain competitive with foreign exporters. I confess to being a bit mystified by all of the controversy about extending such a common-sense power to the president. TPA simply says that when the executive branch completes negotiations on a trade agreement and submits it to Congress for approval, that Congress cannot amend the agreement. It must simply vote yes or no. This is standard procedure in other types of negotiations. Union negotiators don't reach agreements with management and then allow all their members to amend and debate. And as I know from 27 years in investment banking, mergers and acquisitions would never be consummated if, once negotiated, rather than being sent to a corporate board of directors for approval, they were sent to be restructured. The most obvious aspect of the war on terror is clearly military action. But we can't forget the economic component, and primarily the gains we reap from globalization. Let's not forget that it continues to be those countries most closed to trade that are prime breeding grounds for terrorists. Moreover, to truly wage and win this war, our political unity and military power must be fortified by the strength of our economies. Those economies are increasingly at risk. Global prosperity is threatened not only by the specter of terrorism itself, but by the slump that was deepending before the Sept. 11. Worse, it is during periods of economic distress that pressure to revert to economic nationalism and protectionism are the greatest. This is a recipe for disaster, and it must be resisted through bold and decisive action. The two necessary actions are clear; a fiscal, consumer- oriented stimulus package and TPA. Congress is well on its way to passing a stimulus package, and should take care to keep it directed at consumers. Although trade won't provide the sort of immediate boost to the economy that a stimulus package will, trade will have greater long-term impact. While each of the previous five presidents has been granted this authority, it lapsed in 1994. During the seven years the U.S. has been without this trade authority, other countries have moved ahead without us. Since 1990, the European Union completed negotiations on 20 free trade agreements, and is currently negotiating 15 more. Mexico now has eight agreements with 32 countries. Today out of 130 preferential trade agreements and investment agreements in the world, the U.S. is a party to only three. This means our exporters encounter higher tariffs--if not closed markets--in other countries. Our own consumers face higher prices and fewer choices. And the U.S. sits on the sidelines as the rules of the game are set on everything from e-commerce to agriculture. Passing TPA is the first, all-important step to restoring U.S. leadership. It will allow us to move quickly on several fronts. We can complete negotiations for free trade agreements with Chile and Singapore, build vital support for the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas and, most important, lead a drive for a new round of global trade negotiations. The stakes are enormous and there has never been a time in our recent history when American leadership has been needed more. TPA can be a key part of that leadership, building confidence in the global marketplace by clearly signaling that the process of globalization will continue with renewed vigor. It will enhance our economic position in the world and strengthen our national security. The time for Congress to act is now.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), who has done extraordinary work in this regard.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Grucci), another valuable member of our committee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, first I want to pay tribute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), my good friend, for once again helping us craft a very fair and equitable rule to debate this very difficult issue that faces us. Just a few short weeks ago, we faced this terrible attack on America on September 11, and I do not think any one of us could have foreseen the events that have taken place since that time that have drawn this Congress towards addressing some of the most critical issues facing us. We have done a great job, in my estimation, acting on a bipartisan basis, dealing with things like giving the President the authority to wage a military campaign in Afghanistan, providing the funding necessary to get New York back on its feet and to compensate victims of this terrible tragedy and, ultimately, I think, passing an economic stimulus package. This legislation that we will be taking up shortly is a direct response to what happened after September 11, and that is almost immediately. The reinsurance market which, for the most part, is offshore and not American, indicated very strongly that they would no longer write reinsurance policies for terrorism. This, of course, had a resounding effect on the American domestic insurance industry, the property and casualty companies, because with the inability to essentially reinsure or to spread the risk through reinsurance, they faced a real conundrum. This is not about the losses that took place on September 11, and this bill is not a bailout for the insurance companies. The insurance companies stepped up to the plate and are taking care of their obligations that resulted from the September 11 attack. Indeed, it is going to be a $40 billion to $50 billion project for them to make these folks whole. What it is all about now is what happens next. All of us hope that our efforts today will not be needed in the future because our bill only occurs and only triggers when an event actually occurs of a terrorist nature to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury. We all hope and pray that our efforts today, while beneficial, will not have to be used. I think all of us share that. But in the event that we have another terrorist attack, we have to be prepared, and the issue is how can the domestic insurance companies provide the kind of coverage, as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) said yesterday in the Committee on Rules, saying that the glue that holds our economy together truly is insurance. People have told us, lenders and everybody else, we can no longer provide the kind of insurance coverage necessary. We do not know how to price it. This is a case of first impression, and we need a backstop; not a bailout, but a backstop, so that we can provide some kind of certainty for the insurance industry and, more importantly, for our concern. Because make no mistake about it: this legislation that we are going to be taking up soon is all about keeping our economy strong, not about bailing out insurers, but to actually provide the kind of continuity and certainty in the economic field. I have talked to developers who have development projects literally in the pipeline who are waiting to see what the Congress can do to provide this backstop. Mr. Speaker, this is a fair rule. It provides the opportunity for the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), my good friend and the ranking member, to offer a substitute of his choosing. It also offers the minority the opportunity for a motion to recommit, as is the custom. That basically says that the other side gets two bites of the apple. That is fine. But I also think, Mr. Speaker, that this bill that we will be debating should be a bipartisan effort, just like all the other efforts have been in this House. Make no mistake about it: this House is going to act. The other body has some real problems. There is some question as to whether they can even get their act together; but today, sometime between 3 and 4 this afternoon, this House will have spoken loudly and clearly that we understand the problem and that we are ready to address the problem in a bipartisan way. This rule gets us towards that effort. I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), and particularly the newly arriving chairman of the Committee on Rules (Mr. Dreier), just newly arrived, not newly arrived to Congress obviously, but newly arrived to the Chamber, for his excellent work in crafting a rule that all of us can support.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor), a new member of our committee. (Mr. CANTOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in addition to striking the litigation management sections, the motion to recommit imposes price controls on the insurance industry. We can attempt to regulate rates, but we cannot force insurance companies to offer coverage; and States with rate regulation have less competition and higher prices for consumers. Only if we want less insurance availability and higher prices would we vote for this motion to recommit. Our bill, H.R. 3210, forces the industry, not the taxpayers, to bear the ultimate cost of the terrorist attack. That is what this bill is all about. The bipartisan bill passed out of committee on voice vote allows insurers to price it into future policies. The motion to recommit says that not only are insurers responsible for spreading terrorist costs, but we are going to force them into insolvency. Why should insurers be punished and not allowed to rebuild their reserves? They should be allowed to reinsure themselves, particularly in light of the fact that the reinsurance industry has gotten out of the business. These price controls proposed are bad for consumers, bad for policyholders and bad for our national economy. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I appreciate the gentleman's remarks. Let everyone understand something. The Senate and the White House apparently have been at this for quite some time and, literally, as we speak, they still have not got their act together. The House of Representatives is on the floor with legislation ready to pass in the next hour, so we have done our job. So you can talk all you want about what the Senate and White House are doing. We are getting the job done for the people of this country to make certain we have insurance coverage. I think we all should be very, very proud of that. Mr. Speaker I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox), a valuable member of our committee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Staten Island, New York (Mr. Fossella). (Mr. FOSSELLA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary.

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

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is absolutely necessary. That is why this committee is charged by the Speaker to produce a bill, and produced it in virtually record time. That is why during a day-long markup, it culminated in a voice vote for the legislation. And that is why, frankly, the substitute that is going to be offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce) contains 85-90 percent of the bill that came out of our committee. Let us understand that most of this debate today, at least on the other side, has been about legal reforms, liability reforms, and not about the specific areas that were negotiated and worked on and I think is an excellent work product; and, in fact, solves the problem that all of us want to solve, and that is the availability of insurance to make certain that our economy continues to move forward. That is what all of us have as a goal. As we pass this bill on to the other body, it is important that the House send a strong signal that we are prepared to meet that challenge. This legislation, this underlying legislation, is exactly what the patient needs to provide the kind of stability in the insurance market that all of us desire. Make no mistake about it, this Congress will pass this legislation, this type of legislation, before we return home. We have no other choice, it seems to me. If we do not, we face political peril, should the economy start to unravel, with the unavailability of credit in this dynamic marketplace. Mr. Speaker, my hat is off to all of those who participated in this great endeavor.

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

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart), a valuable member of our committee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), a very valuable member of our committee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson).