Michael Oxley

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), a valued member of our committee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, this has been a very good debate, and first of all, let me thank members of our committee on both sides of the aisle and their respective staffs for what I think will turn out to be a historic legislative product that we have been able to put together. The chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), has done yeoman's work in this area and deserves a great deal of credit. My friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), as well as his ranking member, Mr. Kanjorski, have also performed admirably. Mr. Speaker, this is a historic moment for a new committee. We have faced issues like anti-money laundering and attended a bill-signing ceremony at the White House just 3 weeks ago. Now we come to this difficult issue, the reinsurance issue, something we did not ask for, something that happened to America after September 11; but this committee stepped up. We were asked by the Speaker to produce legislation, and I am very proud of the product that we put together over a difficult issue, and it is complicated. I am particularly pleased that the substitute that the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce) offered has so much in common with the underlying bill. The post-event assessment and surcharge systems are largely the same. Both bills have a $100 million lower trigger, and the idea to protect the taxpayers is clearly inherent in both pieces of legislation. I would, however, disagree with my friend from New York in regard to the statement he made on the deductible. The summary of the substitute provided to the Committee on Rules says that this 7 percent per company deductible is based on net premiums. That is simply not true. The substitute language actually bases the 7 percent deductible on aggregate premiums. This, of course, penalizes insurers for using reinsurance. We do not need to be in the business of penalizing insurance companies to provide reinsurance. That is how the system works. As a matter of fact, if my colleagues can imagine a world on September 11 where domestic insurance companies did have not the ability to reinsure, imagine what kind of losses the industry would have taken and imagine what that would have brought to us today. Indeed, this bill ultimately, when passed, will encourage the growth of reinsurance, and it may be early on that these companies, these domestic companies, will essentially have to reinsure themselves. They cannot go offshore, but I guarantee my colleagues that it will not be long before the reinsurance market offshore, the reinsurers offshore, have to go into the largest market in the world. They cannot afford to stay on the sidelines. It is one thing on September 12 to announce that they are not going to provide reinsurance coverage for terrorism, but my guess is the American economy, the American people, the American insurance companies, will find a way to provide the kind of coverage for their consumers and their customers and their insurers. When they do that, the reinsurance folks will be running back to try to get back in this game, and that is what this bill is all about. This is a temporary bill. This is not forever. Even the legal reforms are not forever. They are part of this legislation. So let us defeat the substitute, let us vote for final passage, and let us go on forward to get legislation for the American people.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 297, I call up the bill (H.R. 3210) to ensure the continued financial capacity of insurers to provide coverage for risks from terrorism, and ask for its immediate consideration.

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 the bill under consideration.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema). (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5\1/2\ minutes. (Mr. OXLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, on September 11, the al Qaeda network began a war of terrorism against our Nation. The insidious attack was planned not only to kill Americans, but to disrupt our Nation's financial center. The September 11 attack caused greater insured losses than most of the recent top disasters combined, and, unfortunately, since that attack, the foreign reinsurance market has refused to provide further coverage for terrorism. Without reinsurance for terrorism, primary insurers are not able to responsibly insure high level risks. In fact, they have been filing new policy forms to exclude terrorism coverage in almost every State of this Nation. Without insurance, many creditors will not lend for new projects, and many new businesses, projects, and buildings will simply never happen. We cannot afford this significant economic disruption at a time of economic sluggishness. I am confident that the private insurance sector will eventually adapt to the challenges of the new world, they always do. But 70 percent of commercial insurance policies will be renewed over the next 35 days, and if this Congress does not pass this legislation, many of those policies will not be renewed and our economy will be further injured. This is exactly the result that the terrorists were hoping for, and this is why it is absolutely imperative that the House act today to pass this bill. We crafted legislation in our committee to address this problem. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3210 creates a temporary risk-spreading program which creates the strongest incentives for consumers to be able to obtain coverage with significant solvency protections to maintain a stable market. We created certainty in terrorist exposure for companies by spreading any terrorism risk across the industry with temporary Federal assistance. But the role of the Federal Government is limited to a helping hand up, not a hand out. Any assistance provided must be repaid by the industry over time. We also based our bill on systems being used successfully in almost every single State today: the State insurance guarantee funds. These programs provide immediate liquidity up front to ensure that policyholders are paid, and then the costs are collected back from the industry as a whole. It is simple, it works, and we have the programs in place today we can build on. This is not the approach favored by many in the industry that want free taxpayer money, but it is an approach supported by consumer and taxpayer groups as diverse as the Consumer Federation of America, Americans for Tax Reform, and Citizens Against Government Waste; and it is critical for the House to pass this legislation today to make a clear statement that we are going to protect the economy and we are going to do it in a way that will not put the American taxpayer on the hook or require future tax increases. We need to get this legislation done today. Time is running out. We passed H.R. 3210 out of committee with 35 bipartisan cosponsors on a nearly unanimous voice vote. Since then, the only significant changes our committee has made were in response to our good-faith commitment to continue working to address Members' concerns, primarily to speed up the assessments and create more flexibility for rural areas and small towns. The text made in order by the rule includes additional liability reforms placing limitations on punitive damages and trial lawyer fees for terrorist events. We have been working with Members' staffs in both parties and will continue to make improvements to the insurance provisions. But the minority is being given two opportunities to amend this bill; and once the House works its will, we cannot allow a disagreement on lawyers' fees to sabotage what would otherwise be a bipartisan bill that is critical to our economy. Mr. Speaker, I support limits on legal fees and other liability reforms to ensure that a future terrorist attack does not create a rush to the courthouse. I supported more limited reforms in the Committee on Financial Services. I will back the bill with or without the strengthened provisions. But we cannot let the fight over the trial lawyers undermine our critical responsibility to hold together our Nation's financial foundations. This bill is critical, and it must be sent to the President this year. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3210 is pro-consumer, pro-taxpayer, and pro- business. Regardless of whether Members choose to side with the trial lawyers or the liability reforms, we cannot let the terrorists win by disrupting our economy because we failed to do our job in passing this legislation. I must point out the contributions of the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) to this bill which reflects many of his ideas and much of his energy as well. He, of course, chairs the appropriate subcommittee of our Committee on Financial Services. The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bentsen), and many others on the Committee on Financial Services also deserve thanks for a great job on this bill. The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella), and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Grucci) were early and enthusiastic supporters of our commonsense, pay-back-the-taxpayer approach. Today it is time to put away egos and forget partisan blustering and special interest politics. It is time to help those Americans who are working to create jobs: the guy who is trying to buy a business, expand a manufacturing plant, or construct a new building. The 9-11 attack is over, but the economic terrorism goes on and on unless we act. I strongly urge support for this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank the Chairman of the Budget Committee, Mr. Nussle, for his assistance in moving this legislation to the floor quickly. I am inserting for the Record an exchange of letters regarding his committee's jurisdictional interest in this legislation. House of Representatives, Committee on the Budget, Washington, DC, November 26, 2001. Hon. Michael G. Oxley, Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Oxley: I am writing regarding H.R. 3210, the ``Terrorism Risk Protection Act'' which was recently ordered reported by the Committee on Financial Services. As you know, the legislation includes provisions addressing the budgetary treatment of certain spending, a matter which falls within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Budget pursuant to rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives. Because of your ongoing willingness to work with the Committee on the Budget on this matter, and the need to move this legislation expeditiously, I will waive consideration of the bill by the Budget Committee. By agreeing to waive its consideration of the bill, the Budget Committee does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 3210. In addition, the Committee on the Budget reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of the bill that are within its jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference that may be convened on this legislation. I ask your commitment to support any request by the Committee on the Budget for conferees on H.R. 3210 or related legislation. I request that you include this letter and your response as part of your committee's report on the bill. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Jim Nussle, Chairman.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly).

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio, my good friend, for his leadership on this issue, and the gentleman from Texas. This is an important piece of legislation that really represents bringing ERISA into the 21st century. Let us face it, ERISA was passed almost a quarter of a century ago; and times have changed. I am convinced, after looking at this piece of legislation, that the responsibilities of the investment advisors are fully covered and regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, and by various State regulations. I think nobody needs to fear that these folks will not be regulated. They have been regulated over the years and will continue to be so to make sure that the investors are protected. I was reminded of a story the gentleman from California raised about the visit to the firehouse by Senator Lieberman. I had a similar situation in my office just last year where I had a young worker from my congressional district who had come in to talk to me. He was a member of the machinist union. He did not want to talk about those kinds of issues that he had just heard over at the machinist union. He wanted to talk about investments; he wanted to talk about his future, his financial future. He told me he was 30 years old, he had a couple of kids, he had an IRA, he had a 401(k) plan, and he was interested in the future of Social Security, and he was also interested in his ability to make sound decisions of his investments and his future. That really is a striking example, I think, that we are seeing all over the country. We have over half of the households today who are invested in equities, over half of the households. That is a sea change in the way America looks at its investment opportunities. That is a huge change. Just 20, 25 years ago, two-thirds of people's savings were in bank deposits. Today, two-thirds of their savings are in equities. That is a huge change that we have seen in this country. Let us treat these workers, these folks like adults. Let us not say to them they need to make decisions on their own. They need the kind of advice that this bill provides them. I urge strong support for this legislation.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3060) to amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to augment the emergency authority of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3060, the Emergency Securities Response Act. This legislation will provide the Securities and Exchange Commission with a vitally important tool to ensure the continued health and operation of our Nation's financial marketplace in the event of an emergency that threatens our securities markets, as did the attacks on September 11, 2001. September 11 was a dark day in our Nation's history. The terrorist attacks inflicted great human and physical loss in our country and, in particular, in New York City, the financial capital of the world. The damage to lower Manhattan, home of the world's largest stock market and the heart of our Nation's financial marketplace, suspended the operation of the U.S. equities markets for the longest period since World War I. Mr. Speaker, those were indeed 4 days in which traders were incapable of getting to those markets; and our discussions up there with the major players, the New York Stock Exchange, the NASDAQ, the American Stock Exchange, indicated how severe the damage was, particularly for the inability of the traders of the New York Stock Exchange to even get physically into the exchange, not to mention, of course, the problems that they had with the electrical systems and with the telephone system. Had it not been for the hard work of Verizon with the power company, with all people working at NASDAQ and in the New York Stock Exchange and the American Stock Exchange, literally they would have been unable to open even that Monday after September 11. I had the honor to appear in New York with the Treasury Secretary and the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to witness the reopening and closing of the markets that day, and it was a proud day for all Americans that those markets were up and running, providing the kind of liquidity and the kind of market activity that we have come to expect from those great markets. To facilitate the successful reopening of those equities markets, the Securities and Exchange Commission used, for the first time, emergency powers granted in the wake of the market crash of 1987 to ease certain regulatory restrictions temporarily. The measures the Commission took helped to increase liquidity and promote stability. The Commission and its Chairman, Harvey Pitt, along with the financial markets and firms based in New York, as well as those outside New York, who pitched in to help their competitors and colleagues, deserve special recognition for their efforts in restoring normalcy to those markets. However, the Commission's emergency authority under current law is unnecessarily and dangerously restrictive. For example, that authority permits the Commission to provide emergency relief for only 10 business days, and is limited to the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, only one of the several Federal securities laws. This authority should be flexible enough to be useful where relief is necessary for a longer period of time, or under Federal securities laws other than the Exchange Act. I am pleased to bring to the floor legislation that will accomplish those goals. H.R. 3060, the Emergency Securities Response Act, will enhance the Commission's authority to take actions in the wake of an emergency to reduce, eliminate, or prevent a substantial disruption of the securities markets or investment company operations. This bipartisan legislation, introduced with the committee's ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), extends the maximum duration of an SEC emergency order to 30 business days, and under certain circumstances, up to a total of 90 calendar days. It also extends the Commission's emergency authority to apply to all the Federal securities laws. I want to explain to the Members, Mr. Speaker, that it was only because of the efforts, just to use one example, the emergency powers in regard to corporate buy-backs, that it was decided by the Chairman of the SEC, and I think wisely, that he should use his emergency authority to suspend certain regulations as it related to the ability of corporations to buy back their own stock. The fact is that by doing so, he was able to stabilize the market. Those people who were selling stocks short on the first day of trading after it opened up had to be concerned and wary about the prospects that those corporations could come in and buy back their stock, stabilize those stock prices, and indeed, perhaps make life difficult for the short sellers. Indeed, in many cases, that is exactly what happened. While the markets were down on that particular day by some 600 points in the case of the New York Stock Exchange, they were able to trade effectively, and the liquidity was there in the marketplace. As a matter of fact, the markets that day handled a record volume of trades without a glitch; again, I think testament to the ingenuity and the hard work of those people in the marketplace. So my hat is off to all of those people for their good work, and my hat is also off to the SEC for taking the leadership in this important issue. While I hope this authority will never have to be used, and all of us share that, it is a safety measure our financial markets simply cannot do without. I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 3060. Mr. Speaker, I am including for the Record an exchange of correspondence between myself and the Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce regarding this legislation: House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC, November 13, 2001. Hon. Michael G. Oxley, Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Oxley: It is my understanding that the Committee on Financial Services desires to consider H.R. 3060, the Emergency Securities Response Act of 2001, on the House floor under suspension of the Rules in the near future. Recognizing your desire to act on H.R. 3060 expeditiously, my Committee will not seek a sequential referral of the bill when you file your report. In exchange, I request that your Committee not seek a sequential referral of H.R. 1101, the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2001, should it be reported in a form substantially similar to the introduced bill, or seek a referral of comparable legislation designed to restructure the electricity industry, should such legislation be introduced or reported. I would appreciate your written response to this request. Sincerely, W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Chairman.

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 to include extraneous material on the bill.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am awaiting the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) who has indicated he would come over to the floor. If I could inquire of the Chair as to how much time is remaining on this side.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus) for his good work, the chairman of the subcommittee, along with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers), my good friend, who worked very hard on this issue; and we are finally reaching a point now where we can pass this antifraud legislation. As I am sure other speakers have said, we had numerous hearings on this issue. All of us are painfully aware of the Martin Frankel situation that resulted in such a terrible outcome for numerous people who invested their savings, only to be defrauded and losing millions, first in the securities industry and then as he artfully moved to the insurance side of thing, the same thing happened. This bill, of course, was designed to allow for information-sharing among the various regulators and to focus in on people like Martin Frankel who would take advantage of innocent people and their life savings. So this is a wonderful step forward that all of us can be very, very pleased about. I want to thank the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Shows) for carrying the bill today for his side of the aisle, also the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), the ranking member, and other members of our committee, as well as the Members on the Republican side. This is a truly bipartisan effort. Indeed, without the help also of the Committee on the Judiciary and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), we would not be able to bring this bill to the floor today. My congratulations to all those concerned, and we hope and trust that the other body will take this up with some degree of swiftness so that we can get this legislation signed by the President and on the books, therefore protecting the American consumer from these con artists. On September 11, 2001, the forces of terror struck the first blow in a cowardly attack against our nation. President Bush has now struck back to defend America, using the might of our armed forces to drive the terrorists back into hiding. But to clear our skies for freedom, we need to defend against not only the planes and bombs of the enemy, but also the reach of their financial empire. Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda network survive and thrive on an illegal network of financial crime and corruption. To end terrorism, we need to go beyond the training camps and drive a stake through the heart of their financial network. The Antifraud Network Act was originally conceived as a consumer protection solution. Our financial regulators currently do not have any system in place for the comprehensive inter-industry oversight of company's financial activities. Instead, government agencies are currently sharing information on financial companies and professionals on an ad-hoc basis without any standards for disclosure or recourse when information is used against someone. This bill creates consumer protection standards for the sharing of information among agencies, while giving our regulators additional tools to help integrate the regulation of our financial markets. It also significantly increases the information available to each regulator when tracking down fraud and corruption across industries. We are thus not only protecting our American consumers from domestic fraud artists, but also strengthening the ability of our government to track down and break apart the financial network of international terrorists. Financial fraud costs our nation over 100 billion dollars a year, hurting the lives of millions of Americans and their families. Now with the war on terrorism, the stakes are even higher. The Rogers bill protects consumers and protects our nation. It was passed out by a new unanimous bipartisan vote in both the Financial Services and Judiciary Committee after having been reviewed by hundreds of lawyers from all spectrums of the financial services and law enforcement systems. Mr. Speaker, I am also including for the Record an exchange of correspondence between Chairman Combest and myself regarding the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture on this legislation. I thank him for his assistance in bringing this legislation forward and appreciate his cooperation. I also want to thank the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Sensenbrenner for his ongoing commitment to bring this legislation to the floor. Finally, I want to thank the members of the Committee on Financial Services, including Chairman Bachus, Ranking Member LaFalce, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Waters for their cooperation and hard work on this legislation. And of course, much of the credit for this goes to a Committee freshman and FBI alum, Mike Rogers from Michigan It is the right bill for the right time to protect consumers and stop terrorism. I urge your support for Mr. Rogers' Antifraud legislation. House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC, July 31, 2001. Hon. Michael G. Oxley, Chairman, Committee on Financial Services, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Oxley: I understand that the Committee on Financial Services recently ordered reported H.R. 1408, the Financial Services Antifraud Network Act of 2001. As you know, the legislation contains provisions which fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture pursuant to clause 1(a) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives. Beacuse of your willingness to consult with the Committee on Agriculture regarding this matter and the need to move this legislation expeditiously, I will waive consideration of the bill by the Committee on Agriculture. By agreeing to waive its consideration of the bill, the Agriculture Committee does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 1408. In addition, the Committee reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of the bill that are within the Agriculture Committee's jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference that may be convened on this legislation. I request that you include this letter and your response as part of your committee's report on the bill and the Congressional Record during consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank you for your attention to these matters, Sincerely, Larry Combest, Chairman.

Mr. OXLEY

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the legislation, particularly the provisions in title III which would represent the most comprehensive anti-money laundering legislation which the House has considered in more than a decade. The legislation gives the administration important new tools with which to wage a global financial war on terrorism, and to starve Osama bin Laden and others like him of the funding needed to commit their acts of evil. The bill that passed the House last week by a 412 to 1 vote has in my view been improved in conference with the other body. The legislation targets the specific channels used by terrorists to finance their operations in this country and globally, including bulk cash smuggling, international wire transfers to and from foreign banks, and using informal black market banking systems, such as the ancient network known as hawala. The bill also establishes a framework for an unprecedented public- private partnership that will have as its primary objective the identification, reporting, and disruption of financial transactions related to money laundering generally and terrorist activity specifically. Finally, the legislation gives the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with other government agencies, the power to impose countermeasures aimed at combatting overseas money laundering threats, particularly those emanating from so-called offshore secrecy havens. It has often been said that an effective international regime for thwarting money laundering and disrupting terrorist financing is only as strong as its weakest link. As long as there are jurisdictions that offer no-questions-asked banking and exert little or no regulatory oversight of their financial services sectors, international efforts to impede the flow of dirty money will never fully succeed. With this legislation, we take a critical step toward smoking terrorists and other criminal organizations out of the offshore financial bunkers that for too long have offered them safe haven. The money laundering portion of this legislation was introduced in the House on October 3, marked up by the Committee on Financial Services on October 11, and passed by the House on October 17. Obviously, to move such complex and far-reaching legislation through the process so quickly requires an extraordinary level of bipartisan cooperation. In that regard, I want to pay special tribute to the committee's ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), and commend him for his tireless work in committee and in our dealings with the other body to get the strongest possible bill. I also want to thank Chairman Sarbanes, my counterpart in the Senate, and his staff, both for their good faith efforts to reconcile the House and Senate bills in negotiation late last week, and for their hospitality in hosting the House delegation in Senator Sarbanes' hideaway in the Capitol at a time when most of the Capitol complex was closed. While both the House and Senate were shut out of our office buildings, both bodies continued to work under less-than-ideal circumstances to get this critical piece of legislation to the President's desk this week. I also want to pay tribute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) and the Committee on the Judiciary for their fine work on the antiterrorism legislation. Finally, let me also thank the administration for working closely with the committee to ensure that the new legal authorities that the executive branch will receive under this legislation are carefully tailored to meet the nature of the threat that our Nation now confronts. The bill that Members will have an opportunity to vote on later tomorrow is balanced, comprehensive, and bipartisan. It sends the strongest signal we can send to the terrorists and to those countries that offer them aid and comfort that the war against terrorism will be fought in the financial theater as aggressively as the war now being waged by our brave men and women in uniform. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, that is my understanding.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I have 1\1/2\ minutes remaining; is that correct?

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close for our side. Mr. Speaker, this has been a legislative process at its best, the Congress coming together, recognizing a very, very serious problem: the fact that our law enforcement people, the Secretary of the Treasury, currently do not have the powers and the tools necessary to deal with this horrible threat known as terrorism, this new kind of war. The Congress came together, both Republicans and Democrats from both sides of the Capitol, to craft this legislation. This is going to pass by an overwhelming margin. I think we all understand that. Because the Members recognize, a, that the committees have done their work, have made the compromises, have made the necessary changes to get a piece of legislation that can pass, be sent to the President, and can indeed solve this very, very difficult problem. Nothing could be more important in our careers here in the Congress, no matter how long we stay, than to protect the American people and to make certain that the people who seek to terrorize us and to kill our citizens are brought to justice, and, indeed, even more importantly stop these individuals before they commit these heinous acts. So from my perspective, this is one of the proudest moments of my 20 years here in the Congress, to participate in this wonderful exercise of democracy and positive legislation. For that, I think all of us deserve a great deal of credit. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema), the vice chair of the committee. (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly). (Mrs. KELLY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)