Pete Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Richmond, Virginia, the minority whip, the favorite son from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. SESSIONS. By the way, the gentleman from Mississippi is a very dear friend of mine with whom I engage on a regular basis. I just want the gentleman to know that while I know that under Speaker Pelosi we don't have any process with appropriations to strike or amend any appropriations bills, for 12 years I brought an Amtrak cut bill to this floor. So I will be providing that information, and I look forward to the gentleman joining me as soon as we get a Republican majority that will allow that to take place on the floor of this House, an open process. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Savannah, Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito).

Mr. SESSIONS. I have about 45 or 50 more speakers, and I will consume my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Clarendon, Texas (Mr. Thornberry).

Mr. SESSIONS. I have a number of speakers. We did not receive enough time in this rule to be able to provide enough time for our speakers. It's a very important topic for us, and I understand that you don't have any speakers, but we've got a bunch. So, yes, ma'am, I do intend to use my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) makes a great point, and we can today on the floor of this House of Representatives add to this bill with its own merits by saying let's also, as we're adding billions of dollars, at least simplify government and cut a billion off of what it does. It makes sense to me, and I applaud the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) for his great YouCut suggestion. At this time, Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wheaton, Illinois, Pete Roskam.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the gentlewoman if she has any further speakers.

Mr. SESSIONS. I wanted to ask the gentlewoman if she had additional speakers. I received a good answer. Thank you very much. I appreciate the gentlewoman.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, you know, it sounds like the gentlewoman from West Virginia gave us a good way to think of things, and that is, too much of a good thing may not be good. What this rail service is about, Amtrak, I believe, is a pretty good idea, but too much of a good thing, where you can't properly manage it or pay for it, where it gets larger than what the mission statement is, is a bad problem. And, you know, Madam Speaker, the Republicans are on the floor of the House today and we're called to Washington every week and we can handle that, but day after day after day after day after day after day after day we handle small ideas and little issues. Today, we're handling an issue that the gentleman from Mississippi deeply believes in and, in fact, he will have an opportunity not only to have his ideas on the floor but he will get a vote on those ideas. Republicans have now, in our fourth year, been saying to this Speaker and this majority leader and this Democratic majority that we believe that this body is entitled to have an agenda that the majority wants. But we believe it should be balanced. We believe it should include some tough decision-making, not just more spending, not just pet projects, but, rather, things which will empower people back home to have confidence in what we are doing here in Washington. And Republicans have, once again today, through YouCut, through the leadership of our minority whip, Eric Cantor, presented ideas on this floor and every single Member will have an opportunity to vote on that. Republicans believe that we should have to make tough decisions. Republicans believe that you ought to come and read the bill. Republicans believe that that Rules Committee that's up there, if you say your agenda is going to be open and honest, that you ought to mean it. Republicans believe that there ought to be an opportunity for Members to come and have their ideas heard. We are taking seriously what we think is a duty and an obligation to come and talk about how we can make our jobs that we do more serious by streamlining, providing feedback to Federal money that's being spent. It's an incredible amount of money that not only is being spent out of this town but way too little, if any, is about reforming and making the government more efficient. We think that that's what we should be about. We think that we should be about providing ideas, giving money to this government, but with the expectation of performance that would allow streamlining and efficiencies and not giving away services at less than what their real cost is. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I appreciate the gentlewoman from New York for not only this time but getting through this thing. Madam Speaker, as you can see, Republicans, and at least one Democrat, have a lot to talk about. I wish we had more time today. Republicans would have liked a lot more time to make sure that we could talk about not only this bill, but the implications that are on the floor. Republicans continue to offer, Madam Speaker, commonsense solutions to rein in the current spending spree, a spending spree that's now in its fourth year by this Democrat majority. We, like the American people, would like transparency and accountability and common sense, creation of jobs, not the extension of unemployment benefits that are not paid for. We believe in people having jobs, and if this majority were serious and if this administration were serious, they would do the things that work rather than the things that don't work. They are doing things that don't work, Madam Speaker, and that is what this Democrat majority will be held accountable for. It's really a sad thing to hear person after person who has lost his job, and people whom I know, and to see the malaise this country is in. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. SESSIONS. The legislation before us today brings more uncertainty to the long-term solvency of the NFIP. This legislation risks more American jobs and adds more to our State, local, and Federal deficits. It is true, as the gentleman spoke of, that States take this on. It is a State's responsibility, not the Federal Government's, but that is part of what this agenda is all about. For this reason, I encourage a ``no'' vote on the previous question.

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

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, 2010 marks the 100th Anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America, the largest youth organization in the United States. Since 1910, more than 111,000,000 youth have participated in Scouting programs focused on character development and leadership training. This Sunday, July 25th, the Boy Scouts will kick-off their 100th Anniversary celebrations with a Grand Centennial Parade. Not since the very first Jamboree in 1937 has there been a Scout-specific parade in Washington, DC. There will be floats, marching bands, vintage vehicles, great entertainment, flags, fun and so much more. I am proud to join my father, former FBI Director Judge William S. Sessions, as a division marshal in this historic parade. From July 26th to August 4th, the National Boy Scout Jamboree will be hosted at Fort A.P. Hill just south of Washington, DC. The Jamboree will host over 43,000 Scouts and adult leaders visiting from across the globe. This is the last year the Boy Scouts will celebrate its Jamboree at Fort A.P. Hill having procured a new high-adventure base, The Summit Bechtel Family National Scout Reserve, near Beckley, West Virginia. This new base covers 10,600 acres and is located adjacent to 70,000 acres of National Park Service land, offering world-class outdoor opportunities when it opens in 2013. On Tuesday, July 27th, the Postal Service will host the first day of sale for a new 44 cent commemorative stamp entitled ``Celebrate Scouting,'' made possible through bipartisan congressional support of over 300 Representatives and Senators. The stamp, unveiled in November of last year, will be dedicated by the Boy Scouts at the National Jamboree on Tuesday. Additionally, the National Postal Museum will be hosting a Congressional Stamp Exhibit at the Rayburn House Office Building from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 28 and from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on July 29/30. In collaboration with the Boy Scouts of America, I will be hosting an exhibit on the ``2010 Celebrate Scouting'' stamp. As an additional token of celebration, I was proud to have introduced H.R. 5872, the Boy Scouts of American Centennial Commemorative Coin Act, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 8, 2008. In accordance with the legislation, the United States Mint produced 350,000 Silver Dollar coins in celebration of the Boy Scouts centennial anniversary. Each having a $10 surcharge equally matched by private funds, this bill raised $7 million for Scouts in hard to serve areas. After only 12 short weeks these coins sold out, a remarkable success for spreading the joys of Scouting. This Friday, I am proud to host 11 troops made up of over 500 Scouts from the Dallas area to Washington, DC. I have the pleasure of meeting them on their historic journey to the Jamboree, showing them through the Capitol, and providing them insight into the government of our nation. In this historic year, I ask everyone to join in the celebration of this monumental occasion, and congratulate the Boy Scouts of America on their centennial anniversary.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, today we're here on the floor of the House of Representatives talking about taxing and spending, jobs, and the needs of this great Nation. Yet today we will begin debating a bill which will further tax and cause fees of $18 billion for consumers in the new banking bill, a banking bill that will collapse what is $1 trillion worth of equity and other arrangements that can be made that today fund American businesses and keep small businesses alive. Mr. Speaker, I think it's time that we change the direction that we're heading. Taxing and spending is something that the American people do not want or need for their future. The unemployment rate still stays near 10 percent. And since taking office in 2007, our Democrat friends have set a record for deficits, spending, and unemployment. The American people know this, and they are speaking out. I encourage Americans to visit the Web site www.AmericaSpeakingOut .com. ``America Speaking Out'' is an opportunity for Americans to have a say in their government.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, to balance out this argument just a little bit, I know we have those that want to characterize what Republicans stand for, but I would like to also address the statements that have been made here on the floor and balance out the attacks against Republicans. The gentleman Mr. Hoyer on June 22 said this in regards to what our leader Mr. Boehner said, and I quote: ``On the spending side, we could and should consider a higher retirement age, or one pegged to lifespan; more progressive Social Security and Medicare benefits . . . '' Mr. Speaker, you know, just the unrelenting liberal attacks on this country that have diminished this country's ability to have a free enterprise system have brought us higher taxes, incredible debt, and a future that diminishes our ability for our children and grandchildren. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, in order to allow the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) time to rebut, I yield the gentleman 1 minute.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam, Speaker, we're sitting here arguing on the floor about who gets credit for what. I think we ought to give credit. We ought to give credit to the Democrats for taxing, spending, record unemployment, higher debt. And what we're talking about today, this bill, the financial services sector of this country will not be healthy if we do not turn around our economy. And that too, Madam Speaker, is pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey. At this time I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Roanoke, Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte). (Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I think it's pretty obvious that Republicans today have come down and debated the substance of this rule and the bill. The rule, as it relates to the conference report, is straightforward. It puts in order on the floor of the House of Representatives today a bill which will be a monstrous spending bill for financial institutions, $18 billion that will be passed on to consumers. It's all done for bigger government. This bill empowers the Federal Government not only to get larger, but it gives them raw power. It gives them the opportunity to be the decision-maker in literally all parts of financial services. I think that's a mistake. I think that the balances and the opportunities that we had had as we have spoken in the last few years, we should aim for safety and soundness, not for overbearing government rules and regulations. This bill, once again, is as much about the financial services industry as the health care bill was about health care. It's about diminishing the free enterprise system. It's about diminishing people who really should take the role and the responsibility for that which they do. And it's about creating a larger government that will encroach upon every single one of us and ultimately crush us. The Republican Party disagrees with this bill because we think that the time should be spent on this floor to encourage job creation, not to diminish job creation. And that's what this bill does today also: it diminishes job creation. Taxing, spending, bigger government. Of course, I guess it depends whether you are working for the government; you want the government to win or the free enterprise system. We've looked at the numbers over the last 4 years since Speaker Pelosi's come into office, and we know what that agenda is--taxing, spending, more debt, bigger government, rules, regulations and using every single excuse they can to say, Well, you guys could have done this when you were in. Well, we don't want to do that. We don't want to do this. We don't want the taxing. We don't want the spending. To say that we could have done this, that now we're opposed to it, that's crazy. We don't like this. We want to be about the free enterprise system, job creation, and the opportunity for people back home to have confidence in this body. We're at the lowest level ever that people have confidence in this body. And no wonder. Taxing, spending, rules, regulations, blaming things on former Presidents. My gosh, grow up. Madam Speaker, no wonder the American people are worried about our country, because the Mickey Mouse still goes on and is going on even today. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the gentleman from Colorado, my friend, for yielding me time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this closed rule and the underlying bill. Today, we are considering a 2,300-page Federal takeover of the financial services industry. This happened in health care. It's now happening in financial services. The bill before us today is just one more piece of the Democrat majority's agenda to Federalize more of the private sector of this country. I hear that as I travel in my district. Madam Speaker, while it's important to provide consumer safety and security in the marketplace and to minimize the chance of another financial crisis, I oppose this bill. I oppose this bill, and the underlying legislation holds many far- reaching consequences for the American economy and prohibits the ability of business, small and large, to create jobs and spur economic growth. Obviously, this bill, because it's done by the Democrat majority, will be 2,300 pages; obviously, because this bill is done by the Democrat majority, it will involve new Big Government plans, programs; and, obviously, because it's the Democrat majority, it will involve more taxes, fees, and in fact it's $18 billion worth of new spending through these fees and taxes. In addition to making bailouts permanent, which this bill does do, failing to address the root cause of the crisis and rewarding failed regulators, this Democratic solution makes it even more difficult for consumers to access credit and for businesses to comply with overburdensome regulations. Just a few minutes ago, we heard the story about how Republicans want to do nothing. Republicans would do nothing because they're opposed to rules and regulations in the marketplace. That's not true. We already have enough rules and regulations in the marketplace. And I do agree there's some things in here which do add to the safety and soundness features. But in the overall total, it's a bad deal. It's a bad deal for consumers, it's a bad deal for this country, and it's certainly a bad deal for anyone that wants to turn the corner on growing jobs in America. In a letter from the Independent Bankers Association of Texas, my home State, while referencing the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau created in the bill, it states, ``this agency will have broad powers to write rules on all bank products and services, which we believe will stifle innovation and entrepreneurship on longstanding products that have been responsibly offered by community financial institutions. This will result in more cost and confusion to bank customers and stifle lending and funding in community banks.'' Community banks represent the lifeblood of Texas. I know this because I know a number of the banks and the people not only who lend with them but the people who rely on them day by day. I'm one of those persons. They're worried about what is happening here in Washington. Once again, they were given a reason to have fear of what has happened over the weekend in this bill becoming even closer to law. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Office of Financial Research, two brand new Federal agencies created in this bill--once again, two brand new Federal agencies created in this bill--will give unelected bureaucrats unprecedented power to track financial activities without citizens' approval. And these are not the only new regulatory components of the bill. This legislation allows for 355 new rulemakings, 47 studies, and 74 reports, and potentially dozens more as implementation begins. But what should we expect from this Democratic Congress? The goal of regulatory reform should be to help, not hinder. It should be there to help our economy to sustain and gain back economic growth. And, of course, gain back private-sector job creation--not government jobs. This legislation, of course, does the opposite. It takes a one-size-fits-all approach to governing, undermining U.S. economic competitiveness and private-sector growth. This Democrat solution will only increase government intervention in the financial markets. It will ration credit. It will limit consumer choice. And, perhaps worst of all, it will continue to kill jobs. I'm sorry; private-sector jobs. I need to get that right. We're all for government jobs when it's a Democratic bill, but when it comes to free-enterprise system jobs, we want to kill those things. This is the hallmark of the Democratic Party, whose party--and I know this, this is just part of it--but the three largest political items of the Democrat majority, Speaker Nancy Pelosi: To net lose 10 million American jobs through cap- and-trade, through card check, and through health care. Once again, we should have included that in that list--jobs that are killed in the free enterprise system by this Democrat majority. Madam Speaker, the motives are clear. My Democrat colleagues are using policy and regulation to force a further government takeover of the free enterprise system while paving the road to diminish the private sector. This is their way of making sure that they use a crisis or a perception of a crisis to get what they want. I get it, and so do people back home. Madam Speaker, the Republican Party and my colleagues in the Republican Party are opposed to this bill. I encourage my colleagues to vote against this rule and the underlying legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, our next speaker is a young gentleman from Texas who has a clear voice and a sound footing not only of economic principles but he also speaks for our party. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).