Bart Stupak

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I rise to honor John M. Mella on his retirement from the Oscar G. Johnson VA Medical Center in Iron Mountain, Michigan after working at the facility for 34 years. His commitment to his work and to the veterans he serves is the definition of what it means to be a dedicated employee as well as a true patriot. John is a native of the Keweenaw Peninsula in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, where he graduated from Calumet High School. His commitment to our Nation's veterans can be traced to his father, Russell Mella, who served with the U.S. Army 91st Infantry Division, 5th Army in North Africa and Italy. John followed in his father's footsteps, attending the Military Police Academy in Fort Gordon, Georgia. He then served in the United States Army Military Police Corps from 1972 to 1975, patrolling the city of Bamberg, Germany and surrounding communities. In 1975, John was hired as a police officer at the VA Hospital in Iron Mountain. In 1983 he began working at the facility as a motor vehicle operator, transporting veterans to the VA Medical Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Over the years he has gone from driving vans and sedans to motor coaches. For 27 years John's steady hand at the wheel has made sure veterans at the VA Hospital in Iron Mountain arrived at their destination safely, and with honor and dignity. Both on and off the job, John is an active veteran. He is a member of the Uren-Cooper-Johnson American Legion Post #50 in Iron Mountain and has been a Legionnaire for 30 years. Over the years John has served as Post Commander, 12th District Committeeman, Commander of the Upper Peninsula Association, and Michigan American Legion State Commander. He also has served as membership director for the Michigan District and is currently serving as chairman of the Time and Place Committee for the Upper Peninsula Association. John has served as chairman for the Dickinson County Office of Veterans Affairs, and is currently serving as finance officer. He is a 21- year member of the Knights of Columbus, a member of Elks Lodge #700 and a Habitat for Humanity volunteer. In 2006, John co-chaired the Upper Peninsula Veterans Memorial Committee, which raised $106,000 to build a memorial site in honor of members of the armed services who served our Nation. This tribute placed on Pine Mountain in Iron Mountain is an especially fitting tribute to preserve the memory, dedication and the honor of our Upper Peninsula veterans who proudly served their country. Madam Speaker, John is a friend, a patriot and has proven himself to be a man of distinction in his years of work at the Oscar G. Johnson VA Hospital. His service to our Nation and his commitment to the men and women who have served in the armed forces are a testament to his generosity and dedication. Therefore Madam Speaker, I ask that you, and all of my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives, join me in saluting John M. Mella for his service to our veterans and congratulate him on his retirement.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chair, years of abuse on Wall Street, manipulation of our financial markets and expansion of regulatory loopholes have harmed American consumers and businesses, leading to the global financial disaster last fall. As the U.S. House of Representatives sought to craft aggressive financial regulatory reforms, I worked with the relevant Committee Chairmen and Democratic leadership to end the abuses that have allowed Wall Street to profit at the expense of American consumers for far too long. Unfortunately, H.R. 4173, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, falls short of ending the practice of Wall Street speculators, big banks and the nation's largest financial houses (Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Citigroup) operating outside the watchful eye of federal regulators. Because this bill does not put an end to many of these abuses, I must oppose H.R. 4173. As chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, I have led a three-year-long investigation into the role speculators play in driving up the cost of energy. What we have learned from our investigation can be applied across the energy, commodity, and financial markets: As long as loopholes exist, speculators will manipulate markets and consumers will pay the price. I fought for and made part of the American Clean Energy and Security Act regulatory reform for the energy and carbon markets. The provisions found in the Prevent Unfair Manipulation of Prices, PUMP, Act of 2009 should have served as a starting point for further reform of the unregulated over-the-counter derivatives markets known as ``dark markets.'' Unfortunately, this legislative precedent and my amendments were ignored in favor of big money interests on Wall Street. But those of us who have spent time working on this issue know true regulatory reform cannot occur without bringing transparency to all markets and subjecting all financial transactions to federal oversight. Therefore, I offered two amendments to H.R. 4173 to close loopholes and bring strong reform to the unregulated ``dark markets.'' The first amendment required all trades to occur on an open marketplace, effectively bringing an end to ``dark markets'' so regulators could see the transactions. This most fundamental reform would have brought sunshine to the largest unregulated financial sector of our economy. For example, trades on the regulated markets totaled $80 trillion in 2008 while trades on the unregulated ``dark markets'' accounted for $600 trillion, or 41 times the size of the entire U.S. economy. Regulators could not view the transactions, the contracts or the financial terms of these trades. As Commodity Futures Trading Commission, CFTC, Chairman Gary Gensler noted in a letter supporting my amendment, ``As a nation, we do not stand for this lack of transparency in other markets.'' Staunch opposition from Wall Street led to the amendment's defeat, despite Gensler's assertion that: ``your (Stupak) amendment promotes the critical goal of promoting transparency without imposing any additional cost on business.'' Without providing our regulators the most basic tools they say they need to effectively monitor the markets, we cannot call H.R. 4173 a true reform bill. My second amendment narrowed a loophole that banks and large financial houses use to avoid regulation, prohibited credit default swap contracts that threaten the stability of the financial markets, and prohibited illegal swap contracts from being considered valid in a court. A comprehensive financial regulatory reform bill has to close the loopholes that allow speculators to control the markets. In defeating my second amendment, speculators will be allowed to continue their abusive practices. Defeating my second amendment was not Wall Street's only success in ensuring loopholes remain in place. Banks, large financial firms and speculators were able to push through an amendment authored by Congressman Scott Murphy that widened the loophole banks can use to evade regulation. Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank offered an amendment to ensure everyone trading in the markets has some ``skin in the game'' by requiring collateral be posted up front. The amendment was opposed by Wall Street and it ultimately failed. Many parts of H.R. 4173 accomplish important financial reform, and I support efforts to protect consumers from predatory financial products and end taxpayer funded bailouts. The amendment process on the House floor offered the opportunity to strengthen the bill in a way that delivers true reform across all of our financial markets. Unfortunately, Wall Street succeeded in using this opportunity to weaken the bill and significantly dilute the impact the legislation would have on their practices. If regulators cannot shine a light on ``dark markets'' and loopholes can be exploited by Wall Street, we are just a few years away from another economic crisis. Leaving ``dark markets'' unregulated, unchecked and unfazed allows speculators to dictate prices for goods ranging from gasoline to bread to life insurance, and leaves consumers vulnerable to these financial abuses. Today ``dark markets'' operate like a casino, with a commercial business betting that the price of a product will move in one direction and a Wall Street bank betting against that price change. The only difference is that we actually regulate casinos. On Wall Street neither the company nor the bank are subject to regulation. Only the largest Wall Street banks know the price or volume of these trades, leaving federal regulators and consumers in the dark. H.R. 4173 does nothing to change this. Leaving these markets to police themselves has resulted in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, FDIC, taking over 133 banks so far this year, a record. When these markets implode, credit across the financial system freezes. Small businesses and farmers can't secure loans. Community banks, credit unions and businesses are threatened with insolvency, and ultimately employees and taxpayers are left out in the cold. H.R. 4173 attempts to bring regulation to these markets, but leaves loopholes and creates new ones that far outweigh any positive reforms in the bill. I want to thank Congressman Chris Van Hollen, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro and Congressman John Larson for their strong support in working with me to try to strengthen this bill and bring true reform to Wall Street. As H.R. 4173 moves through the legislative process, I will work with Senators Maria Cantwell, Bernie Sanders, Byron Dorgan and others who have a shared interest in closing loopholes that remain a threat to our economy. It is imperative that the bill be strengthened in the U.S. Senate to rein in speculators and end the abusive practices of Wall Street's largest financial houses. I hope the Senate can accomplish these goals in the form of a final bill I can support. I did not vote for the Wall Street bailout last year. Once again, I stood up to Wall Street's reckless financial transactions. Now, we need more members of Congress to stand with me for effective regulatory reform. For I believe, in this one instance where doing too little is a far greater threat than doing too much.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 4284, a bill that would increase our trade deficit, compromise our labor laws, and delay a much-needed reform to our nation's trade policy. Since the last extension, in October 2008, Congress has still not adequately addressed the fundamental problems in relation to agriculture and labor practices in this trade preference agreement. With the on-going debate surrounding the Colombia Free Trade Agreement and the South Korea Free Trade Agreement, and the sharp economic recession, it would be irresponsible to simply extend these preferences without thorough discussions on the effects of our trade policy on American jobs. Originally passed in 1991, the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) was designed to develop economic alternates to narcotics production in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. However, ATPA has failed to reduce cocaine production and it has harmed American farmers. As a result of the ATPA, the U.S. had a $7 billion trade deficit with the four ATPA countries in 2008. Overall, the U.S. trade deficit has grown to more than $738 billion and trade policies have cost America 3.2 million manufacturing jobs over the past 10 years. Because both the Bush and Obama administrations deemed that Bolivia failed to meet eligibility criteria, H.R. 4284 would extend trade preferences only with Columbia, Ecuador, and Peru. Before extending the Andean Trade Preferences Act for a fourth time, Congress should take a closer look at damage it has done to American farmers and how it has failed to reduce illegal drug production in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. Among the great economic challenges our nation faces is creating new trade and globalization policies that serve America's workers, consumers, farmers, and firms. The Obama administration and Congress have an opportunity to rewrite our trade policy and to create a trade framework that supports American jobs. Let's seize this opportunity to create a new framework for trade agreements. New trade agreements must meet basic standards to protect labor rights, environmental standards, food safety regulations, financial regulations, and taxation transparency. Most importantly, new trade agreements must protect American workers first. I urge you to vote against H.R. 4284 when it comes to the House floor today so that we can focus on reforming America's trade laws.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize Enstrom Helicopter Corporation of Menominee, Michigan as it celebrates its 50th anniversary in the community. This company designs and produces helicopters that can be found performing a wide range of duties across the globe, while staying true to its hometown roots. Enstrom Helicopter began with a mining engineer from the Upper Peninsula named Rudy Enstrom. In the 1940's Rudy began building a helicopter and this hobby became a passion. After years of developing and building his own helicopter, Rudy caught the attention of businessmen in the Menominee area and founded R. J. Enstrom Corporation in 1959. The project to replace Rudy's original prototypes with a better engineered product was led by Jack Christensen, Al Belauer and Paul Schultz. In 1965, Enstrom Helicopter achieved FAA certification on its F-28 model and received certification in 1968 for its more powerful model, the F-28A. Today the company produces three models, the F-28F, the 280FX and the 480B. Enstrom's 280FX and F-28F piston-powered helicopters are the only turbo-charged helicopters produced in the world today. Over the years Enstrom Helicopter has had capable leaders at the helm, including F. Lee Bailey, Bob Tuttle and today's president, Jerry Mullins. These men have guided the continued growth of the company, thanks in large part to their ability to retain a dedicated and experienced workforce. Having produced approximately 1,200 aircraft, Enstrom helicopters can be found in 45 countries around the world. In fact, 70 percent of Enstrom helicopters are purchased overseas. Recently the company delivered 480B models destined for Ukraine, India, Thailand, and Bulgaria. These helicopters are used for a variety of purposes, including agricultural spraying, search and rescue, cattle herding, law enforcement, and personal transport. Despite its international popularity, Enstrom Helicopter has remained committed to the Menominee community throughout its history. In turn, the residents of Menominee and surrounding areas have thrown their support behind Enstrom. During its first 10 years as a public company, as many as 10,000 individual shareholders living primarily in the Upper Peninsula and northern Wisconsin invested in the company. This early support from the community was largely responsible for the ultimate success of the company. Madam Speaker, Enstrom Helicopter Corporation is both a community company and a world leader in helicopter production. Over the years, it has continued to innovate, grow and provide good jobs for the residents of Menominee. I ask, Madam Speaker, that you, and the entire U.S. House of Representatives, join me in recognizing Enstrom Helicopter Corporation, its management, and employees past and present on this golden anniversary of 50 years.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize Lt. Frank Hentschell of Munising, Michigan on his retirement from the Michigan State Police after 36 years of dedicated law enforcement service. Lt. Hentschell's enthusiasm for his work and commitment to the communities he has served is testament to the caliber of officers in the Michigan State Police. A native of the Upper Peninsula, Lt. Hentschell started his career in uniform as a Boy Scout. He made Eagle Scout, the highest rank in Boy Scouts, by age 13 and continues to be active in Boy Scouts to this day. As a graduate of Northern Michigan University's Police Academy, Lt. Hentschell was also certified as an EMT and firefighter. His police career began in 1973 with the Manistique Public Safety Department, where he served for five years before leaving the post to help re- establish the Chocolay Police Department near Marquette, Michigan. He served as chief of the Chocolay Police Department for one year before leaving to join the Michigan State Police in 1984. Following graduation from the 98th State Police Training Academy in Lansing, Michigan, Lt. Hentschell was assigned to the State Police post in Flat Rock down in Southeast Michigan. There he became a member of the Emergency Support Team and served from 1987 to 1995. He also served as a trooper at posts in Erie and Munising and as sergeant at the post in Gaylord, Michigan. He earned the title of Lieutenant in 1995 when he returned to the Upper Peninsula to serve at the Iron River Michigan State Police Post. In 2001, Lt. Hentschell came back to Munising where he has served since. Over the years, Lt. Hentschell's hard work and dedication has been recognized through a number of written commendations. He received the 1989 Officer of the Year award from Monroe County while serving at the Flat Rock post, and Kiwanian of the Year while serving in Iron River. Lt. Hentschell's wife Donna has been by his side throughout his career. They will remain in the Munising area following his retirement and look forward to travelling together and spending time with their daughter Sandra and granddaughter, Katie. Madam Speaker, Lt. Frank Hentschell has spent 36 years of his life enforcing the law and protecting the citizens of Michigan. His lifelong devotion to law enforcement should be commended. Throughout his career he has touched the lives of countless individuals he has worked with and served. I ask Madam Speaker, that you and the entire U.S. House of Representatives, join me in recognizing Lt. Hentschell for his courage, his dedication, and his years of service on his retirement from the Michigan State Police.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. I yield the balance of my time to the co-author of this amendment, Mr. Van Hollen.

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the co-author of this amendment.

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chair, this amendment was crafted with the help of Representatives DeLauro, Larson, and Van Hollen. We worked and reached an agreement with Chairman Frank and Chairman Peterson to enhance regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market. I want to thank my colleagues and both chairmen for their work. Our amendment provides additional assurances that the swaps market will be policed and prevents speculative financial companies from evading regulations or otherwise ignoring the law. Under this amendment, the CFTC and the SEC will be granted authority to prohibit swap transactions that pose a risk to the financial marketplace. Certain swaps, such as naked credit default swaps, are pure speculative bets that a company will fail and should be banned. As we learned in 2008, credit default swaps and other swap transactions pose a systemic risk to our economy and accelerated the economic collapse. This amendment also narrows the definition of determining which companies are and are not bona fide hedging end users. Commercial companies that use commodities and securities to lock in prices and hedge the risk of their products, such as airlines, trucking companies, and electric utilities, did not create the current financial crisis. H.R. 4173 reflects this reality, but its exception for clearing swaps on an exchange is written so broadly that financial speculators and private pools of capital can be treated as bona fide hedgers. To maintain strong standards for financial companies, we must ensure illegal swap transactions do not remain a valid contract in a court of law. Our amendment prevents a company that enters into a swap contract to remain liable for payment under the swap contract if the counterparty has acted illegally in creating, executing, or reporting the swap. This amendment is the result of hard work between Chairman Frank, Chairman Peterson, and my colleagues and me to reach an agreement. This amendment will preserve the ability of bona fide end users to hedge commercial risk with strong standards for Wall Street financial companies. I urge adoption of this amendment. December 8, 2009. Re support H.R. 4173, ``Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009''. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Representative: The undersigned organizations strongly urge you to support H.R. 4173, the ``Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009,'' when it comes to the House floor this week. We write individually and also on behalf of Americans for Financial Reform, a coalition of more than 200 national, state and local consumer, labor, retiree, investor, community, business and civil rights organizations who are campaigning for real reform in our nation's financial system. The need for this legislation could not be more obvious. Years of deregulation have produced a financial system that is a threat to our economy. Rampant abuses in consumer lending practices, combined with a casino mentality on Wall Street and the willful blindness of federal regulators, have plunged our economy into its worst economic crisis since the Great Depression--and it is clear that Wall Street has not learned its lessons. While H.R. 4173 needs to be strengthened, it contains vital reforms for our country and must be passed. A number of amendments will be offered which will fundamentally affect the shape of this legislation. In order to ensure meaningful financial reform, we strongly urge you to: Oppose the Minnick amendment to eliminate a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) from the bill. It would leave enforcement of consumer protection and civil rights laws in the hands of the same existing regulatory bodies that resoundingly failed to use them. Support the Stupak/DeLauro/Larson/Van Hollen amendment on derivatives. Regulators must have the authority to ban abusive derivatives instruments rather than simply reporting them to Congress, transactions which violate the law should be considered invalid, and loopholes which leave too many trades to continue in the shadows must be closed. At the same time, we believe that as the legislative process moves forward, H.R. 4173 must be improved in important respects including: The bill provides systemic regulatory authority to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve without reforming the Federal Reserve System to remove the banks themselves from a role in overseeing the Federal Reserve's regulatory staff. We need a fully public systemic risk regulator, either in the form of a separate agency as detailed in Chairman Dodd's proposal, or a reformed Federal Reserve. The proposed CFPA needs to have jurisdiction over the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), as it does in Chairman Dodd's proposal. The CRA is vital to fighting discriminatory, deceptive, and unsustainable lending practices in minority communities. But as is the case with other consumer protection and civil rights laws, CRA enforcement in recent years has been extremely weak, allowing a wide range of under-regulated, non-bank-- and often predatory--lenders to fill the void. The legislation should also be changed to give the SEC authority to make the exemption from registration under the 1940 Act for private investment funds contingent upon such funds fulfilling requirements established by the SEC. Despite the need for these improvements, passage of H.R. 4173 would represent dramatic progress towards a financial system that works for all Americans. By voting for it, you will send an important message to the American public that you intend to change the way that Wall Street works for the better. Thank you for your consideration of our views. If you have any questions, please contact Rob Randhava, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and Lisa Donner, Americans for Financial Reform. Sincerely, Americans for Financial Reform. Following are the partners of Americans for Financial Reform. All the organizations support the overall principles of AFR and are working for an accountable, fair and secure financial system. Not all of these organizations work on all of the issues covered by the coalition or have signed on to every statement. A New Way Forward; AARP; ACORN; Adler and Colvin; AFL-CIO; AFSCME; Alliance For Justice; Americans for Democratic Action, Inc; American Income Life Insurance; Americans for Fairness in Lending; Americans United for Change; Calvert Asset Management Company, Inc.; Campaign for America's Future; Campaign Money; Center for Digital Democracy; Center for Economic and Policy Research; Center for Economic Progress; Center for Responsible Lending; Center for Justice and Democracy; Center of Concern; Change to Win; Clean Yield Asset Management; Coastal Enterprises Inc.; Color of Change; and Common Cause. Communications Workers of America; Community Development Transportation Lending Services; Consumer Action; Consumer Association Council; Consumers for Auto Safety and Reliability; Consumer Federation of America; Consumer Watchdog; Consumers Union; Corporation for Enterprise Development; CREDO Mobile; CTW Investment Group; Demos; Economic Policy Institute; Essential Action; Greenlining Institute; Good Business International; HNMA Funding Company; Home Actions; Housing Counseling Services; Information Press; Institute for Global Communications; Institute for Policy Studies: Global Economy Project; International Brotherhood of Teamsters; Institute of Women's Policy Research; and Krull & Company. Laborers' International Union of North America; Lake Research Partners; Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Leadership Conference on Civil Rights; Move On; NASCAT; National Association of Consumer Advocates; National Association of Neighborhoods; National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development; National Community Reinvestment Coalition; National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients); National Consumers League; National Council of La Raza; National Fair Housing Alliance; National Federation of Community Development Credit Unions; National Housing Institute; National Housing Trust; National Housing Trust Community Development Fund; National NeighborWorks Association; National Training and Information Center/National People's Action; National Council of Women's Organizations; Next Step; OMB Watch; Opportunity Finance Network; and Partners for the Common Good. PICO; Progress Now Action; Progressive States Network; Poverty and Race Research Action Council; Public Citizen; Sargent Shriver Center on Poverty Law; SEIU; State Voices; Taxpayer's for Common Sense; The Association for Housing and Neighborhood Development; the Fuel Savers Club; The Seminal; U.S. Public Interest Research Group; Union Plus; United Food and Commercial Workers; United States Student Association; USAction; Veris Wealth Partners; Veterans Chamber of Commerce; Western States Center; We the People Now; Woodstock Institute; World Privacy Forum; UNET; Union Plus; and Unitarian Universalist for a Just Economic Community. Partial list of State and Local Signers Alaska PIRG; Arizona PIRG; Arizona Advocacy Network; Arizonans For Responsible Lending; Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development NY; Audubon Partnership for Economic Development LDC, New York NY; BAC Funding Consortium Inc., Miami FL; Beech Capital Venture Corporation, Philadelphia PA; California PIRG; California Reinvestment Coalition; Century Housing Corporation, Culver City CA; Center of Concern; Center for Media and Democracy; CHANGER NY; Chautauqua Home Rehabilitation and Improvement Corporation (NY); Chicago Community Loan Fund, Chicago IL; Chicago Community Ventures, Chicago IL; Chicago Consumer Coalition; Citizen Potawatomi CDC, Shawnee OK; Colorado PIRG; Coalition on Homeless Housing in Ohio; Community Capital Fund, Bridgeport CT; Community Capital of Maryland, Baltimore MD; Community Development Financial Institution of the Tohono O'odham Nation, Sells AZ; and Community Redevelopment Loan and Investment Fund, Atlanta GA. Community Reinvestment Association of North Carolina; Community Resource Group, Fayetteville A; Connecticut PIRG; Connecticut Association for Human Services; Consumer Assistance Council; Cooper Square Committee (NYC); Cooperative Fund of New England, Wilmington NC; Corporacion de Desarrollo Economico de Ceiba, Ceiba PR; Delta Foundation, Inc., Greenville MS; Economic Opportunity Fund (EOF), Philadelphia PA; Empire Justice Center NY; Enterprises, Inc., Berea KY; Fair Housing Contact Service OH; Federation of Appalachian Housing; Fitness and Praise Youth Development, Inc., Baton Rouge LA; Forward Community Investment (Madison, WI); Florida Consumer Action Network; Florida PIRG; Funding Partners for Housing Solutions, Ft. Collins CO; Georgia PIRG; Green America; Grow Iowa Foundation, Greenfield IA; Homewise, Inc., Santa Fe NM; Idaho Nevada CDFI, Pocatello ID; and Idaho Chapter, National Association of Social Workers. Idaho Community Action Network; Illinois PIRG; Impact Capital, Seattle WA; Information Press CA; Indiana PIRG; Iowa PIRG; Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement; JobStart Chautauqua, Inc., Mayville NY; Keystone Research Center; La Casa Federal Credit Union, Newark NJ; Low Income Investment Fund, San Francisco CA; Long Island Housing Services NY; MaineStream Finance, Bangor ME; Maryland PIRG; Massachusetts Consumers' Coalition; MASSPIRG; Massachusetts Fair Housing Center; Michigan PIRG; Midland Community Development Corporation, Midland TX; Midwest Minnesota Community Development Corporation, Detroit Lakes MN; Mile High Community Loan Fund, Denver CO; Missouri PIRG; Mortgage Recovery Service Center of L.A.; Montana Community Development Corporation, Missoula MT; and Montana PIRG. National Housing Institute; Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project; New Hampshire PIRG; New Jersey Community Capital, Trenton NJ; New Jersey Citizen Action; New Jersey PIRG; New Mexico PIRG; New York PIRG; New York City Aids Housing Network; Next Step MN; NOAH Community Development Fund, Inc., Boston MA; Nonprofit Finance Fund, New York NY; Nonprofits Assistance Fund, Minneapolis MN; Northern Community Investment Corporation (St. Johnsbury, VT); North Carolina Association of Community Development Corporations; North Carolina PIRG; Northside Community Development Fund, Pittsburgh PA; Ohio Capital Corporation for Housing, Columbus OH; Ohio PIRG; Oregon State PIRG; Our Oregon; PennPIRG; Piedmont Housing Alliance, Charlottesville VA; Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center, CO; Rhode Island PIRG; Rural Community Assistance Corporation, West Sacramento CA; and Rural Organizing Project OR. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority; Seattle Economic Development Fund; Siouxland Economic Development Corporation (Sioux City, IA); Southern Bancorp (Arkadelphia AR); Community Capital Development; TexPIRG; The Association for Housing and Neighborhood Development; The Fair Housing Council of Central New York; The Help Network; The Loan Fund, Albuquerque NM; Third Reconstruction Institute NC; Vermont PIRG; Village Capital Corporation, Cleveland OH; Virginia Citizens Consumer Council; Virginia Poverty Law Center; War on Poverty--Florida; WashPIRG; Westchester Residential Opportunities Inc.; Wigamig Owners Loan Fund, Inc., Lac du Flambeau WI; and WISPIRG.

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the co-author of this amendment, Mr. Van Hollen from Maryland, who is a champion on this issue.

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chair, Chairman Frank and Chairman Peterson have provided the framework for regulation of the swaps markets in H.R. 4173, but I believe Congress can improve this bill by requiring additional transparency. We could pass the most comprehensive and thorough regulation of the financial sector imaginable, but it would be meaningless if we continue to leave loopholes in place to evade regulation. As we saw in the oil markets of 2008, leaving loopholes in place for speculators costs consumers more of their hard-earned money. Swaps are financial contracts that allow a company to lock in prices on everything from currency to oil to pork bellies. In 2008, roughly $80 trillion was traded on regulated exchanges worldwide. And as astonishing as that figure is, it pales in comparison to the more than $600 trillion traded over-the-counter, or in unregulated dark markets. This is seven-and-a-half times what was traded on regulated markets. To put that into perspective, the total gross domestic product of the United States is $14.4 trillion or 41 times smaller than the unregulated swaps market. These unregulated markets create a systemic risk across the financial system and helped bring Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and AIG into bankruptcy and our economy to the verge of disaster. The best way to address this problem is to require Wall Street financial houses to post collateral and clear their swaps contracts on regulated exchanges. If we can't guarantee that Wall Street will post collateral, have some skin in the game, we should at least require that these trades be made in the open, transparent markets. My amendment establishes a simple requirement: Swaps by end dealers that could clear will remain exempt from clearing because one of the parties in that contract is a bona fide hedger. However, the swaps still should be reported on an exchange. Much of the concern over the dark swaps markets is the lack of information that ensure a competitive, transparent market. By adopting this amendment, the marketplace will become more open, and end users and other important swap users can accurately determine fair prices. Nothing, and let me repeat, nothing in this amendment requires a new clearing requirement. It's all about transparency and nothing more. Our amendment specifically includes a provision stating that the amendment ``shall not be interpreted as requiring any swap to be cleared.'' CFPC Chairman Gary Gensler originally proposed the concept for required reporting on specific swaps, and supports our amendment that requires transparency in swaps markets. I would like to submit his letter of support in the Record. As Chairman Gensler told the House Energy and Commerce Committee last week, ``Economists have for decades recognized transparency benefits the marketplace'' and that ``lack of regulation in these markets has created significant information deficits.'' There are a number of groups who support this legislation and this amendment, including Americans for Financial Reform, which includes United Food and Commercial Workers, AFL-CIO, a number of groups. Without our amendment, a significant portion of the swaps market will remain in the dark, and unscrupulous traders will remain out of reach of regulators. I urge Members to adopt this amendment and bring these swap contracts out of the dark markets. U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Washington, DC, December 10, 2009. Hon. Bart Stupak, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Chris Van Hollen, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Congressmen Stupak and Van Hollen: I am writing in support of your amendment to H.R. 4173, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, which would require transparency in swaps contracts by requiring all standardized non-cleared swaps be executed on a registered swap execution facility. This requirement would apply only to those contracts listed for trading while still fully allowing hedgers to enter into customized transactions off-exchange. In addition, the amendment explicitly states that it ``shall not be interpreted to require any swap to be cleared.'' Your amendment would be an important addition to a very strong bill. In the past few months, Congress has taken historic steps to bring comprehensive regulation to the over-the-counter derivatives markets. H.R. 4173 fully regulates swap dealers and requires that all standardized trades between these Wall Street swap dealers be brought into clearinghouses and transparent trading facilities. Your amendment strengthens the bill by broadening the transparency requirement to include all standardized derivatives transactions. Under H.R. 4173, while big Wall Street banks would be subject to the requirement when trading with each other, those same Wall Street banks would be exempt when trading with many of their customers. Your amendment would close this exemption and increase the amount of information available to the public and market participants. Economists have for decades recognized that market transparency benefits the public by lowering costs. If derivatives users knew what others were paying to enter into similar contracts, they would receive better pricing on their transactions. A municipality could better decide whether or not to hedge an interest rate risk based upon the reported pricing from the broader market. As a nation, we do not stand for this lack of transparency in other markets. For example, one would not purchase 100 shares of his or her favorite stock without knowing the last price at which those shares sold. Similarly, one would not buy an apple at the supermarket if the price was kept private. Transparency in the over-the-counter derivatives marketplace would shift the information advantage from Wall Street to the businesses, municipalities and nonprofit organizations that you represent in Congress. This would lower the cost of hedging and thus the costs to customers and promote economic growth in every sector of the economy. Your amendment accomplishes the critical goal of promoting transparency without imposing any additional costs on business as it does not require these end-user trades to be cleared by central counterparties. Your amendment separates mandatory trading on transparent trading venues from a central clearing requirement that would require businesses to post margin. The two should not be confused. Transparency can be required while leaving the clearing decision up to the parties involved in particular transactions. I commend you for your efforts to bring greater transparency to the currently opaque over-the-counter derivatives marketplace. Sincerely, Gary Gensler, Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the fallen officers of the Lakewood, Washington, Police Department and to offer my condolences to the families and colleagues of these officers. The tragic events of November 29, 2009, took the lives of four officers who have served the Lakewood Police Department for many years. This is a loss not only to the police department, but to the law enforcement community across the country. It is also a solemn reminder that every day, our men and women in uniform face unpredictable threats. We must work in Congress to ensure that our police departments are always prepared, equipped, and ready to fend off these threats. Law enforcement officers are on the front lines of protecting our communities, and we must ensure they are protected, too. As a former police officer and a Michigan State Trooper, and the co- chairman of the Congressional Law Enforcement Caucus, I extend my condolences to the fallen, to the families, and to the police department of Lakewood, Washington. Our thoughts and prayers are with you.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Madam Speaker, on Monday, November 2, 2009 through the morning of Friday, November 6, 2009, I could not be present for votes due to a family funeral back in Michigan. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: House Rollcall Vote 832. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 833. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 834. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 835. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 836. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 837. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 838. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 839. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 840. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 841. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 842. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 843. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 844. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 845. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 846. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 847. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 848. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 849. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 850. I would have voted ``no.'' House Rollcall Vote 851. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 852. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 853. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 854. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 855. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 856. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 857. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 858. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 859. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 860. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 861. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 862. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 863. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 864. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 865. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 866. I would have voted ``yes.'' House Rollcall Vote 867. I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. STUPAK

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

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, to close on our side, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) to state how current laws are maintained with the Stupak amendment.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to Mr. Ellsworth from Indiana, who has been a champion on this issue and has worked hard to get this amendment to where we are here today.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time we have remaining?

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 45 seconds to Mrs. Dahlkemper from Pennsylvania to speak on the bill. She has been a stalwart on this issue, and I appreciate her support on this issue.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, our amendment does one very simple thing: It applies the Hyde amendment, which bars Federal funding for abortion except in the case of rape, incest, or life of the mother to the health care reform bill. The Hyde amendment has been law in Federal funding of abortion since 1977 and applies to all other federally funded health care programs, including SCHIP, Medicare, Medicaid, Indian Health Services, veterans health, military health care programs, and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. More specifically, our amendment applies the Hyde amendment to the public health insurance option and private policies purchased using affordability credits. I am not writing a new Federal abortion policy. The Hyde amendment already prohibits Federal funding of abortion and the use of Federal dollars to pay for health care policies that cover abortion. This policy currently applies to the 8 million Americans, including Members of Congress, covered under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, and should apply in this bill. The amendment has no impact on those individuals with private insurance who do not receive affordability credits and in no way prohibits any individual from purchasing a supplemental abortion coverage policy. Health insurance companies can still offer policies in the exchange that cover abortion; they just can't sell those policies to individuals receiving affordability credits. I wish to thank Speaker Pelosi for her commitment to trying to reach an agreement between all sides late last night. Unfortunately, at the last minute the deal fell apart. The Speaker then took the only appropriate action remaining, which was to allow a vote on the floor. So we are asking Members to maintain current law and vote ``no'' on public funding for abortion. Let me also reassure my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, I did not buck my party. I did not buck my party leadership to trade a vote for this amendment. I did it based on principle. This bill, with the Capps language, is the most direct assault on the Hyde language we have had since 1997. So I ask my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, let us stand together on the principle of no public funding for abortion, no public funding for insurance policies that pay for abortion. Stand with us, protect our role, and let's keep current law. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 5 of the 10 minutes granted to our side be controlled by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.