Maxine Waters

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Axne), who is the sponsor of H.R. 2409.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I inquire through the Chair if my colleague has any remaining speakers on his side.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Axne) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mooney) for introducing this important legislation. This bipartisan bill passed the House by a near unanimous vote last Congress. It is time for it to become law to help rural businesses across this country become even more important job creators. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important piece of legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, my amendment simply removes $1 million from the Administration for Children and Families programs account, but it replaces it back in the very same account. My intent in doing this is to highlight an issue for my colleagues and for the Department of Health and Human Services. Before I go into detail on this, I want everyone to know that I was one of the early participants in the Head Start program as an assistant teacher. I was there when Head Start was first developed under the Federal poverty program. I love Head Start. I understand it very thoroughly, and I wish that every child that needed the advantages of this program could have it and benefit from it. In California alone, the Head Start program serves over 100,000 children. Nationwide, more than 1 million children and families across the country rely on its essential services. However, children and families can't receive the care and valuable benefits of Head Start if we aren't strategic in determining the organizations and communities that receive aid. When Federal auditors determine whether a Head Start program must recompete for funding, they compare the metrics of a program against national averages. However, a successful program operating within an urban community must be defined differently than one operating in the suburbs or a rural community. Comparing providers to national averages disadvantages those with fewer resources and more obstacles to success. In my own district, the 43rd Congressional District of California, there have been six Head Start organizations that serve predominantly minority communities that have lost their funding in favor of organizations operating in more affluent areas. I fear these closures in Los Angeles may be indicative of a nationwide trend. There are also reports of Head Start programs serving minority communities in Detroit, Michigan, and Little Rock, Arkansas, that have been forced to recompete because they did not rank high enough when compared to programs nationwide. Instead of helping struggling programs improve, which would ensure that families living in those communities still receive uninterrupted Head Start services, this recompete process forces providers to divert resources from programmatic priorities to administrative costs associated with competing for Federal grant dollars. This only compounds the difficulties faced by the Head Start provider. The result of this process may be that affluent Head Start providers are better able to navigate the bureaucratic system HHS has created while those providers struggling to overcome obstacles, such as funding deficiencies and higher teacher turnover rates, are shut down. Further oversight is required. The Department of Health and Human Services should comprehensively examine its Head Start selection and evaluation process for any evidence that such processes are having a disparate impact on either the minority communities that the programs serve or on minority-operated Head Start programs. HHS should submit a report to Congress no later than January 1 of 2020--and I am going to be working on that--on its findings and any changes necessary to remedy the effects of such disparate impacts on communities of color. We must do everything possible to ensure that all children, not merely the ones who happened to live in affluent communities near a well-funded Head Start provider, have access to the support services they need. Although I will be withdrawing this amendment, I strongly urge my colleagues to support a comprehensive audit of the Head Start application, evaluation, and recompete processes. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I would simply like to say that I think that the processes that we are examining have unintended consequences that we think we can straighten out. I thank Congresswoman DeLauro for her support in taking a look at this issue. We will be working together. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time, and I withdraw the amendment.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H. Res. 430, which authorizes litigation to compel Attorney General Barr to provide key evidence underlying the Mueller report and the unredacted report itself, authorizes a civil suit to compel Don McGahn to provide the Committee on the Judiciary with documents and testimony, and, prospectively, allows committee chairs to bring civil actions on behalf of their committees to enforce their subpoenas without a subsequent full House vote when authorized by the bipartisan legal advisory group. H. Res. 430 is key to ensuring that Congress is able to efficiently exercise its constitutional responsibilities in light of the unprecedented stonewalling by the Trump administration and a President who has openly said such things as: ``We're fighting all the subpoenas,'' and, ``I don't want people testifying.'' Who does he think he is? A dictator? The committees have requested information that we are constitutionally entitled to, as a coequal branch of government, and that we need to fulfill our legislative and oversight responsibilities. In the Financial Services Committee, for example, we have subpoenaed documents from financial institutions, including Deutsche Bank and Capital One, as part of our investigation into the integrity of the United States financial system, bank safety and loan practices, and anti-money laundering policies, including as they apply to and involve the accounts of President Trump and family members. So, ladies and gentlemen, in another display of stonewalling, President Trump sued to prevent the banks from complying with the committee's valid subpoenas. I will continue to support efforts to ensure that our critical oversight is not impeded. Who does he think he is?

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I send to the desk a concurrent resolution and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration in the House.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1500 and to insert extraneous material thereon.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act, which restores the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, so it can carry out its mission of protecting consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices by financial institutions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was created by Congress following the financial crisis in order to ensure that there is an agency in place with the sole, dedicated purpose of protecting every consumer of financial products and services and holding bad actors fully accountable when consumers are harmed. Under the leadership of its first Director, Richard Cordray, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was a resounding success. During that time, the agency put nearly $12 billion back in the pockets of over 30 million consumers who were harmed by financial institutions. The agency put in place important new protections so that consumers no longer had to worry about exploding mortgages, hidden prepaid card fees, or unnecessary foreclosures due to weak servicing standards. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau also helped to take the confusing jargon out of various financial products, such as student loans, by creating tools students can use to compare financial aid and costs when deciding where to go to college. But Donald Trump and his appointees have made it their mission to destroy the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from within. Mick Mulvaney, who was Trump's Director of the Office of Management and Budget before Trump inappropriately installed him as Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, made it his mission to dismantle the agency from the inside. In fact, enforcement actions have fallen by 75 percent under Trump's appointees, there have been zero public fair lending enforcement actions, Mulvaney originally requested zero dollars from the Fed to fund the CFPB, and the number of employees at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has declined by 10 percent. I introduced the Consumers First Act to fix the damage that Mulvaney caused at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. For example, Mulvaney stripped the Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity of its supervisory enforcement powers. The Consumers First Act restores those powers. Mulvaney fired the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's consumer advisory board. The Consumers First Act restores and strengthens the advisory panel to ensure consumers are heard by the agency's leadership. Mulvaney stacked the senior leadership of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with ideological political appointees. The Consumers First Act limits the number of political appointees at the agency. Mulvaney stopped the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from supervising its regulated entities for compliance with the Military Lending Act, which is in place to prevent servicemembers from being ripped off. The Consumers First Act directs the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to promptly resume Military Lending Act exams. Mulvaney worked to hide the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's consumer complaint database from the public. The Consumers First Act requires that the consumer complaint database remain publicly accessible so that there is transparency about the complaints consumers are making about financial institutions. H.R. 1500 puts consumers first by reversing the harmful actions Mulvaney took that we are aware of one by one. Over 50 consumer, civil rights, and labor organizations support the Consumers First Act. The harm at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is continuing under Director Kathy Kraninger, who appears to be following Mulvaney's lead by rolling back payday lending protections and reducing the collection of the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, or HMDA data, which is used to identify discrimination in lending. And she is just getting started. Following general debate on the bill, the House will debate several amendments to undo the harmful actions taken by Director Kraninger. Congress will not tolerate the Trump administration's anticonsumer actions, and H.R. 1500 will ensure that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is able to fulfill its statutory mission to put consumers first. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, May 17, 2019. Hon. Maxine Waters, Chairwoman, House Committee on Financial Services, Washington, DC. Dear Chairwoman Waters: I write concerning H.R. 1500, the ``Consumers First Act.'' This bill was primarily referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and secondarily to the Committee on Education and Labor. As a result of your having consulted with me concerning this bill generally, I agree to forgo consideration of the bill, so the bill may proceed expeditiously to the House floor. The Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 1500, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and we will be appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation moves forward so we may address any remaining issue within our Rule X jurisdiction. In agreeing to forgo consideration, I respectfully request your support for the appointment of outside conferees from the Committee on Education and Labor should this bill or similar language be considered in a conference with the Senate. Finally, I would appreciate a response confirming this understanding and ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration thereof. Very truly yours, Rep. Bobby Scott, Chairman.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) the chair of the Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital Markets. (Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, we have no regrets about how we organized the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the supervisory authority is already in law. All they have to do is implement it. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay), the chair of the Subcommittee on Housing, Community Development and Insurance on the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, it is absolutely unbelievable that the Republicans on the opposite side of the aisle now talk about wanting to work with us after they have done everything possible to undermine the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. We move ahead with restoring it from all the harm that has been done to it. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. David Scott), a leading senior member of the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, this is a consumer bill. My friends on the opposite side of the aisle who would try to kill this bill evidently do not understand that the day is over when predatory lending will go forth in this body. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), the chair of the Subcommittee on Diversity and Inclusion on the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Garcia), a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), a member of the Ways and Means Committee and always a strong leader on consumer protection issues.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), a strong defender of consumers.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I would like to inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, I am so proud of this legislation, I am so proud of the members of the Financial Services Committee, and I am so proud of our Democratic Caucus. We have strong support for this legislation. I am so proud of the over 50 consumer, labor, and civil rights organizations who strongly support H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act. It has been said more than once today that we went through a recession here in this country--almost a depression--in 2008 when predatory lending from the major financial institutions in America caused this recession and caused us to have communities that were devastated--boarded up homes--we had communities, not only where the homes were boarded up, but the weeds were growing up, in many instances animals had taken over the property, and many consumers and homeowners who lost these homes really did not know what had happened to them. It was predatory lending. It was the tricks that were fostered on innocent people who simply wanted to live the American Dream and own a home. They signed on the dotted line for products and mortgages they didn't understand and could not afford. And they were led into signing on the bottom line because we had predatory lenders who wanted to get them into a situation where they could get some money, perhaps up front, and sell off the products that they were getting signed on up to Wall Street, et cetera, et cetera. Of course, we worked for 2 years, and it was in 2010 that we were able to put the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau together, which is indeed the centerpiece of the Dodd-Frank reforms. So we had Mr. Cordray who was our first Director who did a magnificent job, and it has been cited here time and time again. My friends on the opposite side of the aisle have done everything that they could do to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and, Madam Chair, none of them are going to vote for this bill today. None of them will criticize the big banks on Wall Street and others who took advantage of our consumers. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. No, I am not prepared to close.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), who is the chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairwoman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to just say that we send a message from this House today, and our message that we are sending out across this Nation is that we are now in a position to undo what has been done and the wreckage that has been caused with our Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. We send a message that the day for predatory lending is over. We send the message despite the fact that we have Members of this House who would dare not stand up for students and servicemembers and not criticize what has happened to consumers in the way that it has happened in this country. And so I want that message to be loud and clear. I want those on Wall Street and the major banks who had the predatory products and who had the exotic loans, I want all those who mismanaged the way that they deal with our students when our students had complaints and they looked for someone to help them, I want all of them to know, well, I suppose, there is a new sheriff in town. We are going to make sure that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is strong, that it is not simply made up of political appointees, and that they do not have to worry in the way that they are worrying now. We have personnel who have quit the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because it was not carrying out the mission that was intended. Again, I have said earlier how proud I am to have this bill on the floor and to have the support of the Democratic Caucus. I would just ask my friends on the opposite side of the aisle to think about what is going on and to think about ways that they can begin to take into consideration their constituents who need protection, and prior to our legislation there was no protection for consumers. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.