Maxine Waters

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I am so proud that, today, we are going to stand up for consumers on this side of the aisle. It is unfortunate that our friends on the opposite side of the aisle have not seen fit to support consumers. They will all vote against this bill. We will vote for this bill on this side of the aisle. Madam Chair, again, I urge my colleagues to come to the floor quickly and vote for consumer financial protection, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to amendment No. 6.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, this amendment would take the widely successful consumer complaint database dark, hiding from the public how consumers report personally being harmed by financial institutions. The Dodd-Frank Act required the CFPB to establish a consumer complaint database to provide consumers with the opportunity to report complaints about financial products and services. A public database empowers consumers to seek redress when harmed and benefits the public by providing firsthand stories to help other consumers to avoid similar harms. A public database also promotes market discipline and encourages financial firms to treat their consumers fairly. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has received over 1.5 million consumer submissions, with a 97 percent response rate by financial firms to the consumer complaints. This means that the American people know, need, and use this function. Taking this away from the public only harms hardworking people in need of help and benefits the bad actors. Through its research, education, market monitoring, and the much-used consumer complaint database, the CFPB has been able to directly address problems in the market and issues that directly harm hardworking families. This is especially useful for the millions of consumers who, unfortunately, do not have the financial means, time, or access to the judicial court system. Mandating that the consumer complaint database remain transparent and publicly accessible is an important aspect of this bill and will promote better conduct from providers of financial services across this country. Thus, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment to H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Chair, I would like to reiterate my strong opposition to this amendment. Congress must ensure that consumer complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are available to the public to hold companies accountable to the American people for their actions or lack of actions. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment to H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I oppose this amendment because it seeks to limit the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by using the appropriations process to politicize and defund the agency. All the bank regulators are independently funded. In addition to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Reserve, the OCC, the FDIC, and the NCUA are all funded outside of the appropriations process. In fact, so is the FHFA, the FSOC, and OFR. Congress provided the regulators with independence from the executive branch and the appropriations process to ensure that financial regulators focused on protecting the financial system from harm. However, ever since it was created, Republicans have focused on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's funding because, more than any other agency, it has helped level the playing field between Wall Street on one side and families, communities of color, older Americans, servicemembers, and students on the other. Under the guise of the appropriations process, Republicans are seeking to do by amendment what they were unable to do for the 8 years they were in power, eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau entirely. To that end, Mulvaney's first request for funds to be transferred from the Federal Reserve to fund the CFPB's operations was zero. He later asked Congress to turn the CFPB, which he previously called a ``sick, sad'' joke of an agency, into an appropriated one. In addition, Republicans often point to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is subject to annual appropriations, as an example we should follow. What they seem to forget is that during Trump's 35-day shutdown, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau remained open while the SEC was effectively shuttered. Advocacy groups like Americans for Financial Reform also point out that ``big banks would be able to use the politically charged appropriations process to deny funding for rule-writing or enforcement actions that Wall Street particularly dislikes. They could simply starve the agency of the basic funds it needs to do its job or threaten to do so in order to intimidate the agency out of taking actions to curb abuses by powerful companies.'' The difference with Mulvaney and the Trump administration is that they have purposely sought to ignore or disregard the law and the independence Congress tried to create. Mulvaney, who reports directly to Trump, clearly ignored the law when he directed the agency to stop supervising banks for violations of the Military Lending Act. Nevertheless, I am not surprised that Republicans' efforts to reform the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau involve trying to starve the agency of funding. Madam Chair, Democrats want to ensure the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau can do and is doing its jobs and puts consumers first. This amendment does exactly the opposite, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Chair, I would like to reiterate my strong opposition to this amendment. Today, the House is trying to return the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to its mission of putting consumers first. This amendment, instead, is meant to slow down and ultimately starve the agency by using the appropriations process. Madam Chair, my friends on the opposite side of the aisle have tried everything they could try to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I think it is odd that they would spend their time opposing what is good for consumers and, yet, embracing the very institutions that caused us to have a recession in 2008 and to harm the American people. Madam Chair, I ask that everyone oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS

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

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment requires the Department of Health and Human Services to submit to Congress a report on the extent to which increases on prescription drug prices may have caused Medicare beneficiaries to forego recommended treatment, including failing to fill their prescriptions. Drug prices have increased significantly over the past year. The Center for American Progress reported that nearly 30 drug companies announced last year that price increases will take effect in January. Pfizer alone announced that it would raise the prices of 41 different drugs. Critical medications, including insulin and opioid addiction treatments, have already seen dramatic price increases this year. These price increases are taking a toll on patients. The Kaiser Family Foundation reported that among those currently taking prescription drugs, 24 percent of adults and 23 percent of seniors say it is difficult to afford their prescription drugs. This includes about one in ten respondents who say it is very difficult. The Kaiser Family Foundation also found that certain groups are much more likely to report difficulty affording medication, including those who are spending $100 or more a month on their prescriptions, that is 58 percent; those who report being in fair or poor health, about 49 percent; those who take four or more prescription drugs, 35 percent; and those with incomes less than $40,000 per year, representing 35 percent. Furthermore, 29 percent of all adults report not taking their medicines as prescribed at some point in the past year because of the cost, and 8 percent say their condition got worse as a result of not taking their prescriptions as recommended. Needless to say, when Medicare beneficiaries cannot afford their medications, their health will suffer. My amendment requires HHS to study the impact of increases in prescription drug prices on Medicare beneficiaries and their health. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, we have had extensive discussions throughout this Congress about the plight of those who cannot afford prescription drugs. We know what the statistics are. We know the harm that is being caused to families, and we know that there are preventable deaths if, in fact, people could afford their prescription drugs. And so I would expect all of the Members of the House of Representatives, knowing this information, understanding all of the research that has been done, the data that has been collected, to simply support this amendment in order to save lives. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support and celebration of the 54th anniversary of the Head Start program and the 25th anniversary of the Early Head Start program. As a former Head Start teacher, I know how vital the program is to over 100,000 low-income children in California and the more than 1 million families across the country who rely on its essential services. I began my journey at Head Start as an assistant teacher and later became the supervisor of parent involvement and volunteer services, helping parents participate and contribute to their children's educational experiences. Head Start services include health screenings, nutritional education, and social support for families with children in the program. Early Head Start provides services like home visits to children at birth. Head Start even funds research and functions as a laboratory for early learning innovation. From the moment I became involved with Head Start, I saw the potential it had to empower and uplift children and their families. Since then, I have worked hard to improve and expand Head Start so that this potential is realized and more families have an opportunity for a better life. My role as supervisor of parent involvement and volunteer services provided me with insights into the unique and pivotal role parents play in the Head Start community. I am so appreciative of the Head Start and Early Head Start programs in my home district in California. These programs basically provide resources and referral services, and research innovative new programs in the areas of childcare, development, and family well-being. These programs serve tens of thousands of low-income children and their families, usually in communities like South Los Angeles, Gardena, Hawthorne, Inglewood, and Lawndale, and demonstrate Head Start's transformative potential. I will continue to strengthen Congress' relationship with Head Start and parents and encourage more Members and families to become involved. Since President Johnson first announced Head Start in the spring of 1965, the program and its services have reached over 32 million children. Study after study shows that providing early childhood education to children is transformative to their future academic success. Children who joined Head Start graduated high school and attended college at higher rates than their siblings who did not participate in the program. Head Start participants consistently show substantial improvements on test scores early in life. Adults who participated in Head Start in their youth are less likely to be charged with a crime or become a teenage parent. These programs are so much more than federally funded preschool programs for the youngest Americans. They are a lifeline for vulnerable communities and provide future generations a chance to succeed. This critical program is our national pledge that every child, regardless of circumstances at birth, has an opportunity to achieve and excel in school and in life. There is perhaps no greater purpose for an elected official than working toward the realization of that pledge. I will never stop. In addition to my support here in making sure that the funding continues and that it grows, I also focus on the oversight, supervision, and management of Head Start programs. In the greater Los Angeles community, many of our delegate agencies are overseen by LACOE. This is a county organization. I want LACOE to get more involved in keeping Head Start programs rather than shutting them down. I believe there must be a strong component that works with compliance and works with training to make sure that the programs meet all the requirements because our teachers, our assistant teachers, and our volunteers are doing the very best job they can do. Many of them need that kind of support. I am not so sure they are getting all of it, but I am going to pay even more attention to LACOE in the greater Los Angeles area to ensure that they are providing the kinds of services that strengthen Head Start programs and do the kind of outreach in the communities to make sure that our families know the availability of the Head Start programs. I believe that Head Start has been one of the most significant programs of the overall poverty program, and I am one of its greatest supporters.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2578) to reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program, and for other purposes.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 2578, the National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act of 2019. Since the National Flood Insurance Programs' multiyear authorization expired on September 30, 2017, ideological differences have led Congress to pass 10 short-term extensions and even allowed the program to briefly lapse twice during government shutdowns. Unfortunately, the National Flood Insurance Program is currently set to expire May 31. My bill, which I have coauthored with Ranking Member McHenry, would extend the program to September 30 because we recognize that the NFIP is critical to ensuring access to flood insurance coverage across this country. This extension will afford the ranking member and me time to complete our work on a long-term, bipartisan compromise. Mr. Speaker, the NFIP is much more than just an insurance program. The NFIP plays an important role in disaster preparedness and resiliency by providing flood maps, setting standards for floodplain management, and investing in mitigation for our homes, businesses, and infrastructure. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, everyone is at risk of flooding. That means that this is not just a coastal issue. We all have an interest in ensuring a strong National Flood Insurance Program. We need a long-term reauthorization to provide certainty to homeowners and businesses, and we also need critical reforms to the program. First and foremost, we must do more to address unaffordable premium costs for low-income households; address the program's debt, which is unfairly burdening policyholders with millions of dollars in interest; and lower costs and fees on policyholders. Secondly, we need to invest more heavily in mapping, floodplain management, and mitigation, which will save taxpayer dollars in the long run by helping to reduce the damage that occurs when floods hit. Finally, Superstorm Sandy exposed numerous issues related to claims processing, including findings of outright fraud. Going forward, we must work to ensure that we have safeguards in place and mechanisms for greater accountability and oversight to ensure that claims are handled fairly and efficiently to provide relief for policyholders. Mr. Speaker, passing H.R. 2578 is not just a stopgap measure to kick the can down the road. I have every confidence that, with this extension, Democrats and Republicans will finally break the cycle of haphazard extensions. I intend to work in a bipartisan manner with Mr. McHenry to provide a long-term reauthorization to restore stability and confidence in the market. Through a thoughtful, bipartisan process, Congress can provide real relief to families, communities, and businesses. Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand with the millions of families across the country who rely on the National Flood Insurance Program by offering H.R. 2578 here today. My bill will provide continuity for the NFIP without which these families would be left unprotected in the face of increasing flood risk. What is more, without the NFIP, the stability of the housing market would be put at risk. My coauthor, Mr. McHenry, and I offer this bill today not as a permanent solution, but as a step towards a broader plan that will reauthorize the program for the long term and make reforms to ensure continued availability, affordability, and fairness in flood insurance. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased for the coming together of Mr. McHenry and myself to present a bipartisan bill on behalf of all of our citizens. I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 2578, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 389) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to pay rewards under an asset recovery rewards program to help identify and recover stolen assets linked to foreign government corruption and the proceeds of such corruption hidden behind complex financial structures in the United States and abroad, as amended.

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

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 389, the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Rewards Act offered by Representatives Lynch and Budd, will help the United States Government identify and recover assets that corrupt foreign government officials have stolen from their countries. The act does this through a Treasury-based rewards program that incentivizes individuals to notify the U.S. Government of the location of stolen assets that are linked to foreign government corruption. These assets may be bank accounts as well as luxury items, such as mansions, jewelry, jet planes, and artwork. Law enforcement already works hard to find these stolen assets. Since 2010, the United States has fought in courts to freeze, forfeit, and ultimately recover more than $3.2 billion in assets linked to foreign corruption to be returned to the victims of these financial crimes. There are several recent examples of corrupt foreign funds making their way to the United States. The multibillion-dollar 1MDB scandal involving Goldman Sachs defrauded the people of Malaysia. To date, the FBI has identified $1.7 billion of the proceeds of that crime, which went to purchase a yacht, museum-quality paintings, and real estate. In fact, the government returned $57 million of recovered stolen funds to Malaysia following a settlement over the rights to the 2013 film, ``The Wolf of Wall Street,'' which was financed using corrupt 1MDB funds. Similarly, the United States helped to recover over $30 million from the sale of real estate, a Ferrari, and rare music memorabilia, which were purchased by Equatorial Guinea's President Obiang and his son with corrupt funds. H.R. 389 would direct the Treasury to pay whistleblowers rewards from the recovered assets for helping to uncover assets like these. Encouraging and incentivizing whistlblowers would strip the bad actors of the ill-gotten gains and help victims and their countries recover from the devastating effects of corruption. So, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Lynch and Mr. Budd for introducing this bill to help the U.S. punish kleptocrats. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 389. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), the sponsor of this legislation and a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that Mr. Lynch and Mr. Budd have presented this bipartisan bill to the House. We must not allow the United States financial system to be a haven for stolen assets that rightly belong to others. By incentivizing individuals to come forward with information about where these stolen assets are hidden, we ensure the financial security of our system and can help send back recovered assets to where they belong. 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.