tv U.S. House of Representatives Legislative Business CSPAN February 1, 2016 2:00pm-4:01pm EST
no votes until 6:30 eastern. tonight, later this week in the house a vote to override president obama's veto of the measure repealing parts of the nation's health care law. also work on a bill funding u.s. coast guard programs. live coverage of the house here on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. haplain conroy: let us pray.
merciful god through whom we see what we could be and what we can become, thank you for giving us another day. send your spirit upon the members of this people's house to encourage them in their official tasks. be with them and with all who labor here to serve this great nation and its people. assure them that whatever their responsibilities, you provide the grace to enable them to be faithful in their duties and the wisdom to be conscious of their obligations and fulfill them with integrity. remind us all of the dignity of work. teach us to use our talents and abilities in ways that are honorable and just, and are of benefit to those we serve. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal
of the last day's proceedings house her s to the approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from south carolina, mr. wilson. mr. wilson: everyone, including our guests in the gallonry, please join in. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. wilson: madam speaker, the president's actions are inconsistent with his words of the state of the union.
his praise of job growth is undermined by obamacare, which the o.m.b. has identified will destroy over two million jobs. his concerns for more gun control is a contradiction at the capitol which was properly awash with brave officers protect everyone with guns. his distortion of voter -- photo identification laws clashes with the requirement of visitor photo identification to ernt the white house. security to prevent voter fraud and security to prevent assault on our president are basic for democratcy. his professed opposition to isis terrorists is undermined by his pardoning prisoners from antanamo who will rejoin terrorists to kill american families using guns. his devotion to syrian refugees was sadly undermined by his failure to enforce a redline, resulting in children playing violence, drowning at sea. as i left the capitol from the speech, i saw inconsistency of
a fleet of stretch limousines waiting for the president as'tacked the oil and gas industry thanks to fuel developed by the oil and gas strifment the president should explaining course for limited government and expanded freedom. in conclusion, god bless our troops and the president by his actions should never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 3:15 p.m.
at 8:00 p.m., republican caucus on c-span and a democratic caucus on c-span2. yesterday, democratic presidential candidate senator bernie sanders hilled a campaign rally in waterloo, iowa and asked voters for their support in the upcoming caucus and outlined his priorities which include the economy, education, and access to health care. bernie: thank you all for coming out. let me also thank pat's staff.
-- thank pat, she's the chairman of the democratic committee and has endorsed our campaign and i appreciate that very much. [applause] i don't know how many of you know cornel west. you know him? dr. west has been running around the state with us, he gives oratory the likes of which is hard to compete with. of alked about a love train a campaign yesterday. we love you all. let me begin by saying this. >> [inaudible] >> bernie, you're my hero. bernie: all right.
let me begin by thanking the people of iowa, the caucus, in case some of you have forgotten, is tomorrow night. dent forget. and jane and i and my staff have been all over this very, very beautiful state for the last nine months and i just want to very sincerely thank the people of this beautiful state for their hospitality, for their generosity, and for their kindness. it has been a pleasure and an honor to campaign in this great state. so thank you all very much for that. [applause] as some of you know, when we began our campaign nine months ago, we had no money, we had
virtually no political organization, and we had almost no name recognition outside of vermont and maybe a few other new england states. in fact, a poll was done by the "des moines register" eight months ago which had us trailing secretary clinton by 41 points. yesterday, there was a poll by that same newspaper that had us down by three points. we have made some progress in the last nine months. [applause] and when we talk about political organization, i am extremely proud and grateful that we have some 15,000 volunteers here in iowa alone. thank you all. many of them are working very
long hours and i appreciate very much all that they are doing. and on top of that, we have put together an organization which has hundreds of thousands of volunteers in every state of this country. and let me say something that all of you know, and that is, it's not great news, but all of you know it to be true, that today in the united states if you go run for president, you need to raise an obscene amount of money. that is sad but true. we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more than a billion dollars. t the beginning of our campaign, many of the pundits said, well, you know, bernie, your hair is really nice and we think you'll make a great presidential candidate, you comb your g.q. reat and
outfit will win you millions of votes but how are you going to raise the money? how are you going to raise the money to compete effectively? and that's a legitimate question. we thought about it for about one tenth of a second and we decided we were not going to ave a super p.a.c. [applause] and the reason for that is not complicated. we do not represent the interests of wall street, corporate america, the drug companies, millionaires and billionaires, we don't represent their interests, we don't want their money. so we were going to do it, we decided to do it without a super p.a.c. now yesterday, my opponent announced she had raised some $45 million for her super p.a.c. we made the announcement, of course that we had raised $0
from our super p.a.c. [applause] so here's what we have also announced, and it is something that i think i never would have believed possible when we began this campaign. when we said we weren't going to have a super p.a.c. and needed to raise money, we just reached out to middle class working families, and we said if you want real change in this country, if you want to be part of a political revolution, we need your help. and this is what has happened in the last nine months, which honest to god is beyond my wildest imagination. in the last nine months, we have received $3.2 million individual contributions. [applause] -- we've received 3. million
individual contributions. [applause] that is more individual contributions than any candidate in the history of the united states up until this point in a campaign. [applause] and while some candidates boast about how much money they raise at super p.a.c. events, let me tell you what i'm boasting about and what i'm very proud of. our average contribution is $27. [applause] in other words, to paraphrase abraham lincoln, this is a campaign of the people, by the people, and for the people. cheers and applause]
and what makes this campaign different than other campaigns, it's not just our progressive agenda, the most progressive agenda, obviously, out there. but more significantly, i think, is what i am telling you and telling everybody in america. and that is that no president, not bernie sanders or anybody else, can do it alone. that in fact, if we are to bring about the changes that most of us want, we are to rebuild a disappearing middle class, if we are to deal with climate change and women's rights and all of the important issues that are out there, the only way that happens is when millions of people stand up, come together, and demand that our government starts working for all of us, not just for 1%. [applause]
now, when we say that, we kind of get the establishment a little bit nervous. wall street a little bit nervous. we get the political establishment a little bit nervous. we get the media establishment a little bit nervous. they are saying, what's going on in america, where ordinary americans, the working class, the middle class, are demanding to change the course of our country? who do they think they are? don't they know that it is the billionaire class and corporate america and wall street who are supposed to run this country? and what we are saying is, enough is enough. you had your day, now it is our
turn. [applause] now there are folks out there during the campaign who say a whole lot of things. i've seen ads on television that suggest that bernie sanders is trying to dismantle health care in america. dismantle health care? i've spencht my life fighting for universal health care for every man, woman, and child. there's an ad out there saying i'm attacking planned parenthood. i've got a 100% lifetime voting record for planned parenthood. i want to expand planned parenthood funding.
we're not attacking planned parenthood, we're going to make them stronger. cheers and applause] there are those who say, you know, we are protecting the gun lobby. some protection. i got a d-minus voting record from the n.r.a. we're going to do everything we can to end gun violence in the united states. [applause] then there's another argument that's going around, and that is that, you know, bernie is a nice guy but you know what? he and his supporters, well, we just can't win a national election. how are we going to beat the republicans? how are we going to make sure that some right wing republican doesn't get into the white house? so let me give you a few reasons as to why we will in fact defeat
any right wing republican that the republican party puts up. and by the way, that means all of them because they're all right wing. we can generalize that statement. bernie sanders can't win a national election, well a recent nbc poll told us that hillary clinton did very well, she was beating donald trump by 10 points, we were beating him by 15 points. another poll had her up by seven, that's good. we were ahead by 13. now, iowa, this beautiful state of iowa, is important not only because it is the first caucus state, but you are a battleground state. sometimes democrats win, too often republicans win. here in iowa, secretary clinton was defeating donald trump by
eight points, that's good. we were defeating him by 13 oints. in new hampshire, the secretary was defeating trump by one point. not bad. we were defeating him by 19 oints. in wisconsin, she was beating him by nine points. we were beating him by 18 points. now, polls are polls. polls go up, polls go down, some polls are good, some polls are not good. but here is the point. the point is, i think, frankly, across cross america, in terms of taking on the republican candidate, we have more support than secretary clinton. and it's not only these polls.
what everybody knows is republicans win elections when the american people are demoralized and do not come out to vote. republicans love low voter turnouts. that's why republican governors all over this country are trying to suppress the vote. nobody votes, that's great, because then big money will be able to carry the day. we win when large numbers of people come out to vote. we win when working people and young people and low income people and elderly people go to the polls. and i think it is fair to say that any objective assessment of secretary clinton's campaign and my campaign, and she has some really good people, so i'm not knocking them, but i think the excitement and energy is with
our campaign. and what that means -- what that means is that in november, i believe, -- i believe that our message and our energy will drive a very large voter turnout, which will mean not only that we retain the white house, we regain the senate, we win governors' chairs all over this country. [applause] now why is our campaign doing so well? why did we come from 41 points down here in iowa to a virtually -- to a virtual tie? i'll tell you why. very radical concept. we are telling the american people the truth. i know that's pretty radical idea. but what the heck. you only go around once, you may
as well tell the truth. what is the truth? nothing that i'm proud of, nothing that i'm happy to tell you. but what i believed a long, long time ago, for a listening time is you don't make progress unless you have the courage to look reality in the eye. you sweep the problems under the rug, they ain't going to get better system of what are the issues? the issue is that we are living today in a rigged economy. what does that mean? it means that the middle class continues to decline. it means that we have 47 million people living in poverty. and it means that almost all of the new income and wealth generated today is going to the top 1%. it means that you pay to bail out wall street and then wall street provides their c.e.o.'s with huge compensation packages while you cannot afford to send
your kids to college. it means that in vermont and in iowa, and all over this country, we have people who are working not one job, they're working two jobs, they're working three jobs, just trying to cobble together some income and some health care. and it means that while our people in america work the longest hours of any people in the industrialized world, while it means that mom is working and dad is working and the kids are working, while it means that marriages are struggling because of the stress of lack of money, parents are not spending enough time with their kids, and in the idst of all of that reality, 58% of all new income is going to the top 1%. what a rigged economy means is that we have more inequality in
america today than at any time since 1928. and it is worse here now than almost any major country on earth. top that means is that the /10th of 1%, not 1% but .1%, owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90%. what that means is the 20 wealthiest people in this country now own more wealth than the bottom 150 million americans, half our population. what that means is that one family in america, the walton family of wal-mart, won family owns more wealth than the bottom 40% of the american people. that, my friends is a rigged economy. and here is a radical idea. you want to hear a radical idea? [applause] this looks like a radical group
of people. looks like a group of people ready to go to the bare kids. what about creating an economy that works for working families and not just a handful of wealthy campaign contributors? and when we talk about why it is that so many people are struggling in this country, it has everything to do with the fact that wages in america are just too low. you can do the arithmetic as well as i can. multiply $8 an hour by 40 hours a week by 52 weeks a year and you end up with a sum of money that no person in america can ive on with dignity. that is why at a time when the
minimum wage in this country is $7.25, the federal minimum wage, we have got to recognize that as a starvation wage. we have got to raise the minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour over the next several years. [applause] this is not a radical idea to suggest that if somebody works 40 hours a week that person should not be living in poverty. that's not a radical idea. that is an american idea. and by the way, when we talk about fair wages, i would hope that every man in this room will stand with the women to end the disgrace of women making 79 cents on the dollar compared to men.
together, we are going to provide pay equity for women workers, because the only reason that women are paid so low is because of old fashioned sexism and together we are going to change that. [applause] once a month there's an official report coming out of the federal government, actually a number of reports, dealing with unemployment. the issue that you see tissue the report you see on the front pages of your paper say that unemployment in america is 5%. anybody believe that?
you're right. you're right. real unemployment, including those people who have given up looking for work or are working part time is close to 10%. furthermore, and here is something that we do not talk enough about as a nation, and we have got to put this issue right up there on the agenda, youth unemployment in america, real youth unemployment, for white kids between 17 and 20, high school graduates, 33%. latino kids, 36%. frican-american kids, 51%. that is intolerable. hat is unacceptable. and if anybody here think there is is not a direct correlation
between that outrageously high level of youth unemployment and another tragedy in america, that is, we in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, we have more people in jail than any other country on earth. we have 2.2 million people in jail, we are spending $80 billion a year locking people up. now you want another radical idea this morning? i know this has been tough, but you ready for the second radical idea? all right, here it is. here it is. how about investing in jobs and education for our kids, rather han jails and incarceration. reality is, it costs more to
lock up a kid than send them to the university of iowa, i'd rather send them to the niversity of iowa. or iowa state or any of your other great universities. i don't want to get myself in trouble here. and if he wants he, can even go to the university of vermont. that's ok too. i now want to touch on another issue. i know i will shock all of you to suggest that in politics today, there is occasionally a bit of hypocrisy. please, please, recover. take a deep breath. it's ok. but it's true. now, in this state right now, you've got a whole lot of republican candidates for president. you can't get a cup of coffee without running into one of them. and if you listen to them
closely, they talk about republican family values. you ever hear them talk about family values? i want everybody here to know exactly what they mean by family values. what they mean is that no woman in this room, in this state, in this country, should have the right to control her own body. i disagree. [applause] they believe we should defund planned parenthood, i believe we should expand funding for planned parenthood. [applause] they believe our gay brothers and sisters who have struggled so many years for dignity, they
believe that gay people should not be able to get married, i disagree. [applause] now here is the ultimate in hypocrisy. my republican colleagues run all over iowa and all over the country telling the people how much they hate government. they're going to cut social security. they're going to cut medicare, medicaid. do away with the e.p.a. they hate the government. they want to get the government that terrible government, out of your life. except. when it comes to a very personal choice that women have to make. and in that case, they love the government and want the government to make that decision for every woman in america. that is hypocrisy.
[applause] jane and i have been married for 27 years. we have four kids and seven beautiful grandchildren. we believe in family and family values. but our values are a little bit different than the republicans'. when i talk about family values, i talk about ending the international embarrassment in which this country, our great country, is the only major nation on earth that does not guarantee paid family and medical leave. [applause] the only -- not only are we the only major country, we're one of the very, very few country, even poor countries do it. what that means is that today
here in iowa, in vermont, all over this country, people are giving birth. if that woman is low income or working class, there is a real likelihood that she will be forced to separate herself from a beautiful new baby because she has to go back to work and earn enough money to take care of her family. that should not be happening in america and that is why i am strongly supporting legislation that will provide three months of paid family and medical leave. [applause] when we talk about our economy, when we talk about real unemployment being close to 10%, youth unemployment off the chart, me it is a no-brainer to say that the federal government must create a massive federal
jobs program to put our people back to work. we should be hiring teachers, not firing teachers. [applause] wesheds be creating the best child care system in the world. we should be hiring well paid, well trained people to take care of the youngest americans. [applause] by the way, when our infrastwuckture, our roads and ridges and our water systems and our wastewater plants and our rail system needs an enormous amount of work, $1 trillion investment will create 13 million jobs, let's do it. [applause]
and we're going to pay for that trillion dollar investment by ending an outrageous loophole that allows billion-dollar corporations to put their money in the cayman islands, bermuda, and other tax havens and in a given year pay zero in federal income taxes. we're going to end that. [applause] now when i talk about a rigged economy, and i talk about a corrupt campaign finance system, and when i talk about a broken criminal justice system, there is one story that i can tell you which encompasses all of those elements of what is happening in america today. some of you may have noticed that a couple of weeks ago,
goldman sachs, one of the large financial institutions on wall street, agreed to a $5 billion settlement with the united states government. $5 billion. and they were one of many banks over the the reason they reached the settlement is they were engaged in illegal activity. they were defrauding investors by selling worthless packages of subprime mortgage loans. they were cheating the american people they reached a settlement with the american government for $5 billion. that's point number one. point number two, when you talk about political pow for the america, you're talking about wall stwreet, they spend billions of dollars to get deregulated. you're talking about goldman sachs the same company that over the last 25 years has managed to get two secretaries of the treasury, revolving door, you know what a revolving door is? you go ofrom wall street to government back to wall street.
they had two secretaries of the treasury, one under a democratic administration, one under a republican administration and dozens and dozens of other high level political appointees. point number two. point nurem three, the same goldman sachs along with other wall street firms makes huge campaign contributions in order to protect themselves, provides very generous speaker fees. point number four may be the most important and interesting point of all. when we talk about why the american people are angry and why they are demoralized and why they see a system in which the rich get richer and almost everybody else gets poorer and why they see a system of justice which is basically unfair, today if some kid in iowa gets picked up with marijuana that kid will have a police record for the rest of his life. gold man -- goldman sachs just reached a $5 billion settlement
for cheating and ripping off the american people. gold man sachs is part of a group of -- goldman sachs is part of a group of wall street companies that helped the stroy the american economy, bring us the worst recession since the great depression, millions of people lost their jobs, their homes, and their life savings. goldman sachs paid a $5 billion settlement but no executive on wall street has yet been prosecuted, has yet been charged with a crime, yet has a police ecord. that is why the american people are angry. what justin means is justice apply equally to all. if you're rich and you break the law, you pay a price. if you're poor and you break the law, you pay a price. not only do we have a two-tier
economy, not only do we have a two-tier campaign finance system, we have a two-tier criminal justice system. if elected president, we're going to bring back justice to our justice system. cheers and applause] and what we're also going to do is overturn this disastrous citizens united supreme court decision. [applause] i may be an old fashioned guy but i believe that democracy is one person, one vote, not billionaires buying elections. and when you have a handful of
billionaires, people like the koch brothers and a few of their billionaire friends, in this campaign spending some $900 million to elect candidates who will represent the interests of the rich and the powerful, when you have those handful of people spending more money on a campaign than either the democratic or the republican parties, my friends, that is not democracy. that is oligarchy and we are going to change that. [applause] if our country is to succeed economically and in other ways, we need the best educated population on earth. [applause] it makes no sense to me that
hundreds of thousands of bright young people who are qualified today cannot get a college education, and others who are not academically inclined cannot get the training they need to be plumbers or carpenters or electricians. and that is why i believe that in the year 2016, when we talk about public education, it can no longer be just first grade through 12th grade. it must include college and post-secondary education. that is why i believe that public colleges and universities should be cue tueigs free. [applause] second point with regard to higher education.
thank you. young laity jumping up and down. i'm just getting to that one right now. how many people in this room are dealing with student debt? whoa! whoa. that's a lot of people. you know, as i go around this state, there's no meet, none, that i go to where people are not raising their hands big time in response to that question. just the other day, a couple of days ago in iowa, young man, 20 years of age, he said, i went to college for two years, dropped ut, $60,000 in debt. talked to another young man, 29 years of age, married, two kids, works in sustainable nrbling. $90,000 in debt. he's paying over 50% of his limited income in student debt. talked to a guy in nevada last month, 55 years of age, he's been paying off his student debt for 25 years.
he is more in debt today than he was when he began. >> [inaudible] bernie: very good. hang on to that one for a minute. i talked to a woman in new hampshire. here's what she said. she said, yeah, i'm not only paying my daughter's student debt, i am paying, continue to pay my own student debt. paying herself and for her daughter. we want the best educated work force in the world. we should not punish people for trying to get the education they need. that is pretty crazy. and that is why i believe we need to be able to tell people with student debt they can refinance their loans at the lowest interest rates they can find. now right now, we have people with student debt paying 6%, 8%,
10% interest rates. you can refinance your home at 3% or 4%. that does not make sense to me. if we allow people to refinance at the lowest interest rates they can find, we will be able to cut student debt in this country very, very significantly. and that's what we should do. [applause] now people say, you know, that sounds, bernie, you're like santa claus you keep giving away free stuff. very nice. but how are you going to pay for it? this is what differentiates our campaign from other campaigns. if everybody in america understands that all of our people regardless of income should get the best education and the most education they need, no one argues with that. no one, i think, argues that people should not be paying off student debt for 10, 20, 30 years, that's pretty crazy. how are we going to deal with that? how are we going to pay for
that? it's an expensive proposition, lower student debt, free colleges. here's how we do it. we'll impose a tax on wall street speculation. [applause] when wall street crashed they went to the murderle class for a bailout. now it is wall street's time to help the middle class of this country. [applause] as adults, as parents and grandparents in my view, we have a moral responsibility to leave this planet to our children and grandchildren in a way that is habitable. i sit on both the senate environmental committee and energy committee and i have talked to scientists all over the world. 24e debate is over. climate change is real. it is caused by human activity. it is already causing
devastating problems in america and throughout the world. in my view, what the next president of the united states should be doing is working with russia, with china, with india, with countries all over the world to take on the fossil fuel industry, transform our energy system away from fossil fuel to energy efficiency and sustainable energy. [applause] this is not some abstract academic debate. we're talking about the future f this planet. and it grieves me. think about this for a moment. off republican party without a presidential candidate who is prepared to come before you and change is real and
it's a serious problem and we've got to do something about it. why is that? why is it that not one republican candidate is prepared to say that? i'll tell you the answer. the answer gets back to the issue of campaign finance. if a republican candidate said what i just said to you on that -- said to you, on that day, the thebrothers, exxonmobil and coal industry would cut funding to those candidates. i say to my republican colleague, worry about your kids and grandchildren and future generations. worry about them and not your campaign contributions. do the right thing. [applause] and by the way, by the way, let me thank and applaud the people of iowa for being leaders in this country in the movement toward sustainable energy. your work in terms of wind and biofuels is extraordinary.
thank you for the model you're setting for america. [applause] what this campaign is about is thinking big. it is understanding that we are the wealthiest country in the history of the world. if we were a poor country, we would have a different conversation. we're the richest country in the history of the world. most people don't know that because they're working two or three jobs and all the income and wealth is going to the top 1%. we have the wealthiest country in the history of the world. i am a member of the health, education and labor committee that helped pass the affordable care act. i believe the affordable care act has done a lot of good thingers in people in our country. it's ended the obscenity called pre-existing conditions. [applause] it has added some 17 million people into the ranks of the
insured. it has done away with discrimination against women in terms of how much they have to pay for health insurance and other things. it's done some good things. but -- and here is a big but -- today -- i didn't mean it that way. et me rephrase that. and that is that there is one country, one major country, wealthy country on earth that does not guarantee health care to all people as a right. so the affordable care act has made progress. we should all be proud of that. i am. but today, 29 million americans still have zero health insurance. and many of you are underinsured with high deductibles and high co-payments. anyone here with a high deductible? all right. lot of people. all right. what that means, if you've got a
$5,000 deductible, $10,000, you if you don't have much money you hesitate going to the doctor. and if you don't go to the doctor when you're sick, you know what happens? you get sicker. and let me tell you something which is no laughing matter. i have talked to doctors in my state and all over this country. and what they say is that people walk into their offices much, much sicker than they should be. and the doctor says why didn't you come in here six months ago when you first felt your symptom ps? and people say, well, i didn't have insurance or i can't afford the deductible. some of those people die. in fact thousands of americans die every year because they don't go to the doctor when they should. others become much sicker than they should and end up in the emergency room or the hospital with great suffering and great cost to the system. now i have been criticized for saying this, so be it, let me say it again. i believe that health care in
america should be a right, not a privilege. [applause] and i do not understand, i just do not understand how it could be that great britain, france, germany, holland, scandinavia, canada, every major country on earth guarantees health care to all of their people. guess what else. not only do they guarantee health care to all of their people they spend significantly less per person on health care. we spend almost three times per person on health care compared to the british. we spend 50% more than the french. we spend way more than the canadians who provide health care to all people as a right. and by the way, we also pay, by far, the highest cost of
prescription drugs in the world. all right? at a time when one out of five americans cannot afford to fill the prescription drug, the prescription their doctors write, the three major drug companies in this country last year made $45 billion in profit. in other words, they are ripping off the american people, they could double the price of your medicine tomorrow, there's no legislation against it. trust me, if i am elected president of the united states, there will be legislation dealing with that issue. [applause] here's another radical idea. today in iowa, and i've met some of these people, in vermont and all over the country we've got seniors and disabled veterans
trying to get by on $11,000 or $12,000 or $13,000 a year. you know what? when you are old and when you are hurting and when you have health problems you cannot get by on $12,000 or $13,000 a year. you can't do it. what that means is when it gets cold you don't turn up the thermostat. what it means is you divide your medicine, your prescription pills in half because you can't afford to buy the medicine you need. it means that you may not buy the food you need to stay healthy. that's the reality for millions of people in this country today. i believe that not only should we vigorously oppose, and i've led the opposition in the senate to republican efforts to cut social security, we should be expanding social security enefits.
2008, barack obama said, and i agreed with him, that we should lift the cap on taxable income. you know what that is? right now, somebody makes $5 million a year, somebody makes $118,000, they are both contributing the same amount into the social security trust fund because there is a cap at about $118,000. lift that cap, start a $250,000. the top 1.5% of american taxpayers, we can extend social security for 50 years and increase benefits for people living on less than $16,000 a year by $13rks00. that's what i intend to do -- by $1,300 a year. that's what i intend to do. [applause] let me just say this. this campaign is a unique
campaign. not just as i mentioned earlier that we have the most progressive agenda. it is a unique campaign because it understands that the only way we make real change in this country is when we come together and demand it. there are folks out there donald trumps and others, who want to divide us up. divide us as to whether we are latino, whether we were born in this country nor at -- or not, but i believe our job is not to divide the american people but to bring the american people ogether. if we do that, black, white, asian american, fway, straight,
people born in this country, people born outside this country, when we stand together and have the courage to think big and have the courage to take on some powerful special interests who today have it all, their greed is destroying our economy, when we stand together and we say to those people, you know, you can't have it all, that's not what america is about, when we do that, there is nothing, nothing, nothing, that e cannot accomplish. that is what this campaign is about. on monday night, there will be, as all of you know, the caucuses. not only will the entire country be looking at iowa, much of the world will be looking at iowa. what they will be looking at is not just to see who wins the caucus, does hillary clinton win it? does bernie sanders win it? what they will really be looking at is to see whether or not iowa
is prepared to move this country away from establishment politics and establishment economics and move us in a very, very different direction. monday night could be an historic night for this country. we can make history. i urge you all to come out to caucus and today i ask for your support. thank you all very much. [applause] [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016]
>> the first question i have, and thank you for taking the time, are you for or against the two-state solution in the palestine-israel -- bernie: for it. >> you don't mention our military my son has been on four deployments he went into the military because he's one of those kids who couldn't incur debt. bernie: i know that. i know that. >> it's ok. bernie spmplet i'm aware that it's difficult. thank you. >> thank you. i appreciate it. >> can i get a picture?
>> and senator sanders is on his way out of waterloo. he's got another rally in des moines. so that's a little over 100 miles from where we are standing now in waterloo. but wear going to take your phone calls and we're going to talk to some of the folks who attended this alley. about 650 folks were here this afternoon in waterloo. we're going to begin by talking with joe kline. oe kline is a longtime political observer, "times" correspondent and columnist. what are you feeling in iowa this year? >> first off, it's the 11th one
of these. on the democratic side i've seen this race before. i've seen a race between a mainstream candidate and a left candidate and it could go either way. on the republican side we've never seen anything like this ever. and there i think it's also going to be close. it depends on a turnout which is actually a cliche but the truth. >> we had a caller yesterday who said i'm looking at bernie sanders and donald trump. what's a connection there? joe: well, the connection there is populism. the connection there is average folks who are upset about, you know, the way things are going in the country. bernie's side is more a class issue. on trump's side it's more like the european right-wing populist. it's very much an ethnic issue. it's very much elderly white people who are looking at a
society that's becoming multiracial and multifaceted and are a little bit afraid by it. host: so this is your 11th time doing the caucuses. are you feeling more energy, less energy, is it the same, is it always like this? joe: i'm feeling more energy on the part of the media mostly because of donald trump. i don't know if that's been entirely responsible but you know, iowans are iowans, and i was impressed. the first one i did was for "rolling stone" magazine in 1974, and i went to a caucus where uncommitted beat jimmy carter and the leader of the uncommitted people said this year we're going all the way. the thing about iowans is they really take it seriously. they really study the issues. they really care about it, and, you know, you can talk about the structure of these things and whether a place like iowa should go first. it's a good thing in one way they go first because they're
interested and they care. host: does the iowa-new hampshire model still work in 2016? joe: i think we should probably rotate small states at the beginning so that you get some states where there are african-americans and latinos and others sorts of people. i think, you know, that that could be done but not very easily because these things are so entrenched but that's part of what this election is about. everything in our society in an older, maturing democracy has become very entrenched. and i think it's beginning to frustrate people across the board. klein, "time" magazine and anonymous author of "primary colors." thanks. joe: thanks. host: let's hear from you and we'll talk to folks here as well. we'll begin with a phone call from hussein in deer born heights, michigan.
hussein, you're on c-span. what did you think about the rally? caller: it's typical in bernie sanders. there was a lot of young people. as a democratic i'm a supporter of hillary clinton and i just wanted to say one thing that joe was talking about. i don't know if the iowa caucus and the state of iowa is representative of america. the caucus voters make up 90% of them are white. only about 16% of actual registered voters will vote in the caucus. and once again, a majority of them are white. it's kind of a shame that has so much momentum and so much pressure on these candidates to win iowa when in actuality they don't represent all of america. however, i get the state of politics. another thing i wanted to touch on, i feel like the media is partially responsible for letting trump side. when trump talks about registering muslims, when trump talks about banning 1.6 billion muslims from entering the country, that's something you don't laugh at. that's something you need to question and grow on that.
that's all. host: that was hussein in deer born heights, michigan. and up next is jonathan in benton, tennessee. hi, jonathan. caller: hi. how you doing? hello? hello? host: we are listening. please go ahead. caller: ok. yeah, i'm not really calling about the rally we just watched. i'm more calling because i'm worried about voters being misinformed of hillary clinton and donald trump both and ted cruz, especially. i would like voters to remember that ted cruz and the tea party are responsible for shutting down the government not once but twice in the last four years. and that it cost the country billions of dollars. lots of people were laid off and couldn't feed their family for months.
and i think people should, especially the democratic people voting for democrat, should vote for bernie sanders because he's the only candidate that will take on the pharmaceutical companies and the superrich. hillary clinton is not willing to do that. she's more focused on her foreign policy which she has a good foreign policy but her foreign policy alone shouldn't elect her -- get her elected president. host: thank you, sir, for calling in today and watching the rally. well, we want to be joined now by somebody who is at the rally. what's your name, where you from, sir? michael: michael right here from waterloo. host: what is your role in the sanders campaign, if any? michael: well, we're involved with the sanders campaign. it's just volumes. we've howed volunteers from the bernie campaign since october off and on weekends when they come from out of state and are
here to help knock on doors and promote his message. host: why senator sanders for you? michael: well, senator sanders seems to be the most viable candidate, the candidate of equality, very consistent since he started out with the civil rights stuff back when he was 20 years old all the way through his time as mayor and as a congressman and now as a senator. and as an independent senator, he's done a great job of working across the aisle, which we have all seen has not been the case for the last many years. and so i think he's got a good shot and the right ideas and he has an idea of a good way to get funding to support those ideas. so he's the candidate for revolution. host: mike, have you been involved in the caucuses before? michael: yes. yes, we've caucused back in 2008 and -- host: for whom? michael: back at that time it was with the democratic party.
host: and for which candidate? michael: ended up at the end obama. host: if hillary wins, hillary clinton wins iowa, what does that say? michael: i'm not exactly sure what it says. we, of course, don't expect that to happen. bernie's going to go all the way. but anybody on the democratic side of the aisle is far better than the republican candidates, in my estimation, who's moved so far right they've fell off the cliff. host: what kind of work do you do in waterloo? michael: retired engineer. host: thank you for your bet. and john deere, by the way, has large factory in waterloo, population about 60,000 people. it's right on the cedar river and on our republican line is stanley in piedmont, south carolina. hi, stanley. please, go ahead. caller: thank you. i've been watching c-span and i love it and i have a question. i'm voting for marco rubio in
the primary. why do we have the electoral college and not just a popular vote? and will that ever be changed? and when do you think we'll know who the presumptive -- >> and leaving this here as the house has gaveled in to debate sex trafficking bills and coast guard programs. now live to the floor of the house. the speaker pro tempore: mr. speaker. the secretary: i'm instructed by the president to deliver to the house a message in writing. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the
ill h.r. 2187 as amended, to direct the securities and exchange commission to revise regulations regarding the qualifications of persons as accredited investors. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 309, h.r. 2187, a bill to direct the securities and exchange commission to revise its regulations regarding the accreditation of a person as a qualified informsor. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognized the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five lennell slative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, ordered. mr. gare relate: i yield myself three minutes.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. garrett: i rise in support of h.r. 2187, the fair investment opportunities for experts act. i'd like to thank mr. schweikert of arizona for his diligent work on this bill and for member ops both sides of the bill who approved the bill in the financial services committee by an overwhelming vote of 54-2. small and emerging companies pay a -- play a significant role as drivers of u.s. economic activity, innovation and creation. the majority of new jobs in the u.s. are from companies less than five years old. most of these companies are privately held companies and their ability to raise capital in the private market is critical to the economic well being of the u.s. and millions of american families. but you see in order for american companies to raise capital, they must sell securities only to what are known as accredited investors. who exactly term what is an
accredited investor is? well, the s.e.c. has for years determined that an individual investor's investment status should be the sole proxy for whether or not they're able to understand risk and rewards. the s.e.c. has take then position that only wealthy individuals should be allowed to invest in those offerings. that makes very little sense. under their logic a random winner of the power ballotry would be deemed an accredited investor. but someone who has a degree and s a knowledgeable investor but whose wealth is below the threshold would not be. there are plenty of hardworking and smart americans who are capable of understanding investments and private business. congress must therefore amend the definition of accredited investors to expand the pool of
potential investors in the private placement market. in h.r. 2187 -- and h.r. 2187 will do just that, by codifying the current accredited investor income and threshold incomes and adjust those for inflation going forward. it will extend accredited investor status to persons the s.e.c. determines have a demntrabble education or job experience to qualify as having professional subject matter knowledge related to that investment. in other words, it will enhance small companies, their ability to raise capital and grow by increasing the power of potential investors while at the same time increasing investment tuns for more americans. allowing more individuals to invest in public and private companies could ultimately have the effect of decreasing the risk in these portfolios themselves. finally as s.e.c. commissioner pointed out last week in a
speech -- -- last year in a speech, by holding -- the roisk the portfolio as a bhole is lower than the risk of individual asset necessary correlation are low enough the overall portfolio risk could decrease, end quote. a means h.r. 2187 has double benefit, affording american businesses more opportunities to raise capital, while actually providing hardworking americans a greater opportunity to create wealth for themselves and their families. so i ask my colleagues on both sifeds the aisle to join me in supporting h.r. 2187. i thank the speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from delaware is ecognized. mr. carney: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. carney: thank you, mr. speaker. let me first thank the gentleman from arizona, mr. schweikert,
and the gentlelady from the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time, ms. sinema for their hard work on this bill. as was buoyanted out by chairman garrett, all members of the committee were in support of the bill except for two. this expands the definition of an accredited investor a status reserved for investors who possess the sophistication and financial means to invest in private, unregistered security offerings. many of these thresholds have not been updated since 1982 and the committee determined it was pastime to do system of it's important to note that the s.e.c. investor advisory committee as well issued bipartisan recommendation which is acknowledge that the current income and net worth tests, and i quote, don't begin to measure the type or level of financial sophistication needed to evaluate the potential risks and benefits of private offerings, close quote. e can all agree and the vast
majority of the financial services committee did agree, that an updated definition is long overdue and the authors of this legislation, the sponsors, mr. schweikert and ms. sinema, have worked to consider the risks of private offerings to ensure that investors in those offerings can understand and bear those risks. with those comments, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garewret: thank you, and i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from arizona, the sponsor of the underlying legislation, and the gentleman who has put all the time and hard work on this great bipartisan piece of legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. schweikert: thank you, mr. chairman, mr. speaker, and my friend mr. karney, thank you. this is one of those occasions where we get to show up here and have something that's bipartisan that we agree upon. but partially because being my piece of legislation, something
we've been working on for a while, i'd like to tell a quick story of where this came from conceptually. about four years ago, we were doing a little town hall, at that time, before redistricting, in tempe, arizona, and most of the discussion in this town hall was a discussion about haves, have nots, why do some people seem to be making wealth, and others are not? we tried to actually address it intellectually with analysis of what are the barriers out there? you're a middle income, hardworking families, you have some talent, what are your -- what's your optionality to be table grow into that next tier of assets, of wealth? and this actually became part of that discussion. that we actually have had this barrier now for decades that say we're going to judge you on your
income and wealth and that income and wealth is your threshold that says you get to invest in something over here. not your knowledge. and there was a gentleman in the audience who stood up and said, got a story for you. i have a ph.d. in electrical engineering, i work at the intel plant in chandler, i have some friends that started a business a year or two ago, i'm an expert, i have a ph.d. in electrical engineering and i work with these guys for year, they started a business and i'm not allowed to invest in it because i don't meet the income and assets threshold system of that's partially what we've accomplished here. and you know, we've gone back and forth with discussion with my democrat friends and many of my friends on our side, working the bill, it's not everything i wanted but conceptually, it's a terrific idea, that income, your wealth, is in the the only prerequisite for your right to
invest in something. that also can be your knowledge and your talent. and if we really care about everyone getting a fair chance at that american dream, we need to do more like this. where you get judged by what you know. your expertise. and not just the fact that you already have made it. and mr. chairman, excuse me, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield back to my chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona yields back, the gentleman from delaware is recognized. mr. carney: i have no further requests for time and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: how much time have we got? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey has 14 1/2 minutes. mr. garrett: thank you. i yield such time of that 14 minutes to the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is
recognized for such time as he macon um um -- may consume. >> thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. karney, my colleague on the distinguished minority for this bill. i also want to thank mr. schweikert for his work on developing h r. 21 7, fair investment opportunities for professional experts act which makes reg-d offerings more effective by broadening the definition of an accredited investor to account for educational or professional expertise. because of the significant costs and barriers to raising costs in our u.s. public markets, many of our small couldn't e-- small companies raise startup or expansion funds in the private market. mr. hill: many of those private market transactions are through accredited investors. the current definition focuses only on financial status of the investor and as a result only wealthy individuals, typically, can participate in regular-d offerings.
2187 expands the definition, recognizing ability to participate is not based on an asset test but on their sophistication and knowledge. i've been in this business before i was in congress on and off for three decades. and i know that many of our nation's accountants, stockbrokers, venture capitalists, engineers have money management experience, a series-7 fnra license, they work in money management they work in specific kinds of industries, but they are not able to invest in private placements due to the fact that they don't meet this income or asset test. mr. schweikert's bill revises these rules so investment and finance professionals who have this level of professional sophistication are treated as accredited investors irrespective of whether they meet an arbitrary test. it's a matter of basic fairness, the government should not limit
investing options to only investors they deem worthy. expanding the accredited investor definition will not only increase investment opportunities for more americans but will help us grow thousands of small and emerging markets who work every year and struggle to raise capital. i thank the gentleman from arizona for all his work on this common sense legislation. i enjoyed working with him on it. i'm proud to support this bill and urge my colleagues to do so. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas yields back. the gentleman from new jersey -- the gentleman from delaware has yielded back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: look, i do not see any speakers that the time. i yield myself 10 seconds to again thank mr. karney and say thank you to the gentleman from arizona for his work on this and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time having been yielded back, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the
bill h.r. 2187 as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the les are suspended -- mr. garrett: may i -- >> mr. schweikert: may i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. mur sunt to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. i now move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3784 as amended, to amend the securities and exchange act to have 1934 to establish an office of advocate for small business capital formation and a small business capital formation advisory
committee and for such other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h r. 3784rk a bill to amend the securities and exchange act of 1934 to establish an office of the advocate for capital formation and a small business capital formation advisory committee and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett and the gentleman from delaware, mr. karney, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material with regard to this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. garrett: i at this time i would like to yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. right now i rise in support of h.r. 3784, the s.e.c.'s small business advocate act.
i'd like to thank mr. karney and mr. duffy on the financial services committee and also mr. crenshaw and mr. quigley of the appropriations committee for working together in a bipartisan manner on this bill and doing so has resulted in the financial services committee favorably reporting this bill out of committee, h.r. 3784, by a unanimous vote. you see the s.e.c. has a three-part mission, to protect investor, min tain fair and orderly and efficient markets and also to facilitate capital formation. but the s.e.c. has given short shoplift to this capital -- short is rift to this capital formation part to the detriment of entrepreneurs and startup ventures. so although small companies are at the proverbial forefront of technological innovation and also job creation, they often face significant obstacles in obtaining the necessary capital
and funding. . these obstacles, if you will, are attributed to the proportionally large burden that they are placed on them. they are written by large companies and are placed on small companies who seek to go public. to fulfill its mandated mission, the s.e.c. is basically hurting, hurting the small companies, it's impeding economic growth and basically hindering job creation, job creation that is so desperately needed in this country. and so when the s.e.c. has failed to advance its mission in facilitating capital formation, congress must step in. most notably through the enactment of the jobs act back in 2012. you see, while the jobs act was made easier for these companies to go public, the jobs act alone was not enough. it was not enough to entirely overcome all of the obstacles that companies face in trying to go public and so now we have
h.r. 3784 here on your desk. what it does is craut the s.e.c. small business capital formation advocate and he will provide an independent voice for small business capital formation on par with the s.e.c.'s investor advocate. this new advocate will support the interest of small businesses and provide guidance to the s.e.c. on advancing a post-jobs act. capital formation agenda. something that unfortunately, if you looked at the track record, the s.e.c. has unfortunately failed to do for years. so the small business advocate will support the interest, not only of entrepreneurs and job creators, but they'll do so also on behalf of investors. so finally, it is clear that fundamental change is needed within the s.e.c. in order to get this agency to focus then on capital formation mandate. and so what h.r. 3784 will do is provide a permanent voice for small businesses at the s.e.c. and will help them ensure the s.e.c. does not
neglect any more this important mandate going in the future. and so i end by saying, i ask my colleagues to, again, in a bipartisan manner, just as it was in committee, to support h.r. 3784. and i thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from delaware seek recognition? mr. carney: mr. speaker, i seek recognition to i yield myself such time as i may consume. on this piece of legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. carney: thank you. i want to begin any thanking foes who have introduced and improved this legislation. i especially want to thank my colleague and friend, congressman from wisconsin, mr. duffy, mr. quigley, who will speak in a minute, mr. crenshaw and all our other co-sponsors, as well as the s.e.c. for their work on this bill. due to their help and the bipartisan work in our committee, this legislation received a unanimous vote in the committee, as mr. garrett voted out.
small businesses are the corner -- pointed out. small businesses are the cornerstone of our community and they are the driver of job growth in our economy. in fact, small businesses create over 60% of new jobs in the united states, and that's the main point here. if we want to help businesses create jobs, we need to help small businesses. every american relies on small business in some way or another, from their employment to shopping needs. given the crucial part they play in our economy, ensuring their success just makes common sense, and that's what this bill is, just a commonsense bill, a bipartisan bill to help small businesses across our great country. despite the important role that small businesses have in driving economic growth and job creation, they can be underrepresented in conversations about regulations affecting them at every local level of government, and their concerns are not always heard. this doesn't just harm small businesses, it can adversely
impact investors and the public at large. the s.e.c. has done an admirable job supporting and advancing the priority of small businesses. this bill, the s.e.c. small business advocate act, simply gives the more tools to understand their needs and concerns. the s.e.c. small business advocate act mirrors provisions found in the dodd-frank bill which created the current office of investor advocate. this advocate would open clear avenues of communication to s.e.c. leadership on issues affecting small business owners, investors and stakeholders. it would also help continue the reforms and progress that congress made in passing the jobs act that mr. garrett mentioned, including issues such as equity crowdfunding and ideas for venture exchanges and changes to ticsa, which mr. duffy and i worked on in the past year.
with the resources provided in h.r. 3784, the s.e.c. will have the ability to pursue meaningful regulatory improvements that could significantly improve outcomes for small business and help them with their access to capital needed to grow and create jobs. i'm very encouraged that the house has chosen to take up this bipartisan piece of legislation today and that we're moving forward to ensure a voice for small business at the s.e.c. again, i want to thank the s.e.c. for their help on this issue, a special thanks from my friend and colleague, congressman duffy, and i would urge all my colleagues, as the members of the financial services committee did, to vote yes on this legislation. with that, mr. speaker, i yield the balance -- i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: the gentleman has reserved the balance of his time. i do not believe that we have any other speakers. if the gentleman doesn't have
other speakers -- i'll reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware is recognized. mr. carney: i'd like to yield the gentleman from illinois three minutes to speak on this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for three minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. chairman. i was worried about the three months. filibuster. thank you, mr. chairman. given that small businesses account for over 60% of the net new jobs created since the end of the recession, we should be doing more to simplify regulatory compliance so that small business can direct their resources to what they do best -- innovating and growing our economy. small businesses and small business investors were not the cause of the financial crisis and do not pose a significant risk to the rest of the economy. yeg, regulators like the s.e.c. which oversee the financial markets too often craft regulations where the cost to small businesses far outweigh
e minimal costs on our economy. we must make small business growth a top priority. that's why i was proud to co-author the s.e.c. small business advocate act, which will establish an office of the advocate for small business capital formation within the s.e.c. this office will open a clear avenue of communication to the s.e.c. leadership on issues affecting small businesses by maintaining a designated representative to advocate on their needs. this advocate will be responsible for helping small businesses resolve problems with the s.e.c., analyzing the potential impact of proposed rules be on small businesses and reaching out to small businesses to understand issues related to capital formation. in addition, this bill formalizes the advisory committee on small and emerging companies which provides members of the small business community with another
mechanism to communicate its concerns with the s.e.c. this legislation will not only improve the regulatory process for small business owners but also for the everyday investors and consumers that depend on them. this legislation has i would spread support from representatives of the business community and was passed unanimously out of committee. i urge my colleagues to empower small business owners and entrepreneurs and support this commonsense bipartisan legislation. thank you and i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois yields back. does the gentleman from new jersey continue to reserve? mr. garrett: we continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware is recognized to close for the minority. mr. carney: i'd ask my colleagues by following the example of the financial services committee and vote unanimously to support this bill to help small businesses access capital and get the advice they need from the s.e.c. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield -- i have no further requests for time and yield back the balance of my time.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: i thank you, mr. speaker. i like wirse -- i likewise commend the gentleman on this legislation and most of the bills coming forward today that was passed unanimously. we have no further speakers so i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time now having been yielded back, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3784, as amended. those in favor will say aye. those opposed will say no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. garrett: again, thank you, mr. speaker. at this point i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4168. that is to amend the small business investment incentive act of 1980, and to require annual review by the s.e.c.,
the to require the secretary of state and the administrator of the united states agency for international development to submit reports on definitions of placement and recruitment fees for purposes of enabling compliance with the trafficking victims, of the annual government business forum on capital -- compliance with the s.e.c. of the annual government business forum on capital. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: h.r. 4186, a bill to amend the securities exchange act of 1934 to establish an office of the advocate for small business capital formation and a small business capital formation advisory committee, and for other -- h.r. 4168, a bill is to amend the small business investment incentive act of 16980 to require an annual review by the to require the secretary of state and the administrator of the united states agency for international development to submit reports on definitions of placement and recruitment fees for purposes of enabling compliance with the trafficking victims of the annual government-business forum on capital formation that is held pursuant to such act. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett, and the gentleman from delaware, mr. carney, each will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield myself such time as i may consume.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise now in support of h.r. 4168, that's the small business capital formation enhancement act. and i'd like to thank mr. poliquin and mr. vargas for their bipartisan work on this bill. and i'll go off script here and say thank you very much to mr. poliquin who has been an active, very active member on this committee from the very beginning and very active in making sure this legislation comes to the floor today. i thank the gentleman. this bill, as i said before, came out of the committee in much part to his work in an overwhelming bipartisan vote. i believe it was 55-1. so we have that one to work on for your next piece of legislation coming out of committee. you see, mr. speaker, congress created the s.e.c. government business forum on small business capital formation to do what, to provide a platform to identify unnecessary impediments to small businesses providing capital formation and find ways to eliminate or get rid of them, reduce them.
so each forum seeks to develop recommendations for government and private action to improve and provide the environment for small businesses capital formation. thereby doing providing small business opportunity to do what, to grow economically and most importantly, like we've been talking all day, about creating more jobs. unfortunately, the s.e.c.'s default position over the several years has been to simultaneously and smarely ignore these recommendations made by the various forum participants which include small businesses, venture capitalists, trade representatives and associations, accountants, academics and other small business academics. you see, despite the claims every year from the commission that we hear about the importance of this forum, it seems that the only time, the only time that the s.e.c. actually implements one of these capital formation agenda items that comes out of it is when congress tells them to do
so. this was certainly the case with several of the provisions of the jobs act, many of which, as you will recall, were original recommendation fathers that very same forum. for example, i'll give you two. there was the crowdfunding and the regulation a-plus provision of the jobs act. they basically mirrored what the forum had made in recommendation years earlier. and so the small business capital formation enhancement act, before us today, provides an answer, provides basically a simple solution to make the s.e.c. more responsive. require the s.e.c. to respond publicly and in writing to each forum recommendation and to simply explain whether plans to take action on that item or if it's not. you know, it really shouldn't take an act of congress for the s.e.c. to fulfill its basic capital formation mission, and quite honestly, it shouldn't take an act of congress for the s.e.c. to simply respond in writing to any of the forum recommendations. but unfortunately we've seen
that's a position we find ourselves in today. and so here we have today, h.r. 4168, the gentleman from maine's work, which will ensure that the s.e.c. no longer ignores these recommendations and will be able to help it fulfill its statutory provision. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from delaware is recognized. carnkrn thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker -- mr. carney: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time. mr. carney: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i'd like to add my thanks and congratulations as well to the gentleman from maine, mr. poliquin, and the gentleman from california, mr. vargas, for their bipartisan work on this bill. this legislation, as was pointed out, passed out of the financial services committee with all but one vote. this brings government officials, business stakeholders to make recommendations to improve and
facilitate small business capital formation. by directly addressing the recommendations of the forum, it will provide idea for future forums to address the concerns, ultimately leading to a more constructive and valuable process this legislation will enhance the role of the forum and assist the s.e.c. to focus on the capital needs of small businesses which as we've discussed several times today are the main drive over job creation in our economy, while simultaneously encouraging participants to substantively engage in the forum. mr. speaker, i ask all my colleagues to support this legislation, this bipartisan piece of legislation and thank the sponsors for their hard work. with that, i are e-- i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves this egentleman from new jersey is ecognized.
mr. garrett: i now yield to the gentleman from maine, the sponsor of the bill, for such time as he consumes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. poll quin: thank you, mr. speaker. -- mr. poliquin: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to extend my congratulations to congressman vargas of california, he's done a great job being the lead sponsor of this capital formation act. all of nuss this chamber who are small business owners understand how important it is to have access to money, to funds, to capital in order for our businesses to be is successful, to grow, and to hire more people. this is true in maine's second district that i represent and across the country. it's all about jobs. unless your business grows and expands, then you don't have jobs. so it's verying very porn to have that key ingredient to small business growth which is access to capital or to money.
now if you're one of the greatest papermakers in the world, and we have a lot up in maine's second district if you are and you work for a paper company in maine you still depend on your company. you might -- it might not be a small company but your company to make sure you have access to the stock and bond markets to borrow the funds they need to expand and be successful and make sure we can secure your job. now, if you're a small business owner, which really dominates the landscape in maine and across the country if you're a small business owner, say you're a boat build for the ellsworth, maine, you still need access to capital to grow. or you're a biotech startup company. the same holds true. 80%, 8 0% of the new jobs created in our country today are not large companies but in small companies. that's where the problem lies as far as access to funding is concerned. i'm not worried as much about
the big companies having access to the capital markets, but i do worry about our small businesses. now as both mr. karney and mr. garrett have mentioned, during each of the past 35 dwhreerks securities and exchange commission by law has -- has been required to put together an annual government business forum. during this annual meeting, they get the most experienced professionals they can find, business owners, s.e.c. attorney, private sector attorneys, to review the current law we was on the books today to make sure they're not impeding our small businesses' ability to borrow money and have access to capital in other ways. now these forums also are a tremendous incubator of coming up with new ideas to make sure our laws evolve. our capital markets, mr. speaker, and our economy, is very dynamic. businesses grow and they change. new products are offered and sold. so there are new needs for
capital going forward. we have to make sure that the actual laws that are the underpinning of our capital market the underpinning of our economy, they also evolve. so these annual business government forums are very important venues for this to happen. now it's been said here earlier, unfortunately, the s.e.c. has no legal requirement to make sure all the terrific recommendations that come out of these annual forums are acted upon or not. in fact, it is very common for the s.e.c. not to comment at all on all the work done to bring these new ideas to the forefront. so my legislation, and i'm proud to say, comes up with a very commonsense fix. it simply requires the s.e.c. to make a public statement on what is going to -- on what it is going to do to embrace these
recommended changes. it's very simple. ers these ideas, mr. chairman, it on the shelf. now my bill also has an ancillary benefit of making sure that each new forum each year doesn't repeat what we just did the year before. by having a benchmark every year, by addressing the recommendations that come out of these meetings, we're able to spring forward and move down the path where we left off the year before. i want to thank you very much, mr. speaker. i want to thank you very much, mr. chairman. for bringing this important bill to the floor. i'm delighted to work with mr. vargas on this. he's done one heck of a job. it is so important that everybody in this chamber please stand up for small businesses across the country, make sure they have access to the money they need to grow, be successful and hire more workers. it is all about jobs.
thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine yields back to the gentleman from new jersey. the gentleman from delaware is recognized. mr. carney: mr. speaker, i'd like to thank and congratulate the sponsor and co-sponsor again. i have no further requests and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: i believe we have one more speaker, mr. emmer, i yield him such time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. emmer: small businesses are critical to job creation and sustainable economic growth in america. in my home state of minnesota, 1.2 million workers, nearly half our state's private work force, is ememployed by a small business. when one of the more than 500,000 small businesses in minnesota contacts our officer, it is most often about how well intended yet shortsighted regulations are inhibiting their ability to utilize the financial
products they rely on. in order to ensure creation and growth of small business, it is imperative that we do our job in washington to make certain they have access to the capital they need. since 1980, the securities and exchange commission has been required to conduct government business forum each year to present and discuss ways to improve small business capital formation. however, the s.e.c. is under no legal obligation, as we've heard several times today, to respond to any of the find organization recommendations that come out of these forums. that is why the small business capital formation enhancement act is so important. the proposed legislation will require the s.e.c. to respond to the findings and recommendations made at these annual government business forums. this will ensure that the ideas formulated at these government forums will be carefully considered at the s.e.c. and possibly even implemented. i want to thank representatives bruce poliquin and juan vargas
for their hard work on behalf of consumers and small business and urge my colleagues to support the small business capital formation enhancement act and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from delaware has yielded back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: at this time, i have no other speakers and yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: all time having now been yielded back, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4168? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the -- >> mr. speaker, i do request the yeas around nays please. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until downed. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the uestion will be postponed.
for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. garrett: i move at this time to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2209. that would require the appropriate federal banking agencies to treat certain municipal obligations as level 2-a liquid assets and for such other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 310, h.r. 2209 a bill to require the appropriate federal banking agencies to treat certain municipal obligations as level 2 liquid assets and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett and the gentleman from delaware, mr. karney each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: i ask unanimous consent to all members have five legislative days to revise and extend and include any extraneous material on this bill.
the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. garrett: at this time, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. garrett: i rise in support of h.r. 2209 and i'd like to begin by thanking mr. messer for all of your hard work on this legislation and your leadership as well, pulling it through and getting it done here at the beginning of this legislative year and being a load thorne bill as well. on the other side of the aisle, she was here before, i'd like to thank mrs. maloney for working ogether with mr. messer in a bipartisan manner which has been every one of our bills today in that manner. the legislation was reported out of the committee by a vote of 56-1. as i said to mr. poliquin before, you have only one member to go to get unanimous consent going forward. given the promises posed by
insufficient liquidity in the last financial crisis, federal regulators issued a rule to cover liquidity coverage ratio being done in conjunction with the boswell committee on standards. the l.c.r. wasest tablied on the premise that banks should have enough assets that would be liquid enough, that would be defined as high quality asset, hgla's and have to have them on hand for 30 days if some unusual sort of short-term funding would disappear. it goes without staying that any time the government steps in or any time a government agency favor this is type of asset over this type of assets through some sort of regulation, you'll end up with basically unintended and undesirable consequences. that's what happened here. not surprisingly, critics have complained that the stock of
hgla's is defined way too narrow which could impact the asset classes we're talking about. investment grade securities if you look at them closely, more than we can do on the floor now, they saresthare the same liquidity characteristics, an that's what mr. messer is trying to address with this great petion of legislation. other hgla's have the same basic same characterist here as far as liquidity go yet the regulators, what did they do? they put them in one pile and excluded them from the final l.c.r. get this also, that while the federal reserve has acknowledged this problem, and they acknowledge the full fault in excluding municipal security the federal reserve's rule would only apply to the bank holding company's municipal securities and not the national banks, where more of these munis or
muni securities are held. if you want to look into one more point, over at a.m.i., the american enterprise institute he, noted in testimony before the committee back in october of last year on the by, he said, quote, it's appropriate and consistent with the public interest, there is no reason why high quality liquid bonds issued by think united states and municipalities here in the united states should receive a lower standing than foreign sovereign debt with equivalent or lesser quality in market liquidity, end quote. think about that for a minute. we're under the current situation treating our municipalities and u.s. securities at a lower standard than foreign such securities and we know how they have fared over the last year or system of with that in mind irk ask my colleagues to join me in supporting h.r. 2209 and the hard work of mr. messer as well on this legislation. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves the balance of his time.
the gentleman from delaware is recognized. mr. carney: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield four minutes to the gentlelady from new york, mrs. maloney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for four minutes. mrs. maloney: i thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership. i rise in strong support of h.r. 2209. in sum, this bill levels the playing field for cities and states, saves cities and states -- hundreds of millions of dollars and does it in a way that maintains the safety and soundness of our banking system. i'd first like to thank my friend from indiana, mr. messer, for his leadership on this issue. it has been a pleasure to work with him. when we introduced this we worked hard to have a balanced bipartisan support and to have broad support on both sides of the aisle. we introduced it with a