Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 106th Congress, First Session, Volume 145, Part 11 Page: 15,006
[1386] p.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
July 1, 1999
and applies to the entire financial services in-
dustry (banking, insurance and securities)
today applied in 1933. In fact, it was in 1933-
not the year Albert Einstein became famous,
but the year he immigrated to America-that
the law in effect today was enacted by Con-
gress. You may not recall that Congress or
even the events in Washington that year. The
big political happening in 1933 was Calvin
Coolidge's funeral. You don't recall that event?
The "Three Little Pigs" was making its debut
as one of Walt Disney's first productions. It
has been several years since Walt Disney
died. But our 1933 financial services laws of
that day live on today. Yes, like the memory
of Calvin Cooledge's funeral they are dog-
eared and worn. And every bit as inefficient as
a steam engine would be on today's railroad
tracks or a tri-engine wood-frame biplane in
service by today's airlines. Imagine wanting to
travel across country and finding not only no
controlled access highways, but only gravel-
topped or dirt-topped highways. What an inef-
ficiency. What an inconvenience. What a cost
to the economy. How outmoded. That's ex-
actly what America's financial services com-
munity has to contend with today. The law is
no more intended for today's market than a
Model T Ford. This is true of today's outdated
financial services laws. It is time to bring finan-
cial modernization laws not only into the late
20th Century but revise them for the fast-ap-
proaching 21st Century. H.R. 10 is such a law.
But H.R. 10 is more than just an updated or
modern approach to banking. It's an improve-
ment over existing laws. All Americans today
would benefit from H.R. 10 in the following
ways:
Greaer efficiency in competition will drive
down prices of financial services (loan rates,
insurance premiums, etc.). Savings are esti-
mated at $15 billion a year. Seeing what com-
petition can do in sports and other businesses,
it is time to find out in financial services.
Imagine our American financial firms having
to compete effectively in international markets
restrained by laws of yesteryear. In a global
economy the ability of American financial firms
to compete effectively internationally is man-
datory. They can only do so under modern
laws such as H.R. 10. Let's increase their ef-
fectiveness to compete internationally. It is
past due.
Americans not only love competition and
low prices, but also convenience. H.R. 10
promises better convenience and access to fi-
nancial products, more choices in both urban
and rural America. Time is money and con-
venience is paramount in today's fast-moving
society. After years of trying and failing, isn't
it time this Congress finally offered the con-
venience of modern banking to American con-
sumers? Convenience and more choices.
Not only does H.R. 10 offer improved ability
for our companies to compete in the world
market, more competition and choice for the
American public, but it also promises in-
creased privacy protections. Under an amend-
ment to be offered today, which I support, the
American banking customer can tell his local
bank, "I'd rather you did not show that infor-
mation outside the bank." Americans love their
privacy and what it protected.
For all of these reasons, it's time, no it's
past time, to modernize our financial serviceslaws. Accomplish this and preserve American
financial leadership for the 21st Century by
voting yes on final passage of the Financial
Services Act of 1999.
Mr. LAFALCE. Madam Chairman, I
yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. WA-
TERS).
Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I
rise in opposition to H.R. 10, the Finan-
cial Services Act of 1999. I must oppose
this legislation because it distorts the
intent of the members of the House
Committee on Banking and Financial
Services who worked hard to develop a
credible piece of legislation that would
cover the mergers of banks and com-
mercial interests.
Instead of respecting the bipartisan
work of the House Committees on
Banking and Financial Services and
Commerce, the House Committee on
Rules hijacked this bill. They stripped
out the Lee anti-redlining amendment
that had been adopted in Banking and
the Markey amendment was stripped
out on privacy that had been adopted
in Commerce. I have never seen this
before. You vote, you get an amend-
ment passed, and then the Committee
on Rules literally takes it out without
a vote? The Committee on Rules then
denied a rule to have a debate on pri-
vacy. And, of course, they denied my
amendment on lifeline banking for low-
income consumers who do not have
bank accounts with traditional bank-
ing institutions.
The House Committee on Rules fur-
ther added a dangerous amendment by
the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. GANSKE)
that allows private medical record in-
formation to be given to subsidiaries
and sold to others. Then, to add insult
to injury, the Committee on Rules
made in order an amendment by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. PAUL), the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. BARR)
and the gentleman from California (Mr.
CAMPBELL) that can only be identified
as the Dope Dealers and Money
Launderers Act of 1999. The Paul
amendment adjusts the currency trans-
action reporting requirement from
$10,000 to $25,000, making it easier for
drug dealers to spend and launder drug
proceeds.
Let us go a little bit further. The
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. BLILEY)
will have Members believe that he is
doing something about domestic vio-
lence and protecting the victims. It is
a trick. He is allowing these mutual in-
surance companies to move out of their
States that do not allow them to take
their proceeds away from the policy-
holders and put them in the hands of
the officers. He is trying to make Mem-
bers believe that he is doing something
for women. Members do not want their
fingerprints on this bill. This is a bad
one. Vote "no."
Mr. BLILEY. Madam Chairman, I
yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. LAZIO), a member of theCommittee on Commerce and a mem-
ber of the Committee on Banking and
Financial Services.
Mr. LAZIO. Madam Chairman, let me
begin by congratulating and thanking
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. BLI-
LEY) and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr.
LEACH) for the stewardship of this fun-
damentally important piece of legisla-
tion for the American economy, having
persevered through a number of dif-
ferent discussions and bringing this to
the verge of passing as an historic
piece of legislation.
Let us go back for a moment to the
early 1930s. The stock market col-
lapsed, the SEC did not exist, and there
were few Federal securities laws. In 3
years between 1930 and 1933, 8,000 banks
went bankrupt and American families
lost $5 billion in deposits, an enormous
sum at the time.
To restore American confidence in
our banks, Glass-Steagall erected a
wall between commercial banks and se-
curities firms. Deposit insurance was
created so American families knew
their financial nest egg was safe. Glass-
Steagall made sense, 60 years ago. But
60 years ago, families kept the bulk of
their savings in banks, earning low
rates of interest. Today, families invest
in the stock market and 43 percent of
adults own a piece of the market be-
cause Americans in the 1990s seek high-
er returns on their investments.
Consumer behavior changed because
stocks and mutual funds achieved supe-
rior long-term results, people began
managing their own retirement funds
through individual retirement ac-
counts, 401(k) plans and Keogh plans.
In short, Americans are no longer hid-
ing their savings in their mattresses.
Q 1715
Today we stand at the center of an
electronic revolution. On line broker-
age businesses are growing. Three secu-
rities legends teamed up to create a
rival to the New York Stock Exchange.
Moneymoves fromsTokyo and back in
an instant. A consumer can see and
speak to a live teller via the Internet.
We simply no longer live in a depres-
sion era that gave birth to Glass-
Steagall.
With this bill, working families will
have more choices. Do my colleagues
want an account with no commissions
and pricing based on household assets?
Do my colleagues want to carry a cred-
it card that has no ATM fees for trans-
actions worldwide? Do my colleagues
want a e-commerce link that has a re-
wards point program?
With this bill, small businesses will
have a greater array of products and
services from which to choose. Do my
colleagues want convenient Internet
access to their checking, savings and
investment activities? Do my col-
leagues want a discount for goods pur-
chased through e-commerce? Do my
colleagues want global market intel-
ligence and unified accounting report-
ing?15006
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 106th Congress, First Session, Volume 145, Part 11, book, July 1999; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30909/m1/49/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.