tv House Rules Committee CSPAN December 18, 2017 5:01pm-5:19pm EST
that either. >> just getting to the fire fly. there was a demand i would imagine there must have been a demand in the american army for something at least similar to the fire fly, i know in normandy, there's a famous store that one fire fly took out six panthers with seven shots in five minutes. and then with the tiger, they should have known -- >> you can watch the rest of this program online at c-span.org. and a reminder you can find more american history tv every weekend here on c-span 3. right now we take you to capitol hill where the house rules committee is meeting on the revised tax reform bill, which is expected to hit the house floor tomorrow. the committee is looking at a bill that would make changes to the dodd/frank financial regulatory law. this is live coverage on c-span 3. >> it's another example of a
bill that has bipartisan support. as i'm sure we'll hear from our witnesses today, the bill was approved by the committee by a vote of 47-12. by the committee even adopted a democratic amendment by voice vote during the markup. after we hear in our distinguished financial services committee members, we'll move on to our witnesses from the weighs and means committee, to hear about hr-1 conference report. i know there will be a lot of opinions about what should and should not be included in tax reform, we've had those opinions and that discussion -- for one, i'm excited that our tax process is finally coming to the floor after years of work for the president's signature. with that, i'd like to yield to our ranking member -- >> hr-33, 12, a lot of us are concerned this is another roll back of important dodd/frank protections, and it undermines
the oversight of large regional banks, but i'll let our ranking member when she gets here. as far as the tax bill goes, i would agree with you, general, we should have a robust discussion, but not in the rules committee, it should have been in the ways and means committee, in this piece of legislation, there wasn't a single hearing in this legislation. i regret that very much. we're continue to learn, based on news reports about the goodies that have been included and put in the bill, we're not meeting on this bill until after votes. the chairman of the weighs and means committee. >> this process, let me say, is pretty lousy about but having said all of that. i'm happy to see the chairman of the financial services committee here, and there's no need for us to prolong this any further. i look forward to his testimony, and we await the ranking member to get here shortly.
>> gentleman yields back. we welcome the gentleman from texas. we will soon be joined by the ranking member. as you know, she has been delayed we will seat her as she arrives. we yield to you, mr. chairman. >> congressman, members of the rules committee, thank you. the financial services committee, always feels welcome at the rules committee. and perhaps not quite as interesting as hr-1. we believe hr-3312 is an important piece of legislation for our economy. it's the systemic risk designation act of 2017. it's an important bill, and i want to accentuate that this is a bipartisan bill. the bill was approved in october in our committee with a strong bipartisan vote. i would point out that a majority of the democrats on our
committee voted in favor of the bill hr-3312 was introduced by mr. lukemeyer. the bill reforms what many now agree was a flawed and arbitrary framework, used by regulators in the dodd/frank act to designate systemically important financial institutions, known by their acronyms. it's important to remember that designation anoint the institutions as too big to fail. the current designation subjects any bank with 50 billion or more in assets to the same costly and cumbersome standards as trillion dollar globally systemically important institutions. mr. lukemeyer's bipartisan bill again supported by a majority of
democrats in our committee, replaces this inflexible $50 billion threshold, with a series of well established standards that more accurately measure systemic importance. more specifically, this legislation requires the federal reserve to review a financial institutions size. it's interconnectedness, and it's complexity, before determining wraej that insti tusz should be subject to heightened sify regulated -- regulatory standards. in other words, it taylors regulations, based on a bank's actual level of risk. these banks are not wall street banks and shouldn't be treated the same. it doesn't make sense as a bank
by jpmorgan chase, which has 2.5 trillion in assets. based on size alone, the $50 billion bank is just 2%. 2% of jpmorgan chase's size. what does make sense instead is to base the regulation of these financial institutions on their actual risk profile, rather than their asset size alone, and that's what mr. lukemeyer's bill would do. i do not agree with the sify architecture at all. and i do not believe any find institution is too big to fail, yet it is important we continue working to support bipartisan reforms that when improve current law, and i think this bill represents exactly that opportunity. even chairman barney frank, the co author of dodd frank, when he
wrote about the threshold, he wrote that it is arbitrary. he also went on and called it a mistake. this is former chairman frank of his own signature law said the $50 billion threshold was arbitrary and a mistake, it fails to take into account differences in the various business models institutions posed to the financial system. let's keep in mind today, this is simply -- not simply a debate over an arcane definition in law. frankly of the effect these regulations have on the u.s. economy. instead of helping to capitalize small businesses which leads to jobs and opportunity for americans who still lack both. financial institutions are needlessly expending capital on compliance. compliance that again even the co author of dodd frank admits is being spent to comply with a
mistake. the american people deserve better, it is time to restore economic growth fueled by capital flowing from american banks and financial institutions to communities all across the nation. i welcome your questions and thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> thank you, mr. chairman, thank you for your leadership on these issues. i tell constituents regularly, we can't agree on everything, nor should we. those things on which we can agree like the overreach as it affects many of our community financial services, institutions, those areas in which we can agree we should act, i thank you for continuing to press forward in that. gentleman from oklahoma, mr. coal? >> thank you, i want to thank my friend for the legislation and bipartisan nature. i deal a lot as we all do, with the action of the respective state. we don't have banks the size my friend referred to, we have several in this category.
and they routinely tell me the level of regulation that they have, and how onerous it is and how difficult it is to engage in injecting capital in the economy, into worthy products and how big a staff did they end up main taken. it's amazed me how intrusive the federal government is, and how much of the cost offloads on to the banks themselves, which come on to all the rest of us that as consumers in higher fees and costs for doing business with a bank. things we didn't have to do very long ago. we don't have any fees here. put your money in, we'll put the money to work, and that will make all of us better off i think it's very important. i don't have specific questions. the fact that it's as bipartisan as you point out to me, is very, very good sign.
we all represent banks, and our friends on the other side of the i'll have these same kinds of institutions in their states. they're in their communities, they know what kind of record they have. these kind of banks, systemic threats are one thing, i hate it whenever any bank fails. the reality is, banks this size, we know what to do. on a friday afternoon everything shut down, the shareholders lose their business, the teams come in. nobody's known anything about it, monday morning it's open under new management, and almost all the people that have assets in the bank, they've kept them below the fdi insured limits. there's no reason for these banks to unveil the regulatory burden they're providing.
>> doesn't lap often, i like to -- >> it's worth noting for the record for that reason alone. >> i want to thank my friend for bringing us good legislation. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> gentleman from massachusetts. >> i've said enough already. i'm yielding back my time. >> the process we're under going here is frustrating. i'm not talking about this bill, but with all the things we need to do before we adjourn for t s this -- for the holiday break. health center reorganization, to disaster relief, to dreamers to keeping the government open and then we're going to deal with a tax bill that nobody knows what the hell is in it. is frustrating. >> gentleman from georgia?
>> i have no questions. >> gentle lady from wyoming? >> mr. chairman, thank you so much for continuing to press forward, anything additional you have in writing. we thank you for your services. >> we appreciate the efficiency of the rules committee. >> does any other member wish to be heard on hr-3312? >> mr. chairman? >> without objection, the statement will be entered into the record. >> is she on her way? >> if we can hold for two seconds, she may be walking in the stairs. i want to make sure that's not the case.
up the rules for debate on the tax reform bill. we'll have live coverage for you when they resume here on c-span 3. c-span's washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning. a discussion o reform bill that congress is set to pass this week, with bloomberg tax reporter laura davidson and ammanda becker. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal live at 7:00 eastern tuesday morning. join the discussion. 75 years ago in june of four japanese aircraft carriers at the battle of midway, a decisive victory that changed the course of world war ii in the pacific after pearl harbor. up next on american history tv. navy veterans recount their experiences opinion