A picture of Representative Robert Pittenger
Robert P.
Republican NC 9

About Rep. Robert
  • Promoting Job Creation and Reducing Small Business Burdens Act

    by Representative Robert Pittenger

    Posted on 2015-01-13

    submit to reddit

    Read More about Promoting Job Creation and Reducing Small Business Burdens Act

    PITTENGER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the leadership and Mr. Fitzpatrick.



    Today, I rise in support of H.R. 37, the Promoting Job Creation and Reducing Small Business Burdens Act. We are here, once again, debating simple measures aimed at growing the economy and relieving some of the unnecessary burdens imposed by the Dodd-Frank legislation.

    Even Tim Geithner, the former Secretary of the Treasury, stated that the Volcker rule and implications of it being regulated were not material in the demise and harm due to major institutions, rather as a result of extended credit.

    This legislation included in this bill is bipartisan, which is why so many of my colleagues already voted in support of it in the 113th Congress and again last week.

    This is a jobs bill. The relief we can give to small business today directly impacts their ability to create jobs. For instance, although small companies are at the forefront of technological innovation and job creation, they often face significant obstacles in obtaining capital in the financial markets.

    [[Page H350]] These obstacles are often due to the largest burden that securities regulations, which are typically written for large public companies, place on small companies when they seek to go public.

    We need competitive markets that encourage innovation, and we need to a develop regulatory environment that acknowledges the differences between small, private, and start-up companies and well-established public companies.

    Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

    There has been a lot of talk about bipartisan support or lack of. There have been a lot of talks about how the Republicans have been able to get Democratic votes and that, somehow, we should be happy, we should be satisfied, and that they really don't understand why it is that we are opposing not only the bill, but the tactics that have been used in several attempts to pass legislation with controversial bills tucked into the big package.

    Let me give you a summary of amendments that Republicans refuse to consider as we have attempted to work with them.

    Mr. Ellison and Mr. Issa offered a bipartisan amendment to strike title VII of the bill, so that all public companies will have to report their financial statements in a computer-readable format. Mr. Sherman and Ms. Kuster both offered amendments striking the CLO title.

    In a similar vein, because Republicans refuse to hold debate on the CLO title, Mr. Kildee and Mr. Capuano offered an amendment to require the regulators to first determine that such a delay was, indeed, in the public interest.

    Mr. Lynch also proposed to revise the delay from 2019 to a date we previously considered and approved in the House, 2017. This revised date is one that we had thoroughly considered in the House. We never considered in the House an extension for 2 more years to 2019.

    In an effort to prevent the spread of systemic threats, Mr. Lynch proposed that an affiliate of a financial institution, whose failure could pose a systemic risk to our economy, should be required to clear its derivatives.

    Mr. Lynch raised a concern that companies, like GE Capital, might be able to take large bets in one part of their company, but receive relief from rules intended to mitigate those risks in another. Mr. Lynch also offered three amendments on title XI, all intended to ensure that employees understand their compensation.

    Elsewhere in the bill, Mr. Capuano offered an amendment to title X, requiring companies to disclose political campaign contributions. In the same title, Mr. Ellison required the SEC to finalize its Dodd-Frank rules related to executive compensation data within 60 days.

    Mr. Grijalva proposed an amendment to restore the swaps push-out provision that Republicans eliminated by attaching it to the CR/Omnibus last month. Mr. Ellison and Mr. Grijalva also proposed a substitute amendment to focus this Congress on something that would help our economy, ending budget sequestration.

    Finally, I propose that we find a way to pay for part of the budget of the cash-strapped SEC by imposing a user fee on investment advisers. This is a commonsense proposal that has been supported by investment advisers, investment advocates, former Republican Chairman Spencer Bachus, SEC Chair White, and the State securities regulators.

    Despite the fact that the SEC can only examine an adviser on average once a decade, our committee didn't even consider this issue last Congress.

    That is an effort, Mr. Speaker and Members, to show that we have attempted to work with the opposite side of the aisle. We have attempted to offer commonsense amendments that have been absolutely rejected without any consideration being given to them.

    We find ourselves here on the floor at 9 this evening, attempting to debate a bill that is going nowhere, that has been issued by the President, a veto message. We are here debating again about whether or not we are putting our taxpayers and Main Street and our small businesses at risk, going back to some of the same tactics, some of the same ways that were used by the banks that brought us to the point of a recession, almost a depression.

    Somehow in this short period of time, we have forgotten what happened in 2008, we have forgotten about how many businesses were destroyed, small businesses were destroyed, we have forgotten how many elderly folks lost money in their 401(k)'s, we have forgotten how many homes were foreclosed on, we have forgotten about how we brought this country to the brink of a disaster.

    {time} 2100 And so let me just say that Dodd-Frank is an attempt for reform. And it is not even a tough reform. As a matter of fact, many of us consider it rather mild. But we have on this side of the aisle been fighting day in and day out in our committee to try and just see the implementation of Dodd-Frank rather than the destruction of an attempt to reform an industry that caused great harm to this society.

    And so with that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

  • submit to reddit
  • Register your constituent account to respond

    Constituent Register