House Proceeding 04-01-09 on Apr 1st, 2009 :: 0:33:25 to 0:53:25
Total video length: 3 hours Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:162 Duration: 0:20:00 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

0:31:45 to 0:33:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Shelley Berkley

0:33:05 to 0:33:25( Edit History Discussion )

Shelley Berkley: hardworking middle-class americans, like those in my district, and i have 10.5% unemployment, not the c.e.o.'s, are people who ultimately pay the price of companies continuing to cancel business meetings and incentive travel. i would like to clarify with the chairman that nothing in this bill or the amendments to be offered today would discourage or limit thuse of

0:33:26 to 0:33:46( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: meetings, events and inctive travel o to serve legitimate business purposes, is that the chairman's funsing, and i yield to the chairman? mr. frank: yes. this bill deals only with compensation, not with travel. the gentlewoman -- any incentive that was performance based would be fully allowed if by selling a certain number of things you earned a trip, that

0:33:30 to 0:33:55( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Barney Frank

0:33:47 to 0:33:55( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: would be allowed. so in general it has no -- not in general, it specifically does not deal with travel for

0:33:56 to 0:34:16( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: the business and it would allow incentive performance-based incentives for this or any other purpose. ms. berkley: i thank the gentleman for clarifying the legislation and the language, and i yield back the balancef my time. the chair: the gentlelady from nevada yields back the balance of her time. massachusetts reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia.

0:34:00 to 0:39:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Randy Neugebauer

0:34:17 to 0:34:37( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: mr. price: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm pleased to yield five minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. gnawing -- mr. neugebauer. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for five minutes. mr. neugebauer: we are going to roll out a big budget that has big deficits, increases our national deficit to a larger number, going to bring out big

0:34:38 to 0:34:58( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: tax increases, but, you know, a lot of discussion has been had about all of the things that currently the deral government's involving theirselves in and the word outrage keeps coming up, and many of us were outraged about the found out were being paid out at a.i.g. but i think what more than the

0:34:59 to 0:35:22( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: outrage about bonuses, i think the american people are outraged at the level of money that's being invested of their hard-earned taxpayer money in to these entities. we find out that now the american people are investors in banks, insurance companies, probably soon to be in the automobile business and in fact you're going to get an extended warrant from the united states

0:35:23 to 0:35:44( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: government. what people are wondering and outraged about, when is the end of this train? one of the concerns i have is that we now have, we went -- people were outraged about g.s.e.'s, now we have t.s.e.'s, taxpayer supported entities.

0:35:45 to 0:36:05( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: people that used to get jouts raged in this body because we were trying to listen in on foreign enemies, worried about their individual rights, now we have no problem, though, for the united states government to start determining what is reasonable compensation in this country. am i outraged about the bonuses? yes. i'm more outraged that we would

0:36:06 to 0:36:27( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: relegate to government and to government employees for home to sit down and determine whether what is reasonable compensation and people will say, oh, this is only for entities we've invested capital into. that's always the way policy gets started in this country. it starts off with a little bit of a foot in the door an

0:36:28 to 0:36:48( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: pretty soon the gorilla is completely in the room. down the road if i'm a small businessman with an s.b.a. loan, i'm wondering if at some point in time the s.b.a. says, you're taking too big a salary out of your company. we're going to set a reasonable salary for you. what does that do to entrepreneurial nism this

0:36:49 to 0:37:10( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: country? what about people that are participating in other government programs? does the government then start saying, we've looked we know you have a government contract, you're one of the small business contractors that has a government contract. and you know, we've looked your i.r.s. records and you're making a lot of money off of that contract. we think we ought to

0:37:11 to 0:37:32( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: renegotiate that contract because you're making too much money. that sounds farfetched but i would guarantee you, if we were to roll back to conversation to a year ago and you would tell the american people they're going to own banks, they're going to own insurance companies, they're going to own automobile companies, they're going to be over $5 trillion or $6 trillion of their money

0:37:33 to 0:37:55( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: committed to these entities, people would have laughed about it. but this is no laughing matter, mr. speaker. this is serious. this government, country, was founded on the principles of individualism, empowerment, not for government to be big. in fact, there are tea parties occurring across this country because people are outraged

0:37:56 to 0:38:17( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: about this the same outrage that over 230, 240 years ago how the king was treated colonists in this land called america. they were tired of the king telling them what they could do and how much money they could make and who was privileged and who was not privileged. we're now starting down that same trail with this bill today.

0:38:18 to 0:38:38( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: should -- what should ha happened here is that we should have taken a -- a reasonable amount of time to determine how this money was going to be distributed, term sheets should have been put together, if we're going to invest the american taxpayers' money, we ought to know what that money will be used for, how it's

0:38:39 to 0:39:00( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: going to be used. if we wanted to limit salary are, you do that before you pass out the money. but this is all really a smoke screen. what the conversation and debate and all this time we ought to be using today is, we ought to be talking about how are we going to get the american taxpayers' money back. people want to focus on the bonus they messed up they cut a

0:39:01 to 0:39:21( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: deal with the white house in the middle of the night, had people put things in the bill to cover them so they didn't have to lose face. the $170 million in bonuses is a big deal but what's a big deal is the $170 billion in money we've invested in a.i.g. mechanic, -- mr. speaker, let's return america back to the

0:39:22 to 0:39:26( Edit History Discussion )

Randy Neugebauer: american people. let's not infringe on their rights, let's not start down

0:39:27 to 0:39:47( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: the road where government starts telling us what we can make, what we can do with our money, i urge people to vote against this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's him time has expired, the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

0:39:30 to 0:43:25( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Barney Frank

0:39:48 to 0:40:09( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: mr. frank: this is an interesting debt bait we're having within the republican party. the first speakers were crilt call of the bill which passed in the recovery bill because it limited senator dodd's restrictions on compensation and said they wouldn't apply retroactively, they said it was senator dodd who initiated the notion of restrictions.

0:40:10 to 0:40:31( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: but now we have the deputy leader of the republican side objecting that we're going too far. directly contrary to the complaints we didn't apply these retroactively, he's upset we applied them at all. he says it's an interference with free enterprise. i do know he says this is a revolt against king george in effect, and it is.

0:40:32 to 0:40:52( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: king george bush. we are dealing here with a program initiating under the bush administration. we are dealing here when we talk about a.i.g. with a grant of funds that came without any congressional input with the approve of the bush administration. weid, some of us, raise the compensation issue last fall.

0:40:53 to 0:41:14( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: we said that if you're going to take government money, you accept some compensation restrictions. the gentleman from texas, and i do note he left the floor. i think the gentleman from texas is entitled to leave the floor. i don't think having made a speech you have to sit here and listen to other speeches. i have to because i'm the manager of the bill. i wish i didn't have to listen

0:41:15 to 0:41:37( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: to some of these smeaches, particularly repetitive one -- these speeches, particularly repepttive ones about the bill from six weeks ago, but since it's in voke, -- vogue, i thought i'd mention it. we said if funds, you accept restrictions. that's no more a restriction of

0:41:38 to 0:41:59( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: free enterprise than any other contracting rule the government has. the gentleman from texas said this isn't the pro the problem is where it will go. now mr. chairman, i have observed when people are opposed to something but don't have confidence in the persuasive quality of the arguments on the particular issue, they might -- they migrate to what would happen if

0:42:00 to 0:42:20( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: it was applied in a different context. it will not be applied in the different context. i speak for myself and majority leader hoyer, this is confined to people who take capital infusion under tarp. it will not be extended to any otheparticipant in the impaired asset program, in the small business lending program, in the higher education lending

0:42:21 to 0:42:41( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: program. i would not as chairman convene a meeting for such a tpwhism majority leader would not bring one to the floor. there is zero chance of that happening. but when members complain about something that might happen that won't happen, it's because they're against what is happening but don't have the confidence that if they said it, people would believe it. let's go back to what this bill

0:42:42 to 0:43:02( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: does. it undoes the restriction on retroactivity that had been a cae of such outrage among republicans. i repeat again, they appear have become so attached to their outrage that they're more outraged that they won't be able to be outraged anymore. secondly we say if you receive

0:43:03 to 0:43:23( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: a capital infusion under the tarp program and only a capital infusion, you may not make salary payments that are excessive and unreasonable, and you can give bonuses as long as they are performance based. i await members on the other side, not one of the members on the other side objected to this

0:43:24 to 0:43:25( Edit History Discussion )

Barney Frank: bill on its merits.

0:43:26 to 0:43:46( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: one said if you took this farther, it would be awful. i have yet to hear an objection on the merits. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognize plsmedsprice: i'm pleased to -- mr. price: i'm pleased to yield to mr. bachus such time as he might consume.

0:43:30 to 0:58:45( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Spencer Bachus

0:43:47 to 0:44:07( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. bachus: i thank the chairman. every day brings notice of new government intervention or new

0:44:08 to 0:44:28( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: government tax. most share the same thing. they're large this bill claims to be about executive compensation. but what it really is is just another step expanding the size , the involvement, and more importantly, the control of the

0:44:29 to 0:44:49( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: federal government. into not only the private sector, but into all aspects of our lives. that's our concern. yes, it's about this bill, but yes, mr. chairman, it is about much more than this bill. you're right about this that.

0:44:50 to 0:45:11( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: sometimes the expansion is subtle, as in the case of this bill. sometimes it's more direct, mo obvious. like the budget that we'll vote on as soon as tomorrow. we are witnessing in light speed, in just the past few months and in the budget we'll

0:45:12 to 0:45:32( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: pass in the next few years, as it goes into effect, a relentless and massive expansion of the federal government, and i for one, mr. chairman, i am concerned. outrageed -- outrage, i would

0:45:33 to 0:45:53( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: say fear and concern are better. but i do believe that as the years go by and we look back on what we've done and what we will do in this next year, i believe the american people will be outraged. as a member, i took an oath to

0:45:54 to 0:46:15( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: uphold the principles of the constitution which intentionally and specifically limited the power of the central government. would our forefathers ever have considered giving the government a say on how much a private citizen earned the

0:46:16 to 0:46:37( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: so-called say on pay. in reading both the constitution and the federalist papers, it clearly appears they would not. i think most americans believe our founding fathers had it right. i applaud the chairman's honesty for years he has advocated a government role in

0:46:38 to 0:46:58( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: limiting the amount of salaries. later tonight, we'll consider a budget. as we have said repeatedly, and we're going to say again today, it spends too much, it taxes too much, and it borrows too much.

0:46:59 to 0:47:19( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: it expands the government control on a scale that we've not seen before, not even in the new deal. it spends more money in this administration than was spent from the time -- from george

0:47:20 to 0:47:40( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: washington to george bush. and the majority criticize bush for the deficit. and now they will double and triple them in the next 10 years under their proposal. the scope and reach of this legislation is breathtaking. if you had told me a month ago,

0:47:41 to 0:48:03( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: and i will recognize the chairman, i'll yield to him in a minute, when i get to the particulars on this bill, if you had told me a month ago that congress wanted to increase the tax burden on charitable contributions, i would have said, it's an april fools joke. but the fact is that if

0:48:04 to 0:48:25( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: donations to charities go down, the government will say it has to step in. but there'll be a big difference. it will be the government will be choosing what it wants to support and how. it can support groups like acorn instead of my local church or local charity. instead of allowing people to

0:48:26 to 0:48:46( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: support their own causes and make their own choices about their charitable contributions, the government will expand into what will obviously and clearly be a restriction on private charities as their funds are restricted.

0:48:47 to 0:49:07( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: unfortunately, it wasn't an april fool's day joke and that's what is being proposed this very week, restricting private contribution. just this week, and there's a pattern developing here, just this week, we saw government mandate to change the

0:49:08 to 0:49:29( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: management of general motors. regardless of what you think about the performance of the c.e.o., and i don't think it was good, i for one do not defend the stewardship, but do we want the federal government making such far-ranging decisions on hiring and firing

0:49:30 to 0:49:54( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: and setting salaries and job descriptions for everyone from the manager to the receptionist? this is all about government control, government command and control, running an economy, not according to free enterprise principles, which many of my democratic colleagues admittedly and

0:49:56 to 0:50:17( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: honestly don't agree with. it is about making business decisions based not on competitiveness but based on social goals. does anyone really believe that a government that is about to add $10 trillion to our debt to our children and our

0:50:18 to 0:50:38( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: grandchildrehas any expertise at all in telling the private sector how to turn a profit? during the campaign president obama said so if someone, and i'm quoting, so ifomeone wants to build a coal powered plant they can.

0:50:39 to 0:50:59( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged such a huge sum for all the greenhouse gases that have been admitted. later today, later today we will take a step down that road with cap and trade. we are going to raise every american's utility bill that

0:51:00 to 0:51:22( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: its utility is fired by coal. we hear the government will require the automobile makers to produ green cars. no one argues with the idea of clean burning cars, but maybe someone should ask consumers whether th can afford to spend several thousand dollars more to buy them and whether

0:51:23 to 0:51:46( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: such policy will end the need for taxpayer support. i think not. i think it will make general motors less profitable, and the taxpayer investment will certainly be at risk. this is the problem with government getting involved in the management of business. decisions will be based on the government's political agenda and not sound economics.

0:51:47 to 0:52:07( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: there will be no limits to r this can go and will go. will the government start telling companies we'd like to review your advertising to see if you're sending the right message or spending too much? will the government tell drug companies who market similar products we think there's too

0:52:08 to 0:52:31( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: much competion, maybe he should com emerge to make prices cheaper? now, you don't have to do that, but if you do business with the government you do. some believe less competition leads to lower prices. i don't think that's the case at all. now, the legislation before us

0:52:32 to 0:52:52( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: today, it gives the treasury secretary and a board all unelected headed by a harvard professor wide discretion to formulate performance-based compensation standards for hundreds of banks across america.

0:52:53 to 0:53:17( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: who does the legislation apply to? let me read the legislation. compensation payment to any executive or employee under any existing compensation arrangement.

0:53:18 to 0:53:40( Edit History Discussion )

Spencer Bachus: any executive or employee, line 23 on page 2, mr. chairman. every employee. there is nothingn this legislation to prevent the secretary from deciding that one measure of performance is whether loan officers are approving loans to fored