“I oppose this bill. It helps big banks and rich people instead of working families who need fair loans.”

“Members have a choice today. Whose side are you on? Do you want to advance Donald Trump’s deregulatory agenda to help out his wealthy friends on Wall Street, or are you on the side of working families, labor unions, consumers, and civil rights groups like those all over the country who just want equal and fair access to affordable financial products and services? For many of you who have been in this struggle with banks, where you have tried to get help with all kinds of issues, I want you to, again, go to your bank where you have a problem--don’t go because they are only available on the phone--and state your problem. See who you can get to talk to. See if you can get an appointment. See if you can get some answers to the questions that you have. You can’t do this with these big mega banks. They don’t have time for you. They don’t have time to listen to you talking about how you only have $200,000 and you want to buy this House around the corner. They are not interested in that. They are interested in the big money. They are interested in not only providing the loans for those who are spending a half million or so on a bank that they are trying to use to get a house. It is clear: The Big Banks are sick and tired of the way that they are being treated. They know they have a lot of power and a lot of friends in the Congress of the United States of America. They don’t know a new day is coming and a new way is coming. People are learning more and more why they have a right to be disturbed about the way that they are being treated. I tell people: Don’t be afraid to confront those Big Banks. Call us. Get your legislator to help you out. That is what we are supposed to do. Sometimes they can’t find us. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Signal 24 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“I want the House to vote against this bill. It rolls back rules on big Wall Street banks instead of helping regular people with the high cost of living. It also breaks a compromise we just made on another bill to help community banks.”

“Mr. Speaker, we know how to support community banks and credit unions. We just did that with our landmark housing bill, and I was pleased to work with the chairman of that committee, Mr. Hill. It became law just a few days ago and included five Republican bills and four Democratic ones that were focused on supporting community banks. Now, here come Republicans to push for what they and their allies want: financial deregulation. This bill has 24 Republican provisions compared to just 2 from Democrats. In fact, I am disappointed that my friends on the other side of the aisle are advancing provisions that even contradict our carefully crafted bipartisan agreement in the housing bill. There is a provision in this bill on de novo banks that goes beyond our bipartisan deal, allowing regulators to decide whether to make permanent reforms that really should be for Congress to decide. We struck a compromise in passing the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, and I think everyone who voted for that should honor that compromise. Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, this bill is a distraction from what Congress should be focusing on: ending the affordability crisis caused by Trump’s failed policies. Nothing in this bill will help consumers afford groceries or pay for gas. Do you know who is not suffering during the affordability crisis? Wall Street. This bill would loosen the guardrails on Wall Street mega banks even as they report record profits. Even Chairwoman Foxx admitted that this bill is all about deregulation and rolling back Dodd-Frank, a law she said she strongly dislikes. Chairman Hill said they received drafting assistance from Trump’s regulators and banks, but not from organizations that represent workers or consumers. Mr. Speaker, we are not stupid. We understand that Trump controls all of his so-called organizations that are independent. He tells them what to do. We get that. He is in control. He is running this country. Those people who are selected to run these so-called independent agencies are those who will do nothing but what they are told to do. That is probably because the groups who represent actual people oppose this bill. That is what they are told to do. That is the leadership they have. Now is not the time to plant new seeds for the next crisis. Now is not the time to juice the mega banks’ profit margins. Now is not the time to legitimize Trump’s efforts to gut the CFPB, fair lending, and other consumer protections. Again, I am so proud and pleased with the work we did in a bipartisan manner. I am so proud and pleased that we were able to negotiate through some very tough times. I am so proud to announce that we had to give some, and we took some. They gave some, and we worked it out. I don’t know exactly what they are being told by Trump, but I know Trump is in charge, and he is charging a lot of what is going on. I urge my colleagues to please vote ``no’’ on this bill, and support the citizens, support their constituents, not Wall Street. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.”