Disapproving Department of Labor Rule Related to Definition of the Term ``fiduciary''
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 706, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 88) disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to the definition of the term ``Fiduciary'', and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Res. 88.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.J. Res. 88. I was proud to introduce this resolution, along with Representatives Boustany and Wagner, to ensure that all Americans have access to affordable retirement advice.
Today, there are far too many men and women in this country who don't have the retirement security that they need and deserve.
In 2015, the GAO found that 29 percent of Americans 55 years and older have no retirement savings and no traditional pension. In fact, today, nearly 40 million working families haven't saved a dime for retirement.
This is a serious problem, and we need to make it easier for families, particularly low-income and middle-income families, to save for their retirement years. That means making sure that every American, regardless of income, is able to access the tools they need to plan for the future. It also means ensuring financial advisers act in their clients' best interests.
Let me say that again. It also means ensuring financial advisers act in their clients' best interests, a priority we all share.
Since the Department began its efforts more than 5 years ago, we made it clear that we believe retirement savers need greater protections. That is why we held numerous hearings, sent letters, and engaged in other oversight activities to advance a responsible solution to help those saving for retirement; and it is why our committee put forward a legislative alternative requiring high standards for retirement advice, while also ensuring access and affordability.
Rather than engaging with Members advancing a thoughtful alternative, however, the Department opposed our bipartisan proposal outright. Instead, the Department of Labor rushed a finalized, misguided rule that will hurt the very people they intended to help.
Does anyone think that a 1,000-page rule that I hold in my hand here will make it more likely for Americans to save for retirement?
In my left hand here, I hold a Webster's dictionary, which defines every word in the English language, and it only has a few more pages than this 1,000-page rule that defines one word, Mr. Speaker, ``fiduciary.'' The last thing Washington should be doing is making it harder for working families to save and invest, but because they took their my-way-or-the-highway approach, we now have a rule that will do exactly that.
The fiduciary rule will make it harder for working families to save for retirement. It will restrict access to some of the most basic financial advice, and it will create new hurdles for small businesses who want to offer their employees retirement options.
These are consequences many Americans cannot afford, and they are consequences we will not accept. That is why this resolution is so important: to put a stop to this fundamentally flawed rule and protect the men and women working to retire with the financial security and peace of mind they deserve.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.J. Res. 88.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I want to put one thing to rest now. This $17 billion you are going to hear over and over again, what they simply did with this formula was take the amount of money in retirement savings and assume that if you used any other adviser other than a fiduciary through the life of the investment, you would get 1 percent less earnings. That is how you get to $17 billion. It has been refuted by numerous people.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, a title does not make you honest. Bernie Madoff was a fiduciary, I might add.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I will point out what has happened in England. We have a playbook by which to look at, where a very similar rule was implemented in England, about how many investors lost advice.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, there we go again. No matter how many times you say ``$17 billion,'' it doesn't mean it is a fact.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Messer), my good friend. He has two very special guests today, his children, who are on the House floor with him.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I inquire as to the time remaining.
Just to clear this up a little bit--and we all agree, everybody on both sides of the aisle, and Mr. Scott and I have agreed on this repetitively--if only best interests were the case, why isn't it just one sentence on one page and not 1,000 pages?
Number two, this is about small investors.
Mr. Speaker, a higher-income investor, like myself, this bill doesn't affect one bit--it will not affect me at all, and it affects nobody on Wall Street because most of us pay a percent of our assets in a fee. That is what we do and that is exactly what this joint resolution is doing. We are worried about small- and low-income investors. We have seen exactly this in England, and it is going to be repeated here once again.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, the average Social Security recipient in this country gets $1,300. We have 29 percent of the people, millions of people over the age of 55, with no savings.
I don't believe for 1 minute anybody in this Chamber actually believes a 1,000-page bill is going to make that easier to do and less expensive to do. I have never seen that in the history of the world.
I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, we have six remaining.
I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for the civility of this debate.
In closing, I want to remind my colleagues that a ``yes'' vote on this resolution will protect access to affordable retirement advice and allow us to get back to delivering real solutions that will empower every American to save for the future.
Mr. Speaker, I don't think it is wasting time to help and protect working families and small businesses from this onerous rule that may actually prevent them from saving for the future. As we have said here on the House floor, almost a third of all Americans--and it distresses me every day--do not have any retirement savings or pension plan. They are looking at $1,300 a month in Social Security to live a very long time. Our life expectancies are going up, so we should be doing everything we can to help people and make it easier for them to save for retirement.
I started a small medical practice--joined four other doctors--almost 40 years ago now. We started out with a very small pension plan for all of our employees. It was a broker-dealer investment situation. We have now grown that to 450 employees, and we have a totally different arrangement because we have a different business model now.
Higher income and higher earning people, like myself, don't have to worry about this rule. It will not affect us. It will affect small businesses that are trying to get started and individuals like my children who are out there starting their pension plans.
If you believe, as I do, that the American people deserve better than a flawed rule that will wreak havoc on workers and retirees, I urge you to support this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, this is a 1,000-page bill to define one word. This is a Webster's dictionary that defines every word in the English language, which is only slightly bigger than that 1,000-page bill right there. I don't think anybody believes that is going to make it easier for people to retire in this country.
On behalf of every American family, I urge you to stand up for affordable retirement advice and support H.J. Res. 88.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source