Providing for Consideration of H.R. Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PASCRELL. I thank the gentleman from Georgia, and I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad you had a little reference here: don't allow companies or corporations to avoid their responsibilities. I want to speak to that issue. I think it is very, very, very critical.

Mr. Speaker, let's not beat around the bush. We are on the floor today debating H.R. 5063 under the guise of ``ensuring responsibility.'' I mean, who would be against that? That is like apple pie. However, this bill is nothing more than a political exercise void of real reprimand for these practices, reforms to the system, or redress to actual victims. If that is what it did, I would be here supporting it.

We have known for years of instances where deferred prosecution agreements have gotten out of hand. You don't remember those days? I will bring them back to you.

When I tried to make modest reforms to improve the transparency of these agreements, I was rebuffed by Members on the other side of the aisle. They have short memories. They have selective memories. Where was this outrage when I was screaming about seven deferred prosecution agreements with large medical device companies that were negotiated by New Jersey's former United States Attorney Chris Christie? There is a name.

One of the settlements allowed Bristol-Myers Squibb to avoid prosecution for securities fraud in exchange for a $5 million donation to Mr. Christie's law school alma mater; and I am listening to preaching over here and pontificating about what is going on today about these groups that are lined up to get their money from the Justice Department. I didn't hear one word--not one word. In fact, if the gentleman has a word to interject, I will hold on for 10 seconds and listen.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PASCRELL. I yield to the gentleman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PASCRELL. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, in all of the settlements, Chris Christie appointed political allies and supporters as monitors to oversee corporate compliance, which the gentleman is talking about, which netted those allies tens of millions of dollars. These allies then served as major donors to a political campaign account.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PASCRELL. Now, these arrangements were so problematic that they prompted the Department of Justice--we have selective memory--to issue a new guidance limiting prosecutors' discretion in reaching such agreements, and the Judiciary Committee held an oversight hearing in 2009.

When Democrats tried to highlight the issue of using a public office to funnel large legal fees to cronies who then turned around and bankrolled campaigns, those on the other side said they did not see it for what it was--crony capitalism. They have heard the term before. Rather, they bent over backward to praise Mr. Christie and accused Democrats of grasping for ways to embarrass a ``rising Republican star.'' Now that time has passed and a different administration is in charge, we are now hearing a different story, but very real issues with these practices still remain.

I agree that we need reforms, my friend from Georgia. I agree. I hope that my colleagues will take a look at the deferred prosecution agreements reform legislation that I, Mr. Pallone, and Mr. Cohen have introduced.

The issue here is not the government forcing companies to use deferred prosecution agreements to potentially divert funds away from helping victims when it comes to corporate malfeasance. The more egregious issue is that firms have avoided prosecution to begin with. The little guy gets it in the neck, and the banks and the corporations are never held accountable. The other side knows. The gentleman, my friend, has opened up a can of worms here--and I mean that sincerely.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PASCRELL. We are on a roll here.

Mr. Speaker, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission made recommendations to the Department of Justice to criminally prosecute top executives at several large financial institutions, but we have yet to see a major Wall Street executive be criminally charged. That is criminal. You want to know what ``criminal'' is? That is criminal. So we come here today, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

I don't question the motivations of the sponsor, by the way. That is not my motive. We learned in March that the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission--I will repeat--recommended that the Department of Justice criminally prosecute. Nothing has been done. I have also written a letter to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. By the way, this is not partisan. Our own Justice Department hasn't done anything either.

I am being fair about this, but they have to look into this. They can't come before us and tell us they are trying to save the little guy or the victims when they allow this and permit this to go on day in and day out when the banks never were held accountable. No one has ever been brought before a court. Eight years later, and we are here.

Rather than wasting time on this fishing expedition, if the House really wants to ensure punishment is carried out and that the actual victims receive compensation, we need to actually address the root cause of the problem.

Mr. Ranking Member, my friend from Georgia, we have to address the root problem.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source