or Login to see your representatives.

Access Candidates' and Representatives' Biographies, Voting Records, Interest Group Ratings, Issue Positions, Public Statements, and Campaign Finances

Simply enter your zip code above to get to all of your candidates and representatives, or enter a name. Then, just click on the person you are interested in, and you can navigate to the categories of information we track for them.

Public Statements

Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act

Floor Speech

By:
Date:
Location: Washington, DC

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WATT. I thank the Chair.

Let me say this: This is kind of an awkward conversation because we did have this discussion in committee. We were advised in committee that the preemption language would be corrected between the committee and the floor. It was revised. And the amendment does take a step in the right direction, so I won't ask for a recorded vote on the amendment, but it doesn't take a step far enough in the right direction because the amendment still preempts States from having the pre-review of these offerings that they now have. Even though it reserves to them the authority to do something about fraud, it does not reserve to them the authority to get involved in the review process. And in that sense, it continues to preempt State law.

I want to applaud my friends, both Mr. McHenry and Mr. Perlmutter, for making a step in the right direction, but this still preempts State law, and States ought to have the prerogative to be involved in this. The State of North Carolina, from which Mr. McHenry hails, the Secretary of State is adamantly of the opinion--and I agree with her--that this amendment does not go far enough.

When we get back into the full House and I can offer a letter into the Record, it will note that the North American Securities Administrators Association does not think the amendment goes far enough to protect States' rights.

I'm not accusing anybody of bad faith. I think they made a good faith effort to try to find grounds. But this raises the exact issue that I raised in the committee, which was the appropriate place to have done this and made this amendment and debated it and thought it out--in the committee, not on the floor of the House. And when you leave it to just a couple of individuals to work out something between committee and the floor of the House, sometimes it doesn't get to where people would like for it to be.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WATT. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time, although I won't take it.

I want to express my thanks also to Mr. Perlmutter, and to my colleague from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry). As I indicated, they made an effort to move this in the right direction. They, in fact, moved it. This amendment is better than the underlying bill, which totally preempted State law. So it moves in the right direction, it just does not move far enough in the right direction. Because of that--I mean, I'm not going to vote against the amendment. I'm not even going to ask for a recorded vote on the amendment itself. But it will make it necessary for me to oppose the bill itself. And I thought it was important enough for me to come down and express this because there are a significant number of people out there, including a number of State Attorneys General and/or Secretaries of State who believe this does not go far enough.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source:
Back to top