Retail Investor Protection Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1090. I must say to Representative Wagner she is correct when she says that there were 30 Democrats--I am one of them--who supported similar legislation, but that was before the Department of Labor reproposed the conflict of interest rules, gave us sort of an unprecedented 164-day comment period during the reproposal, and they withdrew the original 2010 proposal and put forward the reproposed rule in 2015, 5 years. As we discussed it, they have committed to making considerable improvements.

Now, the SEC has yet to begin the process of a related rulemaking 5 years after the Department of Labor began the process, and they have made it really clear that they don't think they will get to it.

I do want to point out--since I have 3 whole minutes here--that it has been very difficult to get the majority party to agree to providing the SEC with the needed resources that would, in fact, enable them to undertake the work that the Department of Labor has already put forward on this. So I don't think we should wait until after the SEC acts to issue a rule. And this legislation before us would only delay these important consumer protections.

The Department of Labor has received a lot of feedback, especially from me. Mr. Speaker, I have been extremely vocal in highlighting areas, some of them which you have heard on the other side mentioned here today--very vocal on the reproposed rule where I think it needs to be improved and, in fact, led a letter to the Department of Labor with 96 Democratic colleagues signing on to that letter.

However, I do think that the time is now for Congress to partner with the DOL, with industry, and with retirement savers toward the best possible final rule to encourage and protect retirement savings.

Now, I want to mention that the overwhelming majority of advisers are good people with their clients' best interest at heart. In fact, no one in this debate is suggesting that we don't support policy which puts the best interest of the client first and foremost. But when financial advisers are unscrupulous, they have a devastating impact on retirement savers.

Further, when advisers are responding to skewed incentives that encourage conflicts and put clients in products, that may be okay for the client, but placement in these products are driven primarily by the adviser's bonus.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

The DOL rule that is being reproposed seeks to mitigate these conflicts of interest so that the best advisers in companies get clients and compensation based on the best interest and the outcomes for their clients.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source