Providing for Consideration of S. 1920, Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2003

Floor Speech

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I had hoped that the procedural abuses that marked the first session of the 108th Congress would be left behind. I had hoped that we would start the new year on a positive note. We have an opportunity today to come together from both sides of the aisle and pass good legislation to help the good people who are struggling to keep their family farms alive.

The Senate has sent us a simple one-page bill, a bipartisan, noncontroversial bill that would extend bankruptcy protections for America's struggling family farmers. We could pass S. 1920 as it is, and tonight it could be on the President's desk to be signed into law. That would restore the chapter 12 bankruptcy protections for family farmers that expired at the end of last year.

Instead, we have before us an election-year dog and pony show. House Republicans have replaced this simple bill to extend a helping hand to family farms with a controversial 500-page bankruptcy overhaul bill, the same legislation that this body passed in March of 2003. They have transformed a bill to help family farmers into a symbolic protest against the other body for not taking up the bankruptcy bill.

Mr. Speaker, the House has routinely approved extensions of chapter 12 so that our family farmers are protected from the hardships of the global economy and so they can access the necessary funds to run their farms. Now is the time of the year when farmers must borrow in order to prepare for spring planting. If this House fails to extend bankruptcy protections for our family farmers today, many will not be able to convince their local banks to provide them with the necessary cash and credit to buy new seed. It is that simple, Mr. Speaker.

Are we going to help our family farmers today? Are we going to pass the extension of chapter 12 that unanimously passed in the other body? Are we going to send it to the President today for his signature? Or are we going to engage in political theatrics and once again subvert the legislative process?

Several members of the other body have already announced that they will not, I repeat they will not, accept S. 1920 back if the House attaches the larger bankruptcy bill to it. So what are we doing here other than punishing and putting in peril the livelihoods of our family farmers?

Mr. Speaker, I would humbly like to make a suggestion to the Republican leadership. Instead of using struggling family farmers to send a message to the other body, I suggest that they simply walk across the Capitol and consult with their fellow Republican leaders in the other body.

They should leave family farmers who need this bankruptcy protection out of their disputes.

Mr. Speaker, we have many critical problems facing our Nation today. Unemployment, an economy that is not creating jobs, and a health care crisis are just a few of the problems we are facing here today. Instead of this piece of political theater this afternoon, we could help struggling American families by passing a clean version of S. 1920, and then we could take up measures to extend unemployment insurance. Instead, we continue to ignore the almost 8.5 million unemployed Americans and the thousands more who have lost hope and who have given up looking for a job.

People are losing their jobs, running out of unemployment compensation, and are being forced to pay their mortgages and buy food using their credit cards. Their personal debt becomes so great that they have no choice but to file for bankruptcy, which speaks to the need for genuine bankruptcy reform.

Instead of addressing the fundamental issues facing Americans, we are wasting our time with this political sleight of hand, rehashing a controversial bill that passed last year, but has no future in the other body. Family farmers are being used as political pawns. The procedures and rules of the other body are being disregarded and the rules of this body are being manipulated and twisted in the process.

Mr. Speaker, the language this rule substitutes for S. 1920, the language from H.R. 975, the larger bankruptcy reform bill passed last year, is still very flawed. The rhetoric around bankruptcy overhaul paints a vivid picture of scheming people running up huge debts, buying extravagant houses and expensive cars just before they run to their local bankruptcy court to avoid paying their bills. But the reality is that only 3 percent of people who file for bankruptcy are these kinds of cheaters.

In order to stop these 3 percent who abuse the system, this bill takes the dramatic, sweeping step of harming the 97 percent of the people who are forced to seek protection under the Bankruptcy Code because of illness, unemployment or divorce. In fact, nearly half of the people who file for bankruptcy protection do so because of medical bills and the financial consequences of illness or injury. Middle-class families are only one serious illness away from financial collapse, and the impact of medical costs is highest on women, families headed by women and among older people.

Mr. Speaker, I am also very disappointed that the substituted language still does not include provisions to hold perpetrators of violence against women's health care clinics accountable for their actions. As part of a coordinated strategy, perpetrators of clinic violence have filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying judgments against them for violating Federal law. This bill would allow them to discharge these judgments and get away with breaking Federal law and trampling the constitutional rights of women.

Mr. Speaker, the Congress should be seeking the enforcement of Federal law and protection for the meaningful exercise of constitutional rights, not attempting to undermine it.

Mr. Speaker, this body still has an opportunity to do the right thing by our family farmers. A substitute will be offered by our colleague, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin), to permanently authorize Chapter 12 of the Bankruptcy Code, which would, once and for all, guarantee these bankruptcy protections for our farmers. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the Baldwin substitute and to stop holding our family farmers hostage in a game to coerce through legislation that primarily benefits wealthy corporate contributors at the expense of struggling farmers.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
In closing, if I can restate one of the frustrations that many of us on this side of the aisle have, we are all very concerned about our small family farmers, and we are worried that the relief they seek will be delayed indefinitely because this new version of the bill, which includes the very controversial and, in my opinion, flawed bankruptcy overhaul bill which this House passed, will go nowhere in the other body, and this is all show business that we are doing here right now.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the gentleman or any Member on the other side of the aisle, given the fact that the Republicans control the House and the Senate, has Republican leadership here in the House been given assurances by the Republican leadership in the other body that they have the necessary votes to move this conference forward? I am looking for an assurance or an answer to that question.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that we are intensely interested in passing this piece of legislation today, moving it to the Senate, believing that our colleagues on the other side of the building will see the wisdom of this bill and move this very expeditiously. This is to make permanent relief for farmers. I believe that the wisdom of the entire bill will be seen by that body, and then we will be able to have it on the President's desk very quickly for signature.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's spin; but we passed this bankruptcy reform bill last March, and the other body has not moved on our version because they have some problems with it. If I am interpreting the statements in the press from the other body correctly, there are Members who will filibuster this. For the bill to move forward in the face of the filibuster, the other body needs to muster 60 votes, which I am told from reliable sources they do not have.

That is why I ask the question if those on the gentleman's side of the aisle know something that we do not know. If those press accounts are true, what we are doing here is not helping small family farmers, we are just going through the motions. This is a big waste of time for everybody.

My suggestion would be that we should move forward with relief for family farmers. We know that will pass here easily and will pass the other body swiftly. We could send it to the President today and we have done something good rather than engage in this type of politics.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, time after time after time sitting in the Committee on Rules, we hear about all of the pieces of legislation that will never go anywhere and will never move. We have heard this about bankruptcies many times, about our budgets; and we have heard this about bills that are related to welfare reform and tax bills. It is amazing how often the other body and whoever sits as our great President, whether it be President Clinton or President Bush, have found the ability and a way to work with the leadership of both bodies. That is part of what this experiment is about.

We have great confidence that the American people, who are the special interests to each and every one of us, the special interests and the needs of farmers and the needs of Americans, will be heard by our President, by each Member of the Senate and this body; and that is why we are moving this legislation forward.

I do not think that we would ask someone ahead of time what they are going to do with that, but rather to allow them the chance to debate and work through the changes. Compromise happens all of the time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I guess that answer means, no, we do not have assurance from the other body that they will move on this; and, no, we cannot give assurances to the family farmers who are watching us here today that in fact the relief that they seek will be enacted anytime soon.

My follow-up question will be if the gentleman gets his way and his leadership gets its way and this bill moves forward with the House-passed bankruptcy reform bill attached to it, it goes over to the other body and they decide to filibuster it, is there agreement on how long we are going to wait until we help our family farmers, or will this go on indefinitely?

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. SESSIONS. The American people will have a lot to say about that as they talk with Members of the other body; and based upon that wisdom and as a result of what the leadership does, we will catch a good signal. We believe it will be on their agenda, and we are proud of what we are doing.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his response; but it is not satisfactory, not only to those of us on this side of the aisle, but to those who may be watching this who are hopeful that we will actually do something of substance and that we will help family farmers looking for relief.

Mr. Speaker, the problem here is that we have an opportunity to do something good, to actually help some people; and we are turning this into political theatrics. I think that is unfortunate. I oppose the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source