On the recordFebruary 3, 2016
I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant opposition to this rule today because it is close--it is close--to a rule that would have substantial bipartisan support. The rule today provides for consideration of H.R. 1675, the Encouraging Employee Ownership Act of 2015, and H.R. 766, the Financial Institution Customer Protection Act of 2015. In terms of process, there is some credit to be given under this rule. The rule was very close, with one major fault, which I will discuss in detail, to fulfilling the promises laid out by the new Speaker of the House of Representatives. As you might recall, Mr. Speaker, there was a promise to all Members that each Member of this body would have a chance to consider his or her ideas on the House floor through a more open amendment process. And you know what? That is a good idea. Of course, if it was an idea that didn't have a majority of support, that is fine. But there would be a vote. We could debate it. We could vote on it. If ideas came to the floor, were debated and considered worthy by a majority of this body, they would pass. Even if a particular committee chair of jurisdiction didn't like the bill, even if leadership on either side didn't like the amendment, the will of the body could be heard for commonsense improvements.…





