On the recordFebruary 15, 2017
I thank Chairman Walberg. There is an irony here, and it is an irony I think that is worth pointing out. This is, obviously, in the context, like the gentlewoman from California pointed out, of the fiduciary rule, which we are familiar with. That was an effort by the Obama administration to promulgate a new rule to create a new standard that would have an impact, Mr. Speaker, on investment advice. It was clear that the net result of that was to do what? It would have crowded people out at the lower end of the economic spectrum, not give them access to the coverage or the advice that they needed, because the advice, Mr. Speaker, would have been too expensive, and it would have created the self-fulfilling prophecy, unfortunately, where wealthier people, who can afford it, are able to get good advice. It was a terrible idea. We worked on a bipartisan basis. The administration wouldn't have any part of the bipartisan solution. They jammed the rule down. It was a bad idea. Yet, the same administration, Mr. Speaker, is now saying to the entities that we really shouldn't have confidence in, that is States and localities on these pensions, you have more flexibility. So think about it. Taking away flexibility from people who need help, locking them out, not intentionally, but locking them out, and yet giving more flexibility to the very entities that have demonstrated that they have not used that properly. It is ironic. I mean, you can't make this up, basically.…
