I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to add my words congratulating everybody for finally getting this done, but I also want to be real clear. I wish we could have done this a year ago, so we could have been…

I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, on the last bill, the TRIA bill, when we were still arguing about it, some people on the other side accused people like me, who support the TRIA bill, of being in favor of corporate welfare…

This bill will allow three, only three of our Wall Street institutions--which control 70 percent of the collateralized loan obligation business; three of them control 70 percent of the business--to gamble with depositors' money again…

To create a more stable and cost-effective program, we need to allow the private market to enter the space instead of inhibiting its ability to do so.

I owe it to the families and business owners living in those communities, and we owe it to all Americans, to create a flood insurance program that is stable, fair, accessible, and cost-effective.

I know a couple of things. And the one thing I know is that we have flood insurance because we haven't found a better way to do it.

It cannot continue to be a program that exposes taxpayers to endless risk, and it doesn't have to be.

I voted against the sequester.

We have a good system. We have to make it better.

I am all for capital.

Everything I know that I want to make better about myself and my family... costs money.

I just want to make sure it is safe, right? We are good?

I am all for that. But in the final analysis, we are going to need more money to keep it up--to catch up now.

If Government takes action and costs somebody money, that is either a direct or an indirect tax.

I continue waiting for my Republican colleagues to acknowledge, as Mr. Greenspan has, that they have found a flaw in free market ideology.

Dodd-Frank has done a very good job at containing the crisis that we had, putting us back on the footing.

This is another one of these show-and-tell hearings with apparently no purpose to it.

How are we going to get to an end? How are we ever going to get any of these things addressed if we simply sit here and say, oh, we hate this, we love that, here are my speaking points for my campaign.

We want to talk about how bad Dodd-Frank is. We don't want to talk about the things we can come to an agreement on to fix some of the things.

I guess I don't really have any questions because the truth is I already know some of the things that need to be done.

We are making money, we are actually costing homeowners more than they should be charged so that we can use it as a piggy bank, yet we can't have an honest discussion on how to fix it.

If every country in the world would legitimately shut down their ex-im bank or their comparable one to it, I would consider it because I don't disagree.

We are opening up our markets. We are walking off the battlefield.

We are not talking about reforming the Export-Import Bank here. It is going away.

This is another example of this Administration's intent to pick winners and losers in our economy, and I can no longer support the authorization of the Ex-Im Bank.