Mike Capuano

I plan to introduce a House version of that same bill shortly.

That is not a reason for us to take the giant banks off the hook for prudential regulation.

I think that it is important that the record reflect that no comment about being nice to either Democratic or Republican witnesses ever came from me.

I oppose Mrs. Wagner's bill. I think it strips Americans of a basic protection that they need for their retirement.

This bill would be devastating to low-income, to middle-income, to senior citizens.

This new bill creates an entirely new standard that isn't a fiduciary standard or a suitability standard.

Tying the hands of the SEC, being overprescriptive as this discussion draft bill is, is dangerous.

This discussion draft will most certainly undermine the SEC's rulemaking authority in this space.

This bill that Mrs. Wagner has put before us is a very troubling bill.

I am disappointed that we are going through this exercise again.

I believe that it properly balances the need to protect retirement investors with the need to streamline compliance costs.

I wrote my own letter to the DOL on the proposed rule asking for six technical fixes and clarifications, and DOL made all six changes that I asked for in the final rule.

According to the Council of Economic Advisers, this rule will save consumers roughly $17 billion--that is 'billion'--per year.

The Labor Department concluded that it could not justify delaying the start date for very long.

If you are giving investment advice to our retirement savers and you are being compensated for your advice, then you have to put your customers' interests first.

The fiduciary rule is a much-needed update of the rules governing investment advice to retirement savers.

I am a supporter of the rule because it provides critical protections to Americans who are saving for retirement.

I absolutely oppose it, and I want the record to reflect that I would never support something that is going to harm people in this fashion.

Conflicts of interest for Government officials cannot be allowed to be present in any of the transactions by the United States Government concerning Government property.

Conflicts of interest have consequences.

I have quite consistently supported for public office persons of both political parties who I believe will reduce the size of Government, increase the efficiency of Government, and reduce the burden of taxation on the American people.

I want to recognize and thank Chairman Denham of our Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials for his leadership in getting the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act across the finish line last year.

There is no reason to find ways to drive us apart unnecessarily.

That is the kind of policy that, absent some reason, would really drive a divisive wedge in a--maybe other places, but in this committee would drive a divisive wedge between people that get along and work together.

I have been informed that President Trump's administration have told all Departments not to answer any questions submitted to them by ranking members of committee or subcommittees.