On the recordJuly 7, 2016
First of all, I would like to point out to my colleague from New York that he is actually wrong. We marked this bill up in committee in April of this year. And the interesting thing, Mr. Chairman, is they want it both ways. We have to follow the SEC until they don't want to do it, and then they disagree with it. They disagree with the statement that the SEC apparently has come up with that this is going to cost $1.7 billion in this initial year. They want to say that the Obama economy is great--until it isn't and it doesn't work in their favor. I, too, am very concerned and join my colleagues of all stripes to say that this economy has not responded the way it needs to and we need to have those wages up. And here we are robbing Peter to pay Paul, because we are going to take that money that could go into investing in equipment and productivity and actual workers, and we are going to do meaningless reports to this that tell us nothing. And the words of the SEC Chair--not my words, the SEC Chair--says that this brings no meaningful information to people in the economy. {time} 1615 So I don't understand why, other than window dressing, once again, and trying to set up a straw man argument, for why the businesses are doing what they are doing, why they would move ahead. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.





