Melvin Watt: “I thank the Chair. {time} 1710 Let me say this: This is kind of an awkward conversation because we did have this…”

“I thank the Chair. {time} 1710 Let me say this: This is kind of an awkward conversation because we did have this discussion in committee. We were advised in committee that the preemption language would be corrected between the committee and the floor. It was revised. And the amendment does take a step in the right direction, so I won't ask for a recorded vote on the amendment, but it doesn't take a step far enough in the right direction because the amendment still preempts States from having the pre-review of these offerings that they now have. Even though it reserves to them the authority to do something about fraud, it does not reserve to them the authority to get involved in the review process. And in that sense, it continues to preempt State law. I want to applaud my friends, both Mr. McHenry and Mr. Perlmutter, for making a step in the right direction, but this still preempts State law, and States ought to have the prerogative to be involved in this. The State of North Carolina, from which Mr. McHenry hails, the Secretary of State is adamantly of the opinion--and I agree with her-- that this amendment does not go far enough. When we get back into the full House and I can offer a letter into the Record, it will note that the North American Securities Administrators Association does not think the amendment goes far enough to protect States' rights. I'm not accusing anybody of bad faith. I think they made a good faith effort to try to find grounds.…”