It is a simple question to ask, that when you come to the floor with an amendment to say that we're going to take money and yank money out of one agency that has a primary responsibility to the members of the public of this country, to first go to those agencies and ask, well, what impact will they have? It's not a matter whether other amendments are coming down that will have a larger or more de minimis impact. It's incumbent upon the gentleman from Massachusetts to do his research before he comes to the floor with his amendment. I'm sorry to see that he did not. Finally, as well, he comes to the floor with this amendment saying, well, we need to do this action now. Don't look back at their past poor performance. Let's take this action now. I remind the gentleman as the author of the Dodd-Frank reform legislation that his very own legislation mandated a study, it was in section 967, to reform the operation of the SEC and asked to do a study in that to see how their reform has occurred. Why don't we wait for the studies to come out, for the information to come out, to see whether or not the SEC has changed its performance. Even after they've lost their majority, we see the conduct of the SEC and it still continues to fail. Even now we see that they are under investigation by the Inspector General. Why? For allegedly leasing more space before receiving funds to do so. So they've had a poor track record in the past.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker criticizes an amendment regarding funding for the SEC and calls for more research before action.
Share
More from Thomas A. Garrett
Very quickly back to Syria, if anyone tells you that this is Turks versus Kurds, they should tell Sheikh Bandar, the leader of thousands of Arabs who fight alongside the Kurds and the SDF. If anyone tells you it is Turks versus Kurds, they…
Somewhere, Mr. Speaker, someone is watching what is going on in this Chamber. Even now, probably in a Nation of 320-plus million, many someones are watching, and most of them don't have a clue who I am, and that is okay. But the fact that…
I believe to my very core that the best of the collective is achieved by empowering the individual.
perhaps have we considered a paradigm wherein we tie aid and development to Afghanistan to eradication efforts?





