The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“ENHANCED S.E.C. ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY ACT” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H13404-H13405 on Dec. 2, 2009.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
ENHANCED S.E.C. ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY ACT
Mr. KANJORSKI. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2873) to provide enhanced enforcement authority to the Securities and Exchange Commission, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2873
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Enhanced S.E.C. Enforcement Authority Act''.
SEC. 2. NATIONWIDE SERVICE OF PROCESS.
(a) Securities Act of 1933.--Section 22(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77v(a)) is amended by inserting after the second sentence the following: ``In any civil action instituted by the Commission under this title in a United States district court for any judicial district, subpoenas issued to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents or tangible things (or both) at any hearing or trial may be served at any place within the United States. Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply to a subpoena so issued.''.
(b) Securities Exchange Act of 1934.--Section 27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78aa) is amended by inserting after the third sentence the following: ``In any civil action instituted by the Commission under this title in a United States district court for any judicial district, subpoenas issued to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents or tangible things (or both) at any hearing or trial may be served at any place within the United States. Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply to a subpoena so issued.''.
(c) Investment Company Act of 1940.--Section 44 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-43) is amended by inserting after the fourth sentence the following: ``In any civil action instituted by the Commission under this title in a United States district court for any judicial district, subpoenas issued to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents or tangible things
(or both) at any hearing or trial may be served at any place within the United States. Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply to a subpoena so issued.''.
(d) Investment Advisers Act of 1940.--Section 214 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-14) is amended by inserting after the third sentence the following: ``In any civil action instituted by the Commission under this title in a United States district court for any judicial district, subpoenas issued to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents or tangible things (or both) at any hearing or trial may be served at any place within the United States. Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply to a subpoena so issued.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
General Leave
Mr. KANJORSKI. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume and rise today to speak in support of H.R. 2873, the Enhanced S.E.C. Enforcement Authority Act, and to congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) for his work on these matters.
{time} 1200
H.R. 2873 enjoys bipartisan support and previously passed the House in a slightly different form as part of the Securities Act of 2008 in the 110th Congress. In the 111th Congress, we've also incorporated this commonsense legislative reform in the Investors Protection Act of 2009. The House Financial Services Committee recently approved the Investors Protection Act, and that bill will come to the House floor in the near future as part of the broader financial services regulatory reform package.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission currently has nationwide service of process of subpoenas in administrative proceedings. This bill will enhance the Commission's enforcement program by allowing subpoenas to be served nationwide in civil actions brought by the agency in Federal court. Currently, the Commission can issue a subpoena only within the Federal jurisdictional district where a trial takes place or within 100 miles of the courthouse. Witnesses in civil cases brought by the Commission are, however, often located outside of a trial court's subpoena range.
With the proliferation of Internet scams that are perpetrated in multiple States, this quirk in the law has hampered the Commission's ability to efficiently and effectively mount its cases. Unless witnesses volunteer to appear at civil trials, the Commission must take depositions where the witnesses are located and use their written or videotaped deposition testimony at trial. Because of the associated travel for numerous lawyers and associates that must be present, depositions are generally more expensive than having a witness attend a trial.
H.R. 2873 would fix this problem by allowing the Commission to have nationwide service of process just as it currently has for its administrative proceedings. These changes in subpoena procedures for civil cases would apply to the Securities Exchange Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Investment Company Act of 1940, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Nationwide service of process would produce a number of substantial advantages, including a significant savings in terms of travel costs and staff time.
During these difficult economic times, we need to ensure that Federal agencies operate more efficiently. Additionally, we need to ensure that the Commission maximizes its limited resources to investigate and resolve wrongdoing in our securities markets. H.R. 2873 achieves both of these important objectives.
Moreover, the bill that the House is considering today incorporates the recommendations of the Commission, the Justice Department and our colleagues on the House Judiciary Committee. The consensus legislation, therefore, not only has bipartisan support in the House but it also has support from within the administration and across committee jurisdictions in the House. In short, H.R. 2873 is a commonsense bill that will allow the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to operate more efficiently.
Madam Speaker, I again commend the gentleman from California for his work on these matters, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would like to thank my colleague from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) for his support of this bill and his kind words about this bill. I would also like to thank the Judiciary Committee for working with us on the Financial Services Committee to come up with language that is mutually acceptable and works for everyone on this bill.
In light of the recent Wall Street scandals with Bernie Madoff and Stanford and others, we think it's appropriate to grant the Securities and Exchange Commission some additional enforcement tools that they need to fight fraud and corruption in the markets. As Mr. Kanjorski suggested--and I won't repeat the details of the bill which he accurately described--but if you think about it, most of these SEC enforcement issues will involve investors and perhaps conspirators from all over the country. But yet under current law, the SEC only has the authority to subpoena someone if they live within 100 miles of the Federal courthouse in which the trial is held.
So this means that if they need witness testimony from a victim, from a co-conspirator, from somebody involved with the investment, from somebody who participated in the alleged crime or who was a victim of the alleged crime, they have to get a deposition from them if they live more than 100 miles outside of the courthouse. Those depositions can be costly, difficult to get, and they clearly are not as effective in a trial circumstance as a witness actually in the trial.
This bill would correct that and simply give the SEC the same enforcement capabilities, the same subpoena capabilities that many other Federal enforcement agencies have in similar circumstances.
So I appreciate the bipartisan support. I appreciate the comments.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time and yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CAMPBELL. I will yield back the balance of my time as well.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Blumenauer). The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2873, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
