{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://kaptur.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/kaptur-opposed-dodd-frank-rider-during-appropriations-markup", "Kaptur Opposed Dodd-Frank Rider During Appropriations Markup", "2014-12-17", "2014", "2014-12", "Democrat", "House", "OH", "Marcy Kaptur", "K000009", "kaptur.house.gov", null, null, "legacy", "WASHINGTON- During a June markup of the Financial Services  \n\tappropriations bill, Congresswoman Kaptur stood out as one of three  \n\tmembers to oppose a controversial amendment by Kansas Republican Kevin  \n\tYoder.  \n\t  \n\tThe controversial Yoder rider to the omnibus spending bill eliminates  \n\tthe requirement for banks to separate trades of financial derivatives  \n\tfrom traditional banking activity, which is insured by public dollars  \n\tthrough the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Trading in  \n\tderivatives such as credit-default swaps contributed to the 2008  \n\tfinancial collapse.  \n\t  \n\tHere is Kaptur's full statement that was made in the subcommittee  \n\tmarkup six months ago:  \n\t  \n\t\"I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. I'm not sure 100%  \n\tof the Members of this Committee fully comprehend everything that is  \n\tbeing included and excluded in the gentleman's amendment. So for  \n\texample, if I'm on the proper amendment, you distinguish between  \n\tinsured depository institutions and changing the language to  \n\tcovered depository institutions. What is the full implication of the  \n\tsubstitution of those words? Who does it include, who does it exclude?  \n\t  \n\t You talk about bona fide hedging and traditional bank activities.  \n\tOne of the ways we got into trouble in this country was in moving away  \n\tfrom true commodities markets to financially transacting false money.  \n\tThat's what happened in 2000 when traditional banking was thrown out.  \n\tAnd so I find it very interesting what the gentleman is trying to do  \n\there on an appropriations bill.  \n\t  \n\t\"I'd like to know who is really behind this. Who has enough power to  \n\ttry to bring this before this Committee? And I have some imaginations  \n\ton who that might be.  \n\t  \n\t\"When the traditional manner of handling real money and commodities  \n\twas thrown out in 2000, it was done in a bill that came here in a  \n\tconference report--and most members didn't even know what they were  \n\tvoting on. And then 2008 happened just a few years after that.  \n\t  \n\t\"Our country got in trouble when we started financializing the value  \n\tof true commodities. If you look at the price of oil today, you'll  \n\tfind that a good 40-70 bucks of a barrel is actually not true value.  \n\tIt is merely what Wall Street has done to create false value and is  \n\tcausing consumers to pay so much more per gallon for every gallon of  \n\tgasoline that they buy. There is something really striking that has  \n\thappened in the last decade in terms of the way that we use to value  \n\treal money and real commodities inside this country.  \n\t  \n\t\"I think what the gentleman is trying to do is really dangerous and it  \n\tdoesn't belong in this Committee. I urge my colleagues to vote  \n\tstrongly no against this amendment.  \n\t  \n\t\"And ask yourself the question (of) who is really trying to do this on  \n\tan appropriations bill?\"", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://kaptur.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/kaptur-opposed-dodd-frank-rider-during-appropriations-markup"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 0.8389400318264961, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}