Regulation on Retirement Savings

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, today the administration will unveil a set of regulations many believe will make it harder for lower to middle-class families to save for retirement. The regulation has been a long time coming, and there will be changes made from what was initially proposed. However, the fundamentals are likely to remain the same.

If that is the case, here is what we can safely say. Some have estimated that investment fees could more than double under this regulation. Here is what that could mean: access to critical retirement advice for those who can afford it and restricted access to affordable advice, and fewer retirement savings as a result, for too many lower and middle-class Americans.

It sounds a lot like ObamaCare. Here is why. Like ObamaCare, it threatens to upend an entire industry, threatens to increase costs and decrease access, and it threatens to hurt the very people it is aimed at helping. This regulation could have the effect of discouraging investment advisers from taking on clients with smaller accounts. What that means is that smaller savers, everyday Americans trying to plan for their future, could have less access to sound investment advice. One report projects the rule could cost middle-class families $80 billion in lost savings over the next decade.

I have already heard from Kentuckians who fear the negative repercussions this rule could have. For example, one financial adviser in my State shared with me his concerns about how the rule, as proposed, could impact his clients. There is the single mom with a daughter in college who fears she could see significant investment fee increases under the rule--increases she simply cannot afford. There is also the small business which could have a harder time accessing investment advice, potentially leading it to stop offering retirement plans to employees all together, and retirees living off their lifesavings could see reductions in their fixed income because of potential increases in investment costs.

From its initial proposal at a campaign-style event to its rollout today, this regulation seems to have always been more about politics than good policy. According to a report released by the Senate Homeland and Governmental Affairs Committee chairman, the administration seems to have ``disregarded . . . concerns and declined to implement recommendations'' from career, nonpartisan staff and government officials. Chairman Johnson's report goes on to say that the administration ``frequently prioritized the expeditious completion of the rulemaking process at the expense of thoughtful deliberation.''

America's middle class deserves responsible solutions, not far- reaching regulations that could jeopardize the retirement security of the very people it purports to help.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source