The House passed the Terrorism Risk Insurance ProgramReauthorization Act of 2014 Wednesday evening in a 417-7 vote.

The act would extend the termination date of the TerrorismInsurance Program established under the Terrorism Risk InsuranceAct of 2002.

The bill also contained a provision that requires the president to appoint atleast one member of the Federal Reserve Board with “demonstratedprimary experience working in or supervising community banks having less than $10 billion in totalassets.''

The provision did not contain credit union parity languange asrequested by credit union trade associations.

Before the bill was passed, the bill was nearly derailed byHouse Democrats, who complained about last-minute add-ons to thebill made by Republicans, including a relaxing of derivativesrestrictions passed in the Dodd-Frank Act. Sen. Elizabeth Warren(D-Mass.) urged House Democrats to vote against the bill because ofthe derivatives language, and House Financial Services CommitteeRanking Member Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) accused House Republicansof failing to negotiate in good faith.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling(R-Texas) countered that the Senate version of the bill alreadycontained the unrelated language regarding the Federal ReserveBoard qualifications from an amendment sponsored by Sen. DavidVitter (R-La.).

“So we have an opportunity to do something very positive, butnow all of the sudden, some on the other side of the aisle say,'Well, we can't do this. We believe this is unrelated to TRIA.'Well, why did the United States Senate put in a provision thatmakes a radical change in a requirement to serve on the Board ofGovernors of the Federal Reserve?” Hensarling said on the Housefloor Wednesday.

“What does that have to do with TRIA? The Senate put that in.NARAB, the National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers –the Senate put that in. Two-thirds of bill is about NARAB. The Senate put that in. Now, I'm not debating the underlying policyissues. But it is, at best, a little disconcerting if notdisingenuous to say, 'Well, my Lord, the House shouldn't put inunrelated provisions' when Senate just did it twice.”