Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
CAN BE HELPED AND THIS F.H.A.
REFINANCE PROGRAM TERMINATION
ACT WOULD PREVENT THAT FROM
HAPPENING.
I THANK THE RANKING MEMBER FOR
THE TIME AND I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
THANK YOU.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I YIELD FOUR
ILLINOIS, MR. DOLD.
MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FOUR
MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN, FOR YIELDING AND, MR.
CHAIRMAN, H.R. 830 IS
COMMONSENSE LEGISLATION THAT
STOPS INEFFICIENT AND
INEFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING.
THIS PROGRAM AT ITS OUTSET OF
THIS $8 BILLION PROGRAM, ITS
FAILURE WAS INEVITABLE.
THAT INEVITABLE FAILURE IS NOW
UNDENIABLE.
IT DOESN'T WORK FOR THE
HOMEOWNER, IT DOESN'T WORK FOR
THE TAX PAYING AMERICAN FAMILIES
AND IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T WORK
FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS WHO ARE
TRYING TO CLAW THEIR WAY OUT OF
THE DEBT THAT WE ARE BURDENING
THEM WITH EACH AND EVERY DAY.
SO LET'S GO BACK AND LET'S TALK
ABOUT THE HOMEOWNERS.
WE'VE GOT 12 MILLION MORTGAGES
IN AMERICA THAT ARE CURRENTLY
UNDER WATER AND YET THIS PROGRAM
, THIS PROGRAM WHICH WAS
ACTUALLY ROLLED OUT IN MARCH,
STARTED ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO,
HAS 245 APPLICATIONS.
245.
HOW MANY HAVE ACTUALLY MADE IT
OVER THE HURDLES AND HAVE GOTTEN
SOME HELP AND REFINANCED?
44.
44 REFINANCES.
WE'VE GOT $8.12 BILLION THAT HAS
BEEN OBLIGATED, WE HAVE $50
MILLION THAT HAS BEEN DISPERSED.
NOW, A QUICK BACK OF THE
ENVELOPE CALCULATION, THAT'S
$1.1 MILLION PER MORTGAGE
REFINANCED THUS FAR.
IF WE LOOK AT IT EVEN FURTHER,
WERE THESE MILLION-DOLLAR
MORTGAGES?
ACTUALLY THE AVERAGE MORTGAGE
WAS ABOUT $300,000.
SO WE SPENT THE AMERICAN
TAXPAYERS, IN TERMS OF THEIR
DOLLARS, WE SPENT $1.1 MILLION
IN ORDER TO REFINANCE A $300,000
LOAN.
THE ADMINISTRATION SAID, WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE $1.-- 1.5 MILLION
HOMEOWNERS GET INTO THIS
PROGRAM.
AND YET WE'VE TAKEN ALMOST A
YEAR, WE HAVE 44 THAT HAVE
ACTUALLY GONE THROUGH.
IF YOU WERE TO GET THROUGH THIS
PROGRAM, IF YOU WERE ONE OF THE
LUCKY ONES, ONE OF THE 44,
CLEARLY IT'S NOT GOING TO HELP
YOU IN SO AS YOU'RE GOING TO
DESTROY YOUR CREDIT FOR THE NEXT
SEVERAL YEARS.
THE AVERAGE CREDIT SCORE OF THE
44 THAT ARE IN THE PROGRAM WAS
711.
THAT CREDIT SCORE IS GOING TO GO
DOWN.
IS THEIR MONTHLY PAYMENT GOING
TO GO DOWN?
IN MANY INSTANCES NO.
BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO
COME UP WITH CLOSING COSTS.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY
PRIVATE MORTGAGE INSURANCE IF
THEY HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING IT
ALREADY.
AND SO THERE ARE OTHER
REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SIMPLY A
BURDEN ON THE ACTUAL HOMEOWNERS.
IT'S TIME THAT WE TELL THE
AMERICAN PUBLIC THE TRUTH.
IT'S TIME THAT WE IN THIS BODY
RECOGNIZE WHEN A GOVERNMENT
PROGRAM IS NOT WORKING.
WE NEED TO GET RID OF THIS
PROGRAM.
$8.12 BILLION OBLIGATED.
$50 MILLION DISPERSED.
FOR 245 APPLICANTS AND 44
MORTGAGES ACTUALLY REDONE.
THE PROGRAM CERTAINLY DOESN'T
WORK FOR THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER.
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT DEBTS AND
DEFICITS IN WASHINGTON, MANY OF
US SENT HERE TO WASHINGTON TO
TRY TO GET THE OUT-OF-CONTROL
GOVERNMENT SPENDING BACK IN LINE
AND I WOULD SAY THAT CERTAINLY $
1.1 MILLION PER MORTGAGE IS NOT
A GOOD USE OF THE TAXPAYER
DOLLARS.
WHEN WE LOOK AT FUTURE
GENERATIONS, WE LOOK AT THE
AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE'RE
SPENDING RIGHT NOW, $.48
TRILLION IN THE DEFICIT SPENDING
-- $1.48 TRILLION IN THE DEFICIT
SPENDING.
DOWN TO TALKING ABOUT $1.6
THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET COMES
TRILLION FOR THE NEXT YEAR.
WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO SPEND
MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE.
OUR DEBT AT $14 TRILLION.
WHEN WE ACTUALLY TOOK A LOOK AT
THE TREASURY REPORT THAT CAME
OUT JUST A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO,
TALKING ABOUT TARP, BECAUSE THIS
PROGRAM IS BASICALLY ON TARP
FUNDS, THEY RECOGNIZED THAT THE
MORTGAGE MODIFICATION PROGRAMS
WERE NEVER INTENDED TO BE
RECOVERED.
THIS TO ME, I THINK, IS AN
ENORMOUS PROBLEM.
THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT DOESN'T
WORK FOR THE HOMEOWNER, IT
DOESN'T WORK FOR THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT
GOING TO WORK FOR FUTURE
GENERATIONS.
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS.
THE GENTLEMAN SIMPLY
REPEATED AN ABSOLUTE FANTASY.
THIS IS NOT A $50 MILLION
SPENDITURE FOR 40 LOANS.
THE $50 MILLION HAS NOT BEEN
GIVEN TO ANYBODY, NOT A PENNY OF
IT.
IT HAS BEEN PUT IN A RESERVE
ACCOUNT.
$50 MILLION HAS BEEN SET ASIDE
IN A RESERVE ACCOUNT.
IT WAS DISPERSED FROM THE TARP
TO A RESERVE ACCOUNT.
THE C.B.O. HAS ESTIMATED THAT IF
THIS GOES FORWARD IT WILL BE
$12,000 PER LOAN.
LAST WEEK THE GENTLEMAN WAS
CLAIMING THAT IF YOU PARTICIPATE
IN THIS PROGRAM YOU'D HAVE A TAX
LIABILITY.
HE LEARNED THAT THAT WAS WRONG.
HE'S PERPETUATING ERROR.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS.
I NOW YIELD TWO
MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM
CALIFORNIA, MR. MCNERNEY.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR TWO
MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MR.
RANKING MEMBER.
I'M PROUD TO REPRESENT MUCH OF
THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY.
LIVE AND WORK BUT UNFORTUNATELY
OUR VALLEY IS A GREAT PLACE TO
WE'VE BEEN HIT VERY HARD BY THE
ECONOMIC DOWNTURN.
THE VALLEY HAS BEEN GROUND ZERO
FOR THE FORECLOSURE CRISIS.
OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS
THOUSANDS OF FAMILIES IN OUR
COUNTY AND THROUGHOUT THE VALLEY
HAVE LOST THEIR HOMES.
I'VE HOSTED FORECLOSURE
ASSISTANCE WORKSHOPS, I'VE MET
WITH HARDWORKING PEOPLE WHO WERE
MISLED BY LENDERS WHO WERE
STRUGGLING TO STAY ON TOP OF
THEIR MORTGAGES, I'VE SEEN GROWN
MEN CRY BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T
KEEP A ROOF OVER THEIR CHILDREN.
I'VE TALKED TO VETERANS WHO
SERVED THEIR COUNTRY ONLY TO
RETURN HOME TO A NOTICE OF
DEFAULT.
AND I'VE MET SENIORS ON THE
BRINK OF HOMELESSNESS.
THE ADMINISTRATION'S FORECLOSURE
PREVENTION INITIATIVES HAVE
FALLEN SHORT IN THE VALLEY.
SIMPLY PUT, THE ADMINISTRATION'S
PROGRAMS HAVEN'T EFFECTIVELY
SERVED THE PEOPLE YOU UNDERSTAND
WATER ON THEIR MORTGAGE AND THE
-- UNDER WATER ON THEIR MORTGAGE
AND THE ADMINISTRATION HASN'T
BEEN TOUGH ENOUGH ON THE BIG
BANKS.
I CALL ON PRESIDENT OBAMA AND
THIS CABINET TO DEVELOP MORE
EFFECTIVE EFFORTS TO STEM THE
TIDE OF FORECLOSURES.
BUT DESPITE THESE SHORTCUMMINGS,
THE BILL -- SHORTCOMINGS, THE
BILL THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS ARE
OFFERING TODAY IS ABSOLUTELY THE
WRONG APPROACH.
IT'S THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH
THE BATH WATER.
INSTEAD OF CANCELING FORECLOSURE
RELIEF PROGRAMS AT THEIR
BEGINNING STAGES LIKE THEY'RE
PROPOSING, WE SHOULD BE
STRENGTHENING THEM SO THEY'RE
MORE EFFECTIVE.
MORTGAGE COUNSELORS FROM MY
DISTRICT ADVISE AND PLEAD TO
IMPROVE OUR EFFORTS TO GET TOUGH
ON BIG BANKS AND PROVIDE
MEANINGFUL RELIEF TO FAMILIES.
STABILIZING THE HOUSING MARKET
IS CRITICAL TO ECONOMIC RECOVERY
AND CREATING JOBS.
FOR THESE REASONS I OPPOSE H.R.
830 AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE
OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
YES, MR. CHAIR, I
YIELD THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ILLINOIS 30 SECONDS.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR 30
SECONDS.
I THANK THE CHAIR.
RUNNING A BUSINESS, I HAVE TO
TELL YOU, OBLIGATED FUNDS ARE
ONE THING, DISPERSED FUNDS ARE
QUITE ANOTHER.
IF I CAN, FROM THE MONTHLY 508
REPORT DELIVERED TO THE CONGRESS
FROM TARP AND FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, AND
I HAVE AND WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT
FOR THE RECORD, UNDER OBLIGATED,
ALL THE WAY DOWN HERE, WHEN IT'S
TALKING ABOUT THE F.H.A.
REFINANCE, IT'S $8.12 BILLION.
IN AN ENTIRELY
DIFFERENT COLUMN, UNDER
DISPERSED, IT'S $50 MILLION.
FROM THE PAPER HERE, FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY,
OBLIGATED AND DISPERSED ARE
DIFFERENT THINGS, WE HAVE $50
MILLION THAT HAS BEEN DISPERSED.
I YIELD BACK.
I YIELD MYSELF 15
SECONDS TO FURTHER ILLUMINATE.
IT'S BEEN DISPERSED IN A LETTER
OF CREDIT, NONE OF WHICH HAS
BEEN DRAWN DOWN.
IT SITS THERE AS A RESERVE IN
CASE OF LOSSES.
I NOW YIELD THREE MINUTES TO THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM NEW YORK, MRS.
MALONEY.
THE GENTLELADY FROM
NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE
MINUTES.
I THANK THE
RANKING MEMBER FOR YIELDING AND
I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 830
AND THIS BILL IS ONE OF FOUR
SEPARATE ANTIFORECLOSURE
PROGRAMS AIMED AT HELPING
TROUBLED HOMEOWNERS STAY IN
THEIR HOMES THAT THE NEW HOUSE
REPUBLICAN MAJORITY ARE PLANNING
TO END.
NOW WHAT IS VERY TROUBLING IS
THEY DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHAT
TO PUT IN ITS PLACE.
NOW, WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE 12
MILLION MORTGAGES THAT ARE UNDER
WATER, THAT NEED HELP.
AND THEY'RE IN ALL OF OUR
STATES.
BUT THEY'RE NOT COMING FORWARD
WITH ANY IDEAS OF HOW TO HELP
PEOPLE.
THE ECONOMY OR TO HELP THE
NOW, THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM IS
JUST GETTING STARTED.
IT'S THE F.H.A. SHORT REFINANCE
PROGRAM.
AND IT'S ONE OF THE FORECLOSURE
PREVENTION PROGRAMS THAT WOULD
NOT ONLY HELP THE INDIVIDUAL
HOMEOWNERS BUT ALSO HELP TO
STABILIZE THE OVERALL U.S.
HOUSING MARKET WHICH IS 25% OF
OUR ECONOMY.
SO IT NOT ONLY HELPS AN
INDIVIDUAL, IT HELPS THE
LOCALITY, IT HELPS OUR COUNTRY,
IT HELPS OUR ECONOMIC STRENGTH.
THE RESULT OF ENDING THIS
PROGRAM WOULD BE HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF ADDITIONAL
FORECLOSURES AND STEEPER PRICE
DECLINES IN OUR HOUSING.
IT'S OUTRAGEOUS.
IT'S SHORT-SIGHTED, IT'S MEAN
AND IT'S WRONG.
NOW, IN THIS PROGRAM IT WOULD
ALLOW THE BORROWERS TO REDUCE
THE PRINCIPAL OWED ON THEIR
HOMES UP TO 10% SO THAT THEIR
PAYMENTS ARE LOWER, SO THAT THEY
CAN SAVE MONEY THAT THEY CAN'T
AFFORD AND IN RETURN THE BANKS
WOULD GET AN F.H.A.-INSURED LOAN
THAT IS SUBJECT TO ALL OF
F.H.A.'S STRICT STANDARDS.
SO TO GET THIS LOAN YOU'RE GOING
TO HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH HOPS --
HOOPS TO BE ABLE TO QUALIFY AND
IT IS VOLUNTARY.
JUST LAST WEEK SEVERAL MAJOR
BANKS IN AMERICA VOLUNTARILY
WALKED FORWARD TO HELP OUT.
CITI BANK, WELLS FARGO, BANK OF
AMERICA, TO NAME A FEW.
SO THE PROGRAM IS JUST GETTING
STARTED AND THE $50 MILLION LINE
OF CREDIT IS LIKE A LINE OF
CREDIT YOU DRAW DOWN ON.
HOPEFULLY WE WON'T EVEN HAVE TO
TAP INTO IT.
HOPEFULLY OUR ECONOMY IMPROVES,
PEOPLE ARE EMPLOYED AND THEY'RE
ABLE TO PAY THEIR MORTGAGES.
AND THE STANDARDS ARE VERY, VERY
STRICT.
THE OWNERS MUST BE CURRENT ON
THEIR PAYMENTS, IT MUST BE THEIR
PRIMARY RESIDENCE, THEY HAVE TO
HAVE FULL DOCUMENTATION TO
QUALIFY.
SO IT IS A STRICT PROGRAM AND I
WANT TO COME BACK TO AN ISSUE
THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, IS
THIS AFFECTS LIVES.
THIS AFFECTS PEOPLE.
NOW, IN CONGRESSMAN FRANK'S HOME
STATE THERE ARE OVER 222,000
RESIDENTS WHOSE MORTGAGES ARE
UNDER WATER THAT COULD QUALIFY
CRITERIA.
POSSIBLY IF THEY CAN MEET THE
IT'S PART OF A TOTAL PACKAGE TO
HELP OUR ECONOMY MOVE FORWARD
AND THE OPPOSITION, THE
REPUBLICAN MAJORITY, HAS NO
IDEAS OF THEIR OWN.
IT'S JUST TO COME IN AND CUT A
GOOD PROGRAM THAT IS JUST
GETTING STARTED.
NOW THEY MENTIONED THE 44 PEOPLE
THAT HAVE BEEN HELPED, THEY SAY
THAT'S NOT IMPORTANT.
I'D SAY IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO
THE 44 PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN
HELPED AND THERE MAY BE 12
MILLION POSSIBLY THAT COULD BE
HELPED UNDER THIS PROGRAM.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ALABAMA.
I INQUIRE OF THE
TIME ON EACH SIDE?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ALABAMA HAS 6 1/2 MINUTES
REMAINING AND THE GENTLEMAN HAS
7 1:4 MINUTES REMAINING.
I CONTINUE TO
I YIELD TO THE
RESERVE MY TIME.
FOUR MINUTES.
GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH CAROLINA
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
NORTH CAROLINA IS RECOGNIZED
FOR FOUR MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I SAY 10 YEARS AGO THE DEBATE
HERE IN CONGRESS WAS WHAT TO DO
WITH THE SURPLUS.
IN FACT, WE PAID OFF $400
BILLION OF THE DEBT AND ALAN
GREENSPAN WORRIED THAT WE WERE
GOING TO PAY OFF THE NATIONAL
DEBT TOO QUICKLY AND IT MIGHT
BE UNSETTLING TO THE ECONOMY.
MR. CHAIRMAN, IF THERE IS ONE
PROBLEM THAT GOT SOLVED IN THE
LAST DECADE IT IS THAT PROBLEM,
THE PROBLEM OF PAYING OFF THE
NATIONAL DEBT TOO QUICKLY.
MY PARTY CAN CLAIM NONE OF THE
CREDIT FOR THAT.
IT WAS A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT
AND A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS.
I MUST ADMIT, I DON'T LIKE WHAT
THEY DID OF PAYING OFF THE
NATIONAL DEBT TOO QUICKLY.
THEY GAVE TAX CUTS TO AMERICA'S
TOP .1%.
AMERICANS MAKING MORE THAN $2
MILLION, $340,000.
AND WE SAW JUST A COUPLE MONTHS
AGO THAT WAS ONE THING THAT WAS
ABSOLUTELY NONNEGOTIABLE TO
THEM.
THEY WOULD GIVE UP EVERYTHING
TO LET THOSE AMERICANS HAVE TO
PAY ANY MORE IN TAXES.
WHEN -- WHEN THERE WAS A
PROPOSAL TO EXPAND MEDICARE TO
TAKE CARE OF PRESCRIPTION
DRUGS, SOMETHING I SUPPORTED
GENERALLY, REPUBLICANS IN
CONGRESS PASSED A BILL THAT WAS
NOT PAID FOR AS OTHER PROGRAMS
LIKE THAT HAD BEEN PAID FOR AND
WAS A GIVEAWAY TO THE INSURANCE
INDUSTRY AND TO THE
PRESCRIPTION DRUG INDUSTRY.
SO WHEN THEY'RE
GIVING TAX CUTS TO THE RICHEST
AMERICANS, THE RICH OF THE
RICH, WHEN THEY'RE GIVING AWAY
TAXPAYER MONEY TO THE INSURANCE
INDUSTRY AND THE PRESCRIPTION
DRUG INDUSTRY, THE DRUG
INDUSTRY, THEY DON'T WORRY
ABOUT DEFICITS AT ALL.
IT'S ONLY WHEN DEMOCRATS TAKE
THE PRESIDENCY AND PARTICULARLY
IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.
WHEN WE HAVE BEEN DEALING SINCE
THE WORST RECESSION SINCE THE
GREAT DEPRESSION AND HAVE BEEN
TRYING TO PULL THE COUNTRY OUT
OF A NOSEDIVE THAT THEY'VE
BECOME WORRIED ABOUT THE
DEFICIT, AND CRITICIZE
AMERICANS, EVERYTHING THAT WE
HAVE DONE TO TRY TO SAVE THE
COUNTRY FROM THE DISASTER THAT
WE -- THAT WE INHERITED.
AND IT IS ONLY THE PROGRAMS
THAT HELP WORKING AND
MIDDLE-CLASS FAMILIES THAT SEEM
THIS ONE.
TO GIVE THEM A PROBLEM LIKE
NOW, WE HAVE BEEN ON THE CASE
OF SUBPRIME LENDING AND ITS
EFFECTS FOR A LONG TIME.
I INTRODUCED LEGISLATION IN
2004 TO REIN IN SUBPRIME
LENDING.
NOT A BIT OF HELP FROM
REPUBLICANS.
BILL.
MR. WATT AND I INTRODUCED THAT
IT WAS MILLER WATT TWO YEARS --
MILLER-WATT TWO YEARS LATER IT
BECAME MILLER-WATT-FRANK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA SAID
IN COMMITTEE THE OTHER DAY TO
DEAL WITH -- THAT WOULDN'T COST
TAXPAYERS.
I INTRODUCED THAT IN 2007.
IT WAS ONE WAY TO TEAL WITH THE
PROBLEM IS LET BANKRUPTCY
JUDGES MODIFY MORTGAGES IN
BANKRUPTCY THE SAME THE WAY
THEY MODIFY ALL KINDS OF
SECURED DEBT.
NO SUPPORT FROM REPUBLICANS AT
ALL.
AND THE OPPOSITION OF
REPUBLICANS KILLED THAT.
I HAD INTRODUCED -- I URGED THE
FEDERAL AGENCIES THAT SET RULES
FOR THE BANKS TO REQUIRE THEY
TREAT PEOPLE BETTER THAN
THEY'VE BEEN TREATING THEM.
NO HELP FROM REPUBLICANS AT
ALL.
AND EVEN -- EVEN MOUNTAIN LAST
-- WELL, JUST YESTERDAY, THE
FEDERAL AGENCIES IN CHARGE OF
-- THE BANKS' CONDUCT AND
STATES' ATTORNEY GENERALS HAD
BEEN PUSHING THE BANKS TO
IMPOSE FINES FOR VIOLATING THE
LAW IN HOW THEY HANDLE
FORECLOSURES.
AND SEVERAL REPUBLICANS SENT A
LETTER YESTERDAY TO THE
SECRETARY -- SECRETARY OF THE
TREASURY PROTESTING THAT
FEDERAL AGENCIES WERE BEING TOO
MEAN TO THE BANKS.
NOW, I THOUGHT MOST POLITICIANS
LEARNED DURING THE KEATING FIVE
THAT YOUR OFFICE DOES NOT GIVE
YOU THE RIGHT TO GIVE YOUR
POLITICAL BUDDIES, YOUR
CONTRIBUTORS, A GET-OUT-OF-JAIL
FREE CARDS BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY
APPEAR TO DO WHEN IT'S THE
BANKING INDUSTRY THAT'S
COMPLAINING ABOUT IT.
IT'S NOT TRUE THAT THIS PROBLEM
OF FORECLOSURE IS JUST
AFFECTING A HANDFUL OF
AMERICANS.
CAN I HAVE ONE MINUTE?
ONE MINUTE.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.
WE ARE IN A CYCLE
OF FORECLOSURES LEADING TO
REDUCED VALUE OF HOMES --
REDUCED VALUES OF HOMES.
WITH PEOPLE UNDER WATER THEY
SEEM THEIR LIFE SAVINGS
DISAPPEAR.
MORE FORECLOSURES AND ON AND
ON.
WE HAVE GOT TO PUT A BOTTOM ON
THE HOUSING MARKET.
WE KNOW THIS CAN WORK.
THIS PROGRAM IS VERY SIMILAR TO
A PROGRAM IN THE NEW DEAL THAT
DID WORK, THE HOMEOWNERS LOAN
CORPORATION TURNED A PROFIT, A
SLIGHT PROFIT BUT A PROFIT AND
SAVED THE MIDDLE CLASS, SAVED
THE HOUSING INDUSTRY.
WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.
REPUBLICANS HAVE OFFERED
I YIELD BACK.
NOTHING.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR.
AT THIS TIME I YIELD ONE MINUTE
AND 15 SECONDS TO THE GENTLEMAN
FROM NEVADA, MR. HECK.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
15 SECONDS.
RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE AND
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF
THE THIS -- THIS BILL.
390,192 FAMILIES IN NEVADA ARE
UNDER WATER.
LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN.
390,192 FAMILIES IN NEVADA ARE
UNDER WATER.
WE MUST HELP INDIVIDUALS WHO
ARE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT
THING.
THIS PROGRAM GIVES SOME OF
THOSE NEVADANS WHO ARE CURRENT
ON THEIR MORTGAGE BUT UNDER
WATER THE ABILITY TO REFINANCE
THEIR LOAN.
SOME WILL SAY THIS PROGRAM IS A
FAILURE BECAUSE TOO FEW
MORTGAGES HAVE BEEN REFINANCED
THROUGH IT.
HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED.
THEY'LL SAY NOT ENOUGH MONEY
I SAY A FAILED P.R. JOB SHOULD
NOT BE THE REASON A GOOD
PROGRAM DIES.
AND THE F.H.A. REFINANCE
PROGRAM CAN BE A GOOD PROGRAM,
BUT IT NEEDS MORE ATTENTION AND
PERHAPS REFORM SO HOMEOWNERS
KNOW IT'S AN OPTION.
VOTE NO ON H.R. 830 AND GIVE
HOMEOWNERS A CHANCE TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THIS PROGRAM, AND
I YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
AT THIS TIME, MR.
CHAIR, I RECOGNIZE THE
GENTLEMAN FROM KANSAS, MR.
YODER, FOR ONE MINUTE.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
KANSAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE
MINUTE.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
I RISE TODAY IN STRONG SUPPORT
OF H.R. 830.
THIS BILL WOULD REPEAL A
POLICY.
WELL-INTENTIONED BUT BANKRUPT
MR. CHAIRMAN, THE REPUBLICAN
PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF BAILOUT
AFTER BAILOUT.
WITH $14 TRILLION AND BORROWING
$5 BILLION A DAY, YET
UNEMPLOYMENT IS 9%.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE SENDING
US AN UNMISTAKABLE MESSAGE, THE
IDEA OF BORROWING AND BAILING
OUT AND SPENDING ISN'T WORKING.
WE'RE BORROWING MORE MONEY IN
WASHINGTON WITH THIS PROGRAM
THAT WE DON'T HAVE, TELL THE
AMERICANS BORROW MORE MONEY AT
HOME FOR HOUSING THEY CAN'T
AFFORD.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS MADNESS.
WHEN WILL THE STOP AND WHEN
WILL THE POLITICIANS IN
WASHINGTON UNDERSTAND THAT
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO
BORROW AND SPEND OUR WAY TO
PROSPERITY?
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE TIRED
OF THIS.
THEY WANT WASHINGTON LEADERS TO
STEP UP, REDUCE SPENDING AND
ELIMINATE PROGRAMS THAT AREN'T
WORKING.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK TODAY WE
PASS THIS LEGISLATION AND
RESTORE FISCAL SANITY TO
WASHINGTON.
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
WHO SEEKS TIME?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS.
HOW MUCH TIME IS
CHAIRMAN?
REMAINING ON BOTH SIDES, MR.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS HAS 2 1/2 MINUTES
REMAINING AND THE GENTLEMAN
FROM ALABAMA HAS ABOUT FOUR --
HAS 4 1/4 MINUTES REMAINING.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA HAS
THE RIGHT TO CLOSE.
THANK YOU.
MR. CHAIR --
I YIELD -- I HAVE
ONE REMAINING SPEAKER SO I'LL
DEFER UNTIL YOU HAVE YOUR LAST
SPEAKER.
YOU JUST HAVE ONE
REMAINING SPEAKER?
YES.
AT THIS TIME I
RECOGNIZE THE GENTLELADY FROM
ILLINOIS, MRS. BIGGERT, FOR 2
1/2 MINUTES.
THE GENTLELADY IS
RECOGNIZED FOR 2 1/2 MINUTES.
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING.
AND, MR. CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT
RONALD REAGAN FAMOUSLY SAID
WITH TONG AND CHEEK, NO DOUBT,
THAT THE CLOSEST THING TO
ETERNAL LIFE ON THIS EARTH IS A
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAM.
AND I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF
H.R. 830, LEGISLATION AUTHORED
BY MY FRIEND FROM ILLINOIS, MR.
DOLD.
AT THE RISK OF DISPROVING THE
LATE PRESIDENT'S AX YUM, LET ME
SAY THAT H.R. 830 WILL
DEMONSTRATE THAT CONGRESS DOES
HAVE THE GOOD SENSE, THE
FORTITUDE AND THE WHEREWITHAL
TO BRING AN END TO A FEDERAL
PROGRAM, ESPECIALLY ONE THAT'S
NOT WORKING.
THE PROGRAM IN QUESTION IS THE
F.H.A. REFINANCING PROGRAM
WHICH WAS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE
BROADEST PROVISIONS IN THE TARP
LEGISLATION BACK IN 2008.
IN 2010 THE PROGRAM WAS
CONCEIVED IN HASTE, ENACTED
WITH NO VOTE IN CONGRESS AND
WAS DESIGNED TO AUGMENT ANOTHER
FAILED PROGRAM, THE MAKING HOME
AFFORDABLE PROGRAM, WHICH HAS
DONE MORE HARM THAN GOOD.
UNDER THE F.H.A. REFINANCING
PROGRAM, THE F.H.A. IS DIRECTED
TO USE TARP FUNDS TO REFINANCE
MORTGAGES THAT ARE CURRENT BUT
UNDERWATER.
ITS RECORD HAS BEEN A REAL
PROBLEM WITH THE F.H.A.
COMMISSIONER STATING DURING OUR
MEETING LAST MONTH, AS OF
FEBRUARY 11, 44 LOANS HAVE BEEN
ENDORSED, END QUOTE.
WHERE ELSE BUT IN WASHINGTON
WOULD IT BE A GOOD IDEA TO
OBLIGATE $8 BILLION IN TAXPAYER
FUNDS AND DISSPERS $50 BILLION
OF THOSE DOLLARS?
-- DISBURSE $50 BILLION OF
THOSE DOLLARS?
WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY WILL BE
IN DEFAULT, HOW MANY -- WHAT IT
WILL COST, BUT THAT MONEY HAS
BEEN DISBURSED FROM THE U.S.
TREASURY.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS BILL ENDS
ANOTHER FAILED PROGRAM.
TAXPAYERS SHOULDN'T FOOT THE
BILL FOR FAILURE, SO I WOULD
URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE BILL AND YIELD BACK THE
THE
GENTLEWOMAN YIELDS BACK THE
--
BALANCE OF HER TIME.
THE GENTLEWOMAN
TIME.
YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HER
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS.
I YIELD MYSELF SUCH
TIME AS I MAY CONSUME.
THE AUTHOR OF THE BILL, THE
GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS, MR.
DOLD, WAS TELLING PEOPLE THAT
IF THEY JOIN THIS PROGRAM THEY
HE WAS WRONG.
WOULD HAVE A TAX LIABILITY.
IT WASN'T HIS FAULT.
HE WAS TOLD THAT WAS THE CASE.
HE DUTIFULLY READ WHAT HE WAS
TOLD.
HE FOUND OUT IT WAS WRONG.
IT WOULD BE $50 BILLION
DISBURSED.
NO, $50 BILLION HAS NOT BEEN
SPENT ON ANY INDIVIDUAL.
IT HAS BEEN SET ASIDE IF
NECESSARY IN THE FUTURE TO PAY
FOR DEFAULTS.
SO THIS IS A FANTASY.
HAD A MAJOR IMPACT.
IT'S TRUE, THE PROGRAM HAS NOT
AND IF IT DOES NOT PROVE ITSELF
OUT IT NEVER WILL.
IT CANNOT BE LOUDLY EXPENSIVE
AND NONEXISTENT.
IT IS THERE IF WE GET AN
AGREEMENT INVOLVING ALL OF THE
ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF BOTH
PARTIES, INVOLVING THE
REGULATORS AND THE FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS, THIS WOULD BE ONE
OF THE TOOLS THAT WILL
ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE.
C.B.O. DOES THINK THERE COULD
BE A LOSS.
THEIR PREDICTION IS -- THEIR
BEST GUESS, AND THEY ARE THE
BEST OBJECTIVE ELEMENT THAT WE
HAVE, YOU COULD GET AN AMOUNT
OF $12,000 OR SO PER LOAN LOST
HERE.
$12,000.
NOT $1 MILLION.
IT IS PART OF A -- PART OF
PROJECTS THAT WILL HELP REDUCE
FORECLOSURES AND HELP THE
ECONOMY DEAL WITH THIS CRISIS.
PEOPLE THAT DON'T LIKE IT,
THEY'LL SEND MONEY TO BRAZIL,
THEY'LL SEND MONEY TO AFGHAN
CITIES, THEY'LL SEND MONEY TO
IRAQI SECURITY, THEY'LL SEND
MONEY TO FARMERS FOR $250,000,
BUT $12,000 PER HOMEOWNER IS
JUST TOO MUCH FOR THEM.
IT'S NOT JUST FOR HOMEOWNERS.
IT'S PART OF GETTING OUT OF OUR
ECONOMIC CRISIS.
SO I HOPE THIS IS DEFEATED.
I APPRECIATE WHAT THE GENTLEMAN
FROM NEVADA SAID.
YES, IT CAN BE IMPROVED.
THE FACT THAT ONLY 44 PEOPLE
HAVE BEEN INVOLVED SO FAR MEANS
THEY ARE PROCEEDING
APPROPRIATELY CAUTIOUSLY.
THIS IS A PROGRAM WITH GREAT
PROMISE.
IT MAY NOT TURN OUT, BUT IF A
PROMISE DOESN'T TURN OUT THEN
IT DOESN'T COST ANYTHING.
AND IF IT DOES TURN OUT TO BE A
WORKABLE PART OF AN OVERALL
SOLUTION, IT WILL BE MONEY MUCH
BETTER SPENT THAN MANY OF THE
BILLIONS MY COLLEAGUES ON THE
OTHER SIDE ARE PREPARED TO
SUBSIDIZE SOME OF THEIR FAVORED
SACRED COWS AS OPPOSED TO DOING
SOMETHING TO HELP THE WHOLE
ECONOMY.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
MR. CHAIR, I'D --
WILL APPROACH THE FLOOR TO USE
MY REMAINING TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN MAY
PROCEED.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR.
MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THIS BODY
, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
CUTTING GOVERNMENT SPENDING?
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE
CHILDREN.
THESE CHILDREN CANNOT AFFORD A
FUTURE WHERE ITS FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT SPENDS $8 BILLION
MORE EVERY DAY THAN IT TAKES
IN.
NOW THE CHAIRMAN HAS CRITICIZED
OUR MILITARY SPENDING.
I COULD HAVE A PICTURE OF MY
CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN UP AND
I COULD HAVE A PICTURE OF ONE OF
MY LITTLE GRANDDAUGHTERS WHOSE
SON SERVED IN THE U.S. MARINES.
THEIR UNIT SERVED IN AFGHANISTAN
AND IN IRAQ.
SO I MAKE NO APOLOGY FOR
SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS.
NOW IF THE PRESIDENT DECIDES TO
CALL THEM HOME, MY SON WOULD
SUPPORT THAT.
NOW, THE CHAIRMAN -- THE RANKING
MEMBER FRANK SAYS, WELL, THIS
SITS, THIS PROGRAM THAT'S HELPED
44 FAMILIES WHOSE AVERAGE
MORTGAGE WAS $330,000, THAT'S
MORE THAN THE COST OF A HOME IN
MY DISTRICT, BUT HERE IS THE --
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S REPORT TO US
THAT $50 MILLION HAS BEEN
DISPERSED BUT THE ALARMING
FIGURE IS $8.12 BILLION THAT'S
OBLIGATED.
NOW, THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW
YORK SAID THAT THE BANKS,
CITIBANK, BANK OF AMERICA,
THEY'RE ALL LINING UP TO USE
THIS PROGRAM.
I WOULD BE TOO.
THIS TRANSFERS OBLIGATIONS FROM
LENDERS TO THE TAXPAYER, AS LONG
AS THESE MORTGAGES WERE MAKING
MONEY THE BANKS PROFITED.
BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN WHEN THEY'RE
UNDER WATER AND A BORROWER MAY
BE CAN'T MAKE THE -- MAYBE CAN'T
MAKE THE PAYMENT, HEY, IF I WAS
A BANK IDENTIFY SAY, YEAH, LET
THE GOVERNMENT, LET THE
TAXPAYERS PAY, REDUCE THIS
MORTGAGE.
THAT OUGHT TO BE BETWEEN THE
BANK AND THE HOMEOWNER.
42 FAMILIES, YOU SAY ALL OF
THESE PROGRAMS WE'RE GOING TO
DEBATE THIS WEEK AND NEXT WEEK
WOULD COST BILLIONS OF DOLLARS,
THEY'RE GOING TO HELP A HALF A
MILLION FAMILIES.
THERE ARE 12 MILLION FAMILIES
THAT ARE UNDER WATER.
LET'S TALK ABOUT SOMETHING VERY
IMPORTANT.
IF WE DON'T GET OUR FINANCIAL
HOUSE IN ORDER, I QUOTE THE
WORDS OF ADMIRAL MIKE MULLEN ON
AUGUST 25, BEFORE CNN, AND I'LL
CLOSE WITH THIS.
THE MOST SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO
OUR NATIONAL SECURITY IS OUR
DEBT.
AND THAT THREAT COMES FROM THIS
BODY AND THE ADMINISTRATION.
IT'S TIME TO CUT SPENDING.
THINK ABOUT THEM, THINK ABOUT
THEIR FUTURE.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
ALL TIME FOR GENERAL DEBATE HAS
EXPIRED.
PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE
AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A
SUBSTITUTE PRINTED IN THE BILL
SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS AN
ORIGINAL BILL FOR THE PURPOSE OF
AMENDMENT UNDER THE FIVE-MINUTE
RULE.
NO AMENDMENT TO THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A
SUBSTITUTE IS IN ORDER EXCEPT
THOSE RECEIVED PRINTING IN THE
RECORD DESIGNATED FOR THAT
PURPOSE AND EXCEPT PRO FORMA
AMENDMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
DEBATE.
EACH AMENDMENT SO RECEIVED MAY
BE OFFERED ONLY BY THE MEMBER
WHO CAUSES IT TO BE PRINTED OR A
DESIGNEE AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED
PRINTED, CONSIDERED READ, IF
PRINTED.
THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE SECTION
1.
ENACTED, SECTION 1,
SHORT TITLE.
ARE THERE ANY
AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 1?
MR. SPEAKER, I
HAVE AN AMENDMENT THE AT THE
DESK.
I MAKE A POINT OF --
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ALABAMA.
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA
HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 1?
NO.
I MAKE A POINT OF ORDER AGAINST
THE AMENDMENT THAT --
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES
SEEK RECOGNITION?
THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW YORK
I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK AND I ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE
READING BE DISPENSED WITH.
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 9
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD OFFERED BY MRS. MALONEY
OF NEW YORK.
I ASK UNANIMOUS
CONSENT THAT THE READING BE
DISPENSED WITH.
THE AMENDMENT HAS
BEEN DESIGNATED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
I MAKE A POINT OF
ORDER AGAINST THE AMENDMENT
BECAUSE IN MY OPINION -- I
RESERVE A POINT OF ORDER AGAINST
THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE IN MY
OPINION --
THE POINT OF ORDER IS
RESERVED.
THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW YORK.
IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES
IN SUPPORT OF HER AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MR.
SPEAKER.
MY AMENDMENT HAS THE PURPOSE OF
MAKING VERY CLEAR WHAT WE'RE
DOING TODAY TO THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE.
AND THIS AMENDMENT ENSURES THAT
WE DO THAT, IT SHOWS THAT -- AND
MAKES CLEAR THAT WE ARE ENDING A
PROGRAM THAT HAS THE POTENTIAL
TO HELP HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
UNDER WATER BORROWERS.
H.R. 830, THE F.H.A. REFINANCE
PROGRAM TERMINATION PROGRAM,
IGNORES THE UNDER WATER
BORROWERS OF THIS COUNTRY AND
DOES NOTHING TO HELP FAMILIES
SAVE THEIR HOMES.
VERY SIMPLY THE BILL ENDS A
PROGRAM THAT HAS THE POTENTIAL
TO HELP HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE WHOSE MORTGAGES NOW
EXCEED THE VALUE OF THEIR HOMES
AND ALSO HELP THE COMMUNITIES
AND HELP THE OVERALL ECONOMY.
THE MAJORITY CRAFTED A SO-CALLED
OPEN RULE IN SUCH A WAY THAT
IT'S NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO OFFER
ANY SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENTS, A
NUMBER WERE VOTED DOWN ON PARTY
LINES IN THE COMMITTEE DEBATES.
IN RESPONSE TO THIS REALITY AND
AN EFFORT TO HIGHLIGHT THE TRUE
NATURE OF THIS HARMFUL BILL, MY
AMENDMENT IDENTIFIES THE NUMBERS
IN EACH STATE, OF THE HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF UNDER WATER
BORROWERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND
MAKES CLEAR THAT THE REPUBLICAN
MAJORITY HAS NO SOLUTION TO THE
PROBLEM, NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY
DESIRE TO FIND ONE.
AMERICANS MUST BE MADE AWARE OF
THE INTENTION OF THIS MAJORITY.
THIS PROGRAM ALLOWS BORROWERS TO
WRITE DEBT AT LEAST 10% TO
REDUCE THE DEBT BURDEN, THEY'RE
ALL PAYING, IN FINANCIAL
DIFFICULTY, AND BANKS THEN CAN
GET AN INSURED F.H.A. GUARANTEE
AND MOVE FORWARD AND KEEP LIVING
IN THEIR HOMES AND CAN KEEP
PARTICIPATING IN THE ECONOMY.
BECAUSE OF THIS VOTE TODAY, IF
THE MAJORITY WINS, HOMEOWNERS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY MAY NOT HAVE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE PROGRAM THAT
JUST BEGAN AND WHICH SHOULD BE
MADE, IN MY OPINION, AVAILABLE
TO THEM.
NOW, WHAT THIS DOES, IT GOES
DOWN ALL OF THE IMPACTS ACROSS
THE COUNTRY.
IT SHOWS THAT IN MY HOME STATE
OF NEW YORK THERE ARE OVER
129,000 MORTGAGES TUND WATER
THAT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO APPLY
FOR THIS PROGRAM TO ALLOW PEOPLE
TO STAY IN THEIR HOMES.
IN CHAIRMAN BACHUS' STATE THERE
ARE OVER 35,000 MORTGAGES UNDER
WATER.
IN FLORIDA THERE ARE MORE THAN
TWO MILLION MORTGAGES UNDER
WATER AND THEY HAVE NO
ALTERNATIVE OF ANY WAY TO HELP
THESE PEOPLE.
AND THESE NUMBERS ARE FROM AN
INDEPENDENT COMPANY STUDY.
IF YOU GO TO CALIFORNIA, OUR
LARGEST STATE, OVER TWO MILLION
HOMES ARE UNDER WATER.
NEVADA, 390,000 INDIVIDUALS ARE
FACING THE LOSS OF THEIR HOMES.
IN ARIZONA THERE ARE OVER
648,000 FAMILIES THAT ARE UNDER
WATER, THEIR HOME IS NOT WORTH
WHAT THEY'RE PAYING FOR IT WITH
THE MORTGAGES.
SO THIS PROGRAM IS ONE THAT I
THINK IS THOUGHTFUL, ONE THAT
HAS ONLY $50 MILLION AS A LINE
OF CREDIT THAT WILL BE PULLED IN
IF THERE ARE DEFAULTS.
BUT THE BANKS PARTICIPATING HAVE
VERY STRICT STANDARDS, AS DOES
THE F.H.A.
THEY HAVE TO BE THEIR PRIMARY
RESIDENCE, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE
FULL DOCUMENTATION, NO MORE OF
THESE NO-DOC LOANS.
IT MUST BE CURRENT ON THE
MORTGAGE.
THEY MUST HAVE A JOB.
THEY HAVE TO HAVE MANY, MANY
BEFORE THEY GET THE LOAN.
LEVELS THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET
BUT AT LEAST IT'S A LIFELINE TO
THESE 12 MILLION FAMILIES WHOSE
HOMES ARE UNDER WATER.
AND WITH DECLINING HOME VALUES
BORROWERS ARE CAUGHT IN
MORTGAGES THEY NO LONGER CAN
AFFORD.
BECAUSE THEIR RATES HAVE RESET
OR BECAUSE THEIR INTEREST-ONLY
PAYMENTS HAVE NOT ALLOWED THEM
TO GROW ANY EQUITY IN THEIR
HOMENTS -- HOMES.
THEY ARE MAKING THEIR PAYMENTS
BUT JUST BARELY AND SO THIS ONE
IS THERE TO HELP THEM.
AND IT SIMPLY ADDS FINDINGS TO
THE BILL WITH THE NUMBER OF
UNDER -- UNDERWATER MORTGAGES IN
DATA FOR.
EACH STATE THAT WE'VE SECURED
SO THAT IT BECOMES VERY CLEAR TO
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HOW MANY
HOMEOWNERS IN EACH STATE WE ARE
NOT HELPING IF WE DO WHAT THE
MAJORITY WANTS TO TERMINATE THIS
PROGRAM.
AND I MIGHT SAY, THIS PROGRAM IS
ONE OF FOUR THAT THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION HAS PUT FORWARD
TO HELP HOMEOWNERS STAY IN THEIR
HOMES AND TO HELP STABILIZE OUR
ECONOMY WHICH IS STILL FRAGILE
AND IS STILL RECOVERING.
HOUSING IS 25% OF OUR ECONOMY
ACCORDING TO MANY ECONOMISTS, SO
THE STRENGTH OF HOUSING IS
IMPORTANT TO THE OVERALL HEALTH
OF OUR NATION'S ECONOMIC FUTURE.
SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO
SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT, TO MAKE
IT CLEAR BY THE VOTE ON THIS
BILL HOW MANY AMERICANS ACROSS
THIS COUNTRY WILL NOT BE HELPED
IF THE MAJORITY GETS THEIR
PASSAGE OF A BILL THAT WOULD
TERMINATE A PROGRAM THAT HAS THE
POTENTIAL OF HELPING LITERALLY
MILLIONS IN AMERICA.
MY TIME IS EXPIRED, I URGE A YES
VOTE ON MY AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEWOMAN'S
TIME HAS EXPIRED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I NOW
MAKE PIVENTE ORDER AGAINST THE
AMENDMENT BECAUSE IN MY OPINION
IT VIOLATES CLAUSE 7 OF RULE 16
WHICH REQUIRES THAT AN AMENDMENT
BE GERMANE TO THE MATTER IT'S
AMENDING.
IT'S NOT GERMANE TO THE BILL
BECAUSE IT'S OUTSIDE THE SCOPE
OF THE BILL AND FAILS TO DRAW
THE NEXUS TO THE BILL.
DOES THE GENTLEMAN
WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE POINT OF
ORDER?
THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW YORK.
THE AMENDMENT IS
GERMANE, MR. SPEAKER.
THIS PROGRAM HAS THE POTENTIAL
TO HELP UNDERWATER MORTGAGES
ACROSS OUR GREAT COUNTRY WHICH
IS GERMANE TO THE BILL WE'RE
DEBATING TODAY.
BECAUSE THE PROGRAM TERMINATES
THE POTENTIAL OF THIS.
HAVE NO FINDINGS IN THIS BILL
THAT YOU'RE RUSHING TO TO THE
FLOOR.
IT IS GERMANE TO TALK ABOUT THE
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE OUT THERE
THAT POSSIBLY COULD LOSE THEIR
HOMES.
BECAUSE THIS PROGRAM IS BEING
TERMINATED.
AND THIS IS GERMANE IN MY
OPINION TO THE UNDERLYING BILL.
DOES ANY OTHER MEMBER
WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE POINT OF
ORDER?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA.
MR. CHAIR, SHE LISTS
THE NUMBER OF MORTGAGES THAT ARE
UNDER WATER BUT THERE'S NO IN
SAYING THAT THIS PROGRAM MAY
HELP THEM.
OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE MANY OF
THOSE, THE BOROSERS ARE BEHIND
ON THEIR PAYMENTS, THEY WOULDN'T
QUALIFY FOR HELP, JUST THE
NUMBER 44 OUGHT TO TELL THAT YOU
WHEN YOU LIST 12 MILLION
HOMEOWNERS AND THEN SAY THAT THE
TERMINATION OF THIS PROGRAM
WOULD HAVE HELPED IS QUITE A
STRETCH.
THERE ARE CERTAIN OTHER
QUALIFICATIONS UNDER THIS
LEGISLATION THAT ARE NOT MET BY
SIMPLY BEING UNDER WATER.
DOES THE GENTLELADY
WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE POINT OF
ORDER?
YES.
AS A POINT INFORMATION THERE'S
VERY STRICT CRITERIA FROM THE
F.H.A. AND THE INDIVIDUAL BANKS
THAT ARE VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATING
AND ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA IS
PAYMENT.
THAT YOU MUST BE CURRENT ON YOUR
YOU MUST BE CURRENT.
WHAT THE GENTLEMAN SAID WAS
INACCURATE, THAT THEY COULD BE
BEHIND ON THEIR PAYMENTS OR NOT
MAKING THEIR PAYMENTS.
THEY HAVE DIFFICULTY MAKING IT
BECAUSE THEIR HOME RAL IS NOT
EQUAL TO WHAT THE MORTGAGE IS SO
IT'S DIFFICULT.
BUT THEY MUST ALL BE CURRENT ON
THEIR PAYMENT.
WILL THE GENTLELADY
--
AND ALSO, MR.
SPEAKER, IT'S VERY GERMANE TO
HURT BY THIS --
LIST THE PEOPLE TO WHO COULD BE
THE GENTLELADY NEEDS
POINT OF ORDER.
TO CONFINE HER REMARKS TO THE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA
WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE POINT OF
ORDER?
NO, SIR.
THE CHAIR IS PREPARED
TO RULE --
I WOULD LIKE TO
BE HEARD POINT OF ORDER.
FIRST OF ALL, THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ALABAMA WAS ARGUING THE MERITS
OF THE LEGISLATION.
THESE ARE FINDINGS THAT PERTAIN
TO THE RESULTS THAT WOULD OCCUR
FROM THE LANGUAGE IN THE BILL.
THE BILL IS ELIMINATING THE
EXISTING FUNDS OR LEFTOVER FUNDS
FOR F.H.A. REFINANCE.
THE AMENDMENT CLEARLY LAYS OUT
THE IMPACTED PERSONS CONNECTED
TO THE ELIMINATION.
THEREFORE THIS IS GERMANE
BECAUSE IT RELATES TO THE
LANGUAGE OF THE AMENDMENT AND
THE INTENT OF THE AMENDMENT, 12
MILLION PEOPLE LEFT BEHIND,
THOUSANDS OF HOMEOWNERS IN
DIFFERENT STATES AND THE FACT
THAT THERE IS NO OTHER SOLUTION
TO THESE HOMEOWNERS EXCEPT
F.H.A. REFINANCE.
IT IS A GERMANE AMENDMENT, THE
FIND RGS SIMPLY LAYING OUT THE
IMPACT, WE DO THAT IN ALL OF OUR
BILLS, TO PUT FINDINGS ON WHAT
THE BASIS OF LEGISLATION -- WHAT
SO I ASK THE CHAIRMAN TO
THE IMPACT WOULD BE.
CONSIDER THE GENTLELADY'S
AMENDMENT BEING GERMANE,
FINDINGS ARE GERMANE, AND IT IS
DOING SIMPLY THAT, OF LISTING
THE ELEMENTS OF THE IMPACT OF
THIS LEGISLATION.
WITH THAT I YIELD BACK AND ASK
FOR A WAIVER IF ANYTHING ELSE
DOES NOT OCCUR.
THE CHAIR IS PREPARED
TO RULE ON THE POINT OF ORDER.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA MAKES
A POINT OF ORDER THAT THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEWOMAN FROM NEW YORK IS NOT
GERMANE.
THE BILL ADDRESSES REPEAL OF THE
FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION
PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES FOR
REFINANCING A SPECIFIED SET OF
MORTGAGES.
ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL
PRINCIPALS OF GERMANENESS IS
THAT THE AMENDMENT RELATE TO THE
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE UNDERLYING
BILL.
THE BILL IS CONFINED TO A
SPECIFIC TYPE OF REFINANCES
PROGRAM.
THE AMENDMENT SEEKS IN FACT TO
ADDRESS MORTGAGES MORE GENERALLY
BEYOND THE CONFINES OF THE
SUBJECT ADDRESSED BY THE BILL.
THE AMENDMENT IS THEREFORE NOT
GERMANE AND THE POINT OF ORDER
IS SUSTAINED.
I STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
THE GENTLELADY IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I'M DISTRESSED
WITH THIS RULING BECAUSE I THINK
IT IS GERMANE THAT PEOPLE WILL
LOSE THEIR HOMES, THAT THEY ARE
ELIMINATING A PROGRAM THAT IS
JUST STARTING, THAT IS
THOUGHTFUL, THAT WOULD GIVE
F.H.A. FINANCING AND GUARANTEES
TO HELP PEOPLE STAY IN THEIR
HOMES.
AND THAT PEOPLE IN NEVADA, OVER
390,000, COULD BE AFFECTED BY
THIS, CALIFORNIA OVER TWO
MILLION PEOPLES' HOMES ARE UNDER
WATER, IN FLORIDA, MORE THAN TWO
MILLION PEOPLE'S HOMES ARE UNDER
WATER, AND IN MY OWN STATE, OVER
129,000 PEOPLE WILL NOT HAVE THE
ACCESS TO THIS PROGRAM THAT
ALLOWS THEM TO ADJUST THEIR
MORTGAGES SO THAT THEY REFLECT
THE TRUE VALUE OF THEIR HOMES.
MAKE THEIR PAYMENTS ON THAT
VALUE SO THAT THEY CAN MOVE
FORWARD AND BE PART OF THE
COMMUNITY, KEEP THESE HOMES FROM
BECOMING BLIGHTS AND EMPTIED IN
AN AREA.
WE ALL HAVE STORIES IN OUR
DISTRICTS AND ACROSS THE NATION
WHERE PEOPLE CANNOT MAKE THEIR
MORTGAGE PAYMENTS BECAUSE THEY
HAVE LOST VALUES IN THEIR HOME,
THEY ARE DESSERTING THEM, THEY
ARE LEAVING THEM IN SOME STATES
THEY ARE LITERALLY BULLDOZING
THE HOMES UNDERGROUND BECAUSE NO
ONE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE IN THEM.
THIS IS A ANSWER TO SOME OF THE
CHALLENGES.
AND MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER
SIDE OF THE AISLE TALKS ABOUT
THE COST.
ONLY TO THE INDIVIDUAL
WELL, I'D SAY THE COST, NOT
HOMEOWNER BUT TO THE OVERALL
ECONOMY, WILL BE GREATER BY
TERMINATING THE FOUR EFFORTS,
THE FOUR ANTI-FORECLOSURE
EFFORTS FROM THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION TO HELP WITH THE
HOUSING CRISIS.
AND WE KNOW THAT THE SUBPRIME
CRISIS WAS A SCANDAL.
MANY PEOPLE WERE NOT -- GOT
INTO HOMES THEY COULDN'T AFFORD
UNDER MISINFORMATION.
WE HAVE HELPED OTHER AREAS OF
OUR ECONOMY.
WE CERTAINLY SHOULD HELP THE
HOMEOWNERS, THE WORKING
AMERICANS TO HELP THEM THROUGH
THIS ECONOMIC CRISIS TOO.
AND WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT
ALTHOUGH WE ARE DIGGING OUR WAY
OUT OF THIS GREAT RECESSION THE
RECOVERY HAS BEEN SLOW.
WE ARE STILL IN A FRAGILE
ECONOMY.
ECONOMISTS TESTIFIED BEFORE THE
FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
THAT HOUSING WAS 25% OF OUR
ECONOMY.
SO HELPING PEOPLE STAY IN THEIR
HOMES I WOULD SAY THAT OUR
IT.
OVERALL ECONOMY HAS A STAKE IN
NOW, SOME PEOPLE SAID, WELL,
THE BANKS WILL RUN IN AND DO
THIS.
BANKS ARE NOT GOING TO DO THIS
IS GOING TO BE PAID AND THEY'RE
UNLESS THEY THINK THAT THE LOAN
AND THE STANDARDS FROM F.H.A.
NOT GOING TO BE HURT WITH IT.
ARE VERY HIGH.
YOU HAVE TO BE CURRENT, YOU
HAVE TO HAVE A JOB, YOU HAVE TO
LIVE IN YOUR HOME, YOU HAVE TO
HAVE PROVEN TRACK RECORD, YOU
HAVE TO HAVE GOOD CREDIT BEFORE
YOU CAN BE APPROVED.
SO THAT IS WHY ONLY $50 MILLION
IS THE LINE OF CREDIT THAT WILL
BE DRAWN DOWN IF THERE ARE
FORECLOSURES.
HOPEFULLY THE ECONOMY IMPROVES,
PEOPLE KEEP THEIR JOBS.
HOPEFULLY THE BANKS DO A GOOD
JOB AND DO NOT HAND OUT LOANS
UNLESS PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY
REPAY THEM.
AND THIS WILL BE A TOOL TO MOVE
FORWARD, NOT ONLY TO HELP
PEOPLE, BUT HELP THE OVERALL
ECONOMY.
NOW, WHAT I FIND TROUBLING,
VERY TROUBLING ABOUT THIS IS
THAT MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER
SIDE OF THE AISLE WANT TO
TERMINATE FOUR ANTI-FORECLOSURE
PROGRAMS, BUT THEY HAVE NO
ALTERNATIVE.
IT'S SORT OF LIKE THEIR
APPROACH TO JOBS.
THEY HAVE NOT COME FORWARD WITH
ANY PROGRAM TO HELP CREATE
JOBS.
THEY HAVE NOT COME FORWARD WITH
ANY PROGRAM TO HELP PEOPLE STAY
IN THEIR HOMES.
IT'S PART OF THE SO BE IT
ATTITUDE.
YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO HELP YOU.
BUT THIS IS A PROGRAM TO HELP
PEOPLE HELP THEMSELVES, ADJUST
TO THE REALITY OF WHAT THEIR
HOMES ARE ACTUALLY WORTH, AND I
THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT
THIS INFORMATION OF HOW MANY
PEOPLE, THE 12 MILLION PEOPLE
AND WHERE THEY LIVE IN AMERICA
IS IMPORTANT INFORMATION THAT
SHOULD BE PART OF THIS BILL.
AND THAT'S WHY I AM NOW
RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING
UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO PLACE INTO
THE RECORD THE LISTING OF WHERE
THESE 12 MILLION PEOPLE LIVE SO
THAT PEOPLE WILL KNOW THESE ARE
THE PEOPLE WE ARE SAYING NO, SO
BE IT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE
THERE TO HELP YOU.
AND LET ME TELL YOU, MY FELLOW
COLLEAGUES, I WOULD BE CAUTIOUS
ABOUT VOTING FOR THIS BECAUSE
YOU'RE VOTING AGAINST YOUR
ECONOMY.
YOU'RE VOTING AGAINST YOUR
STATE.
YOU ARE VOTING AGAINST YOUR OWN
COLLEAGUES, YOUR OWN RESIDENTS
AND NEIGHBORS WHO MAY NEED
THIS.
WE KNOW THE TROUBLE THAT'S IN
THIS ECONOMY.
PRACTICALLY EVERY FAMILY IN
AMERICA HAS SOME RELATIVE WHO'S
LOST A JOB OR IS UNEMPLOYED.
SO THIS IS SOME WAY TO HELP
WITH THIS ECONOMIC RECOVERY.
IT IS THOUGHTFUL, IT IS A GOOD
-- IT IS A GOOD PROGRAM, AND I
URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE
AGAINST THE SO BE IT BILL THE
REPUBLICANS HAVE BEFORE US
TODAY AND TO REALLY WORK WITH
IN A BIPARTISAN WAY THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION TO HELP WORKING
AMERICANS, STRUGGLING AMERICANS
STAY IN THEIR HOME.
IT'S THE LEAST WE CAN DO AS A
CARING NATION.
ABSOLUTELY THE LEAST WE CAN DO
AS A CARING NATION.
AND SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES --
AND I WOULD BE VERY CAUTIOUS IN
YOUR VOTE BECAUSE YOUR
CONSTITUENTS ARE GOING TO
REMEMBER THIS VOTE IF THIS
PROGRAM IS TERMINATED AND THEIR
ABILITY TO STAY IN THEIR HOMES
IS TERMINATED BECAUSE OF YOUR
VOTE TODAY.
I YIELD BACK.
THE
--
GENTLELADY'S TIME HAS EXPIRED.
THE GENTLELADY'S
TIME HAS EXPIRED.
THE GENTLELADY'S REQUEST WILL
BE COVERED UNDER GENERAL LEAVE.
I ASK
UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO STRIKE THE
LAST WORD.
THE GENTLELADY IS
RECOGNIZED.
I'D LIKE TO
SIMPLY ADD THAT YOU NEED TO PUT
FACES ON WHAT THIS LEGISLATION
IS DOING.
IT IS A SIMPLE ACT.
IT GUTS AND ELIMINATES ALL
REMAINING FUNDING.
IT DOES SAY THAT IF YOU ARE IN
THE MIDST OF THE PROGRAM YOU
MIGHT CONTINUE.
BUT EVERYONE KNOWS HOW SOLID
F.H.A. IS.
WHENEVER YOU HEAR F.H.A. YOU
KNOW THAT THERE IS A FRAMEWORK
THAT REALLY PROVIDES FOR
PROTECTION FOR THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AND A FISCALLY
RESPONSIBLE PROGRAM THAT
PROVIDES THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
WITH PROTECTION FOR THOSE WHO
ARE ABLE TO UTILIZE IT.
BUT EVEN TRAVELING THROUGH
AIRPORTS, MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAD A
MAN WITH A FAMILY WHO INDICATED
THAT IN THE MIDST OF THE
HOLIDAY SEASON EVEN THOUGH HE
HAD BEEN TOLD BY THE BANKING
INSTITUTION THAT HIS MORTGAGE
WAS INTACT, THEY WOULD ALLOW
HIM TO CONTINUE TO PAY, HE WAS
KEEPING UP BUT HAVING
DIFFICULTY, LOOKING FOR
MODIFICATION, A FEW DAYS INTO
THE NEW YEAR, JANUARY 6, HE WAS
FORECLOSURED ON AND A FEW DAYS
LATER OR AT LEAST ON THAT DAY
FORECLOSURE OR WITH A SIGN OR
NOTICE ON HIS DOOR, VACATE
WITHIN THREE DAYS.
THESE ARE THE FACES OF
INDIVIDUALS WHO PROBABLY WOULD
HAVE FARED BETTER UNDER F.H.A.
AT THE SAME TIME LAW
ENFORCEMENT, A POLICE OFFICER
CAME TO ME NAMED AN INSTITUTION
THAT I HAD NEVER HEARD OF, HAD
NO NATIONAL STANDING, SOME FLY
BY NIGHT.
HERE IS A LAW ENFORCEMENT, A
LOCAL POLICE OFFICER, PUTTING
HIS LIFE ON THE LINE EVERY DAY
AND HE NEEDED TO SELL HIS HOME
AND HE HAD MANAGED TO FIND A
BUYER.
HE HAD COMMUNICATED THAT TO THE
BANK.
LO AND BEHOLD, THE LOW LIFE
THING TO DO WAS WHAT THIS
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION TO DO.
I WOULD NOT CALL IT A BANK BUT
PROBABLY A MORTGAGE ENTITY.
THEY TOOK THE HOUSE UNDERNEATH
A MAN WHO GOES OUT EVERY DAY
AND PROJECTS HIMSELF INTO THE
COMMUNITY AND LAYS AND COULD
LAY HIS LIFE ON THE LINE.
I AM AGAINST H.R. 830 AND H.R.
836.
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE WHEN WE
HAVE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN NEED OF
THIS PROGRAM.
I WILL VENTURE TO SAY THAT IF A
PROGRAM NEEDS FIX -- IF WE EVER
HEARD OF FIX IT, DON'T END IT
-- OF COURSE IT'S ALWAYS GOOD
TO DO DUE DILIGENCE AND HAVE
OVERSIGHT OVER THESE PRAMENTS,
BUT I WOULD THINK THAT THE
FINANCIAL SERVICES -- PROGRAMS,
BUT I WOULD THINK THAT THE
FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
COULD MAKE THE F.H.A. WORK
BETTER, IF THAT IS THE CASE.
BUT THE NONSENSIBLE PLAN OF
ELIMINATING IT, NOT HELPING THE
UNDER WATER MORTGAGERS, THE
MORTGAGEES, THE INDIVIDUALS
THAT HAVE THESE MORTGAGES WITH
MORTGAGES THAT ARE WORTH MOHR
THAN THE HOMES -- AND WE KNOW
THERE ARE MANY COMMUNITIES LIKE
THIS AND MY COLLEAGUES
MENTIONED SOME BUT LET ME CITE
THREE STATES AGAIN BECAUSE IT'S
FLORIDA, TWO MILLION.
SO ENORMOUS.
CALIFORNIA, TWO MILLION.
NEVADA, 390,000.
THEY ARE STILL IN DISTRESS, AND
EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THE HOUSING
MARKET HAS A LOT TO DO WITH
THIS ECONOMY, AND EVEN WITHOUT
THE HELP OF MY GOOD FRIENDS ON
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, WE
STILL SAW THE UNEMPLOYMENT GO
DOWN AND 192,000 JOBS CREATED.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THIS
DOES NOTHING TO CREATE JOBS.
IT SIMPLY PUTS AMERICANS OUT ON
THE STREET.
IT DEVASTATES FAMILIES, AND WHO
KNOWS, WITH THE LACK OF SALES
OF HOMES AND REMODIFICATION OR
MODIFICATION OF THESE, IT PUTS
PEOPLE OUT OF WORK, NOT IN
WORK.
SO I ARGUE VIGOROUSLY, A LITTLE
TOO LATE ON THE GENTLELADY'S
AMENDMENT, BUT I WANT TO THANK
HER FOR HER ASTUTENESS,
CAREFULLY DEFINING WHAT IMPACT
THIS BILL WOULD HAVE.
AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THE
GOOD WORK OF F.H.A. THAT
REQUIRES DOCUMENTATION, A
CURRENT JOB, A DECENT SALARY,
ALL THAT IS NEEDED IS NOW
THROWN TO THE WOLVES WITH NO
OTHER PLAN.
AND SO WE GO HOME AND
CONSTITUENTS WILL ASK US ABOUT
MODIFICATION OR OR THE
VIABILITY OF THE F.H.A., WHICH
HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR A LONG
PERIOD OF TIME, ALL WE HAVE TO
DO IS GIVE THEM OUR EMPTY HANDS
AND OUR BLANK FACE SAYING
OBVIOUSLY GREATER MINDS THAN
YOU WHO KNEW THIS WAS A GOOD
PROGRAM DECIDED TO ELIMINATE IT
WITH NO SUBSTITUTE IN PLACE.
SO, MR. CHAIRMAN, LET ME
CONCLUDE BY SIMPLY SAYING TO
THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
BORROWERS, HAVE FAITH BECAUSE
THIS IS ONLY THE FIRST STEP.
WE KNOW IN THE WRONG-HEADED AND
WRONG DIRECTION.
THANK GOODNESS FOR THE FOUNDING
FATHERS THAT GAVE US THE HOUSE
AND THE SENATE AND A PRESIDENT,
AND I CAN BE ASSURED THAT THIS
LEGISLATION, I HOPE, IS
DESTINED FOR A ROOT OF NO
RETURN.
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLELADY'S
TIME HAS EXPIRED.
THE CHAIR WOULD REMIND THE
GENTLELADY TO DIRECT HER
COMMENTS TO THE CHAIR AND NOT
THE VIEWING PUBLIC.
THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE
SECTION 2,
SECTION 2.
RESCISSION OF FUNDING FOR
F.H.A. REFINANCE PROGRAMS.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM
PENNSYLVANIA SEEK RECOGNITION?
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK MADE IN
ORDER UNDER THE RULE AND
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD NUMBER 11.
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 11
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD OFFERED BY MR.
FITZPATRICK OF PENNSYLVANIA.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES IN
SUPPORT OF HIS AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
I WANT TO THANK MY COLLEAGUE
FROM ILLINOIS, MR. DOLD, FOR
INTRODUCING THIS LEGISLATION TO
END A FAILED FEDERAL PROGRAM,
THE F.H.A. REFINANCE PROGRAM.
THIS AMENDMENT ENSURES THAT THE
SAVINGS REALIZED FROM ENDING
THIS PROGRAM GOES DIRECTLY TO
DEBT REDUCTION.
LAST MONTH, MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS
CHAMBER BEGAN A PROCESS OF
EXAMINING THE FEDERAL BUDGET
LINE BY LINE ASKING TOUGH
QUESTIONS AND MAKING TOUGH
DECISIONS ON FEDERAL SPENDING.
WHILE WORK WAS SUBSTANTIAL, IT
IS ALSO CONTINUING.
IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE ECONOMIC
GROWTH AND JOB CREATION, THE
FEDERAL DEBT IS AND MUST REMAIN
PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE.
OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS,
FEDERAL DISCRETIONARY SPENDING
HAS INCREASED BY 24%.
THE RATE OF GROWTH IS SIMPLY
UNSUSTAINABLE.
DESPITE THE RECORD PACE OF NEW
SPENDING OVER THE LAST TWO
YEARS, THAT SPENDING CONTINUES
TODAY.
AND JUST THIS WEEK, MR.
CHAIRMAN, WE LEARNED THAT THE
FEDERAL DEFICIT FOR THE MONTH
OF FEBRUARY, 2011, WAS THE
HIGHEST EVER AND EXCEEDED THE
DEFICIT FOR THE ENTIRE FISCAL
YEAR 2007, $233 BILLION, MR.
CHAIRMAN, THE BIGGEST MONTHLY
DEFICIT IN THE HISTORY OF OUR
COUNTRY.
OVER THE PAST DECADE WE HAVE
SEEN THE EXCESSES IN
UNSUSTAINABLE GROWTH IN SECTORS
OF OUR ECONOMY THAT CAN HAVE
DISASTROUS EFFECTS ACROSS THE
ENTIRE ECONOMY.
UNLESS WE TAKE DRAMATIC ACTION
NOW, THE TAX BURDEN PLACED ON
SMALL BUSINESSES AND FAMILIES
IN MY OWN BUCKS COUNTY AND
ACROSS THE COUNTRY WILL OUTPACE
OUR ABILITY TO PAY, KILLING
JOBS AND STRAINING FAMILY
BUDGETS.
JUST AS TROUBLING IS THE FACT
THE MONEY OUR GOVERNMENT IS
SPENDING IS BORROWED FROM
FOREIGN NATIONS.
THE SHEER AMOUNT OF CASH OWNED
TO FOREIGN POWERS LED THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF
STAFF, ADMIRAL MICHAEL MULLEN,
LAST YEAR TO DECLARE THE
DEFICIT IS THE NUMBER ONE
NATION.
SECURITY THREAT FACING OUR
REDUCE THE DEBT.
I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
THE AMENDMENT, SUPPORT THE
UNDERLINING BILL, AND I RESERVE
THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME
HAS EXPIRED.
WHO SEEKS TIME?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS.
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE
LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
FIRST, I WOULD
REPEAT THAT I'M GLAD TO HEAR
THE SUPPORT FOR ADMIRAL MULLEN.
EARLIER WE HEARD OF SECRETARY
GATES AND THE WARNING ABOUT THE
DEFICIT.
I JUST WISH THAT ALL OF THOSE
WHO WERE ACCEPTING THE WARNING
OF THE DEFICIT WOULD REFRAIN
FROM ENFORCING MONEY ON THEM
THAT THEY DON'T WANT.
WE HAVE PEOPLE CITING THE
MILITARY LEADERSHIP AND THEN
VOTING FOR WEAPONS SYSTEMS
SWELLING AN ALREADY SWOLLEN
MILITARY BUDGET THAT THEY DON'T
WANT.
AS TO THIS AMENDMENT, I'M
TEMPTED TO COME TO THE DEFENSE
OF THE DRAFTERS OF THIS BILL,
BECAUSE IF YOU READ THE BILL,
THE BILL PURPORTS TO DO WHAT
THE AMENDMENT PURPORTS TO DO.
PROBABLY THE AUTHOR OF THE
AMENDMENT DIDN'T THINK THE BILL
DID A GOOD ENOUGH JOB OR
SOMEBODY THOUGHT THE AUTHOR OF
THE AMENDMENT, BEING A NICE
FELLOW, OUGHT TO GET IN ON THE
CREDIT.
SO THIS IS AN AMENDMENT THAT IS
EITHER EDITORIAL REFINEMENT OR
POLITICAL REDUNDANCY.
IN EITHER CASE, IT DOES NOT
HAVE MUCH EFFECT, SO I URGE
MEMBERS TO ADOPT IT.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW YORK.
ADVISE?
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES SHE
I MOVE TO STRIKE
THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLELADY IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I WANT TO POINT
OUT TO CONGRESSMAN FITZPATRICK
FROM THE GREAT STATE OF
PENNSYLVANIA THAT THERE ARE
OVER 132,000 HOMES THAT ARE
UNDER WATER NOW THAT COULD
BENEFIT FROM THIS PROGRAM AND
URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT
THE PROGRAM.
I YIELD BACK.
THE GENTLELADY
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
YIELDS BACK.
AMENDMENT.
OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM
PENNSYLVANIA.
THOSE IN FAVOR WILL SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE AYES HAVE IT.
THE AYES HAVE IT.
.
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.
3.
THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE SECTION
SECTION 3,
TERMINATION OF F.H.A. REFINANCE
PROGRAMS.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES
RISE?
THE GENTLEMAN FROM MASSACHUSETTS
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR.
THE CLERK WILL
I BELIEVE I HAVE A DESK.
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 3,
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD, OFFERED BY MR. LYNCH OF
MASSACHUSETTS.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS.
THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR.
I WANT TO FIRST OF ALL CLARIFY
WHAT THIS BILL IS INTENDING TO
DO.
THE GOAL OF THE BILL BY MY
COLLEAGUES IS TO END THE F.H.A.
REFINANCE PROGRAM.
AND WHILE I DO SUPPORT VOLUNTARY
WORKOUTS, AND I THINK THAT'S THE
BEST WAY TO APPROACH THE
PROBLEM, I WANT TO POINT OUT
THAT THE BILL AS IT IS WRITTEN
DOES NOT ALLOW THAT TO BE
ACCOMPLISHED BY THE F.H.A., NOT
ONLY DOES THE BILL ELIMINATE THE
TARGETED PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN
IDENTIFIED, BUT ALSO IN ITS
BREATH ALSO ELIMINATES THE
POSSIBILITY OF ANY VOLUNTARY
AGREEMENTS OUTSIDE OF THESE
PROGRAMS.
AND THAT'S WHAT MY AMENDMENT
WOULD SEEK TO ADDRESS.
I DO KNOW THAT THE C.Q.'S HOUSE
ACTION REPORT INDICATED THAT I
WAS AMENDING SECTION 2, HOWEVER
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY
UNDERSTAND THAT THE LANGUAGE MY
AMENDMENT ADDRESSES IS SECTION
3, TERMINATION OF F.H.A.
REFINANCE PROGRAM.
BASICALLY WHAT THIS AMENDMENT
WOULD DO TO UNDERSTAND IT THE
F.H.A. FACILITATES MORTGAGE
WORKOUTS AND OTHER ACTIONS UNDER
ITS PURVIEW THROUGH MORTGAGE
LETTERS.
THESE ARE WRITTEN GUIDANCES TO
MORTGAGEES, LENDERS, HOW TO
PROVE COUNCILS AND APPRAISE
THIS.
ANYONE WHO IS ACTIVELY PROVIDING
SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE H.U.D.
SIMILAR GUIDANCE IS DONE FOR A
LOT OF OTHER PROGRAMS.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DICTATES THAT
THE AGENCIES CAN ISSUE
ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDANCE THAT
INTERPRETS STATUTES AND
REGULATIONS THAT WE ADOPT.
AND IT REQUIRES PUBLIC NOTICE
AND COMMENT AND MUST BE BASED ON
AUTHORIZING STATUTE.
THE F.H.A.'S GUIDANCE FOR
LENDERS COMES IN THE FORM OF
HAND BOOKS AND THESE MORTGAGE
LETTERS WHICH ESSENTIALLY
PROVIDE PERIODIC ADVICE AND
CLARIFICATION WHILE WE ARE
TRYING TO DO THESE VOLUNTARY
AGREEMENTS.
LAST YEAR F.H.A. ISSUED 43
SEPARATE VERSIONS OF THIS
MORTGAGE LETTER AND SO FAR THIS
YEAR THEY HAVE ISSUED ABOUT 14.
MY AMENDMENT WOULD STRIKE THE
TEXT THAT I BELIEVE AND THE
F.H.A. BELIEVES WOULD INTERFERE
WITH THE REST OF THE WORK THAT
THE F.H.A. IS DOING IN THEIR
OPERATION.
THESE ARE NOT AREAS TARGETED BY
ILLINOIS.
THE BILL, BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM
THE BILL PROVIDES THAT -- THE
BILL PROVIDES THAT ANYTHING
SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO WHAT
THEY HAVE PROHIBITED IN SECTION
2, WHICH IS A MORTGAGE LETTER
TITLED 2010-23, ANYTHING SIMILAR
TO THAT, ANY VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT
SIMILAR TO THAT WOULD ALSO BE
PROHIBITED.
THAT CREATES A PROBLEM.
THAT STOPS THE F.H.A. FROM DOING
A LOT OF THE OTHER WORK THAT
BOTH SIDES AGREE NEEDS TO BE
DONE.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT VOLUNTARY
AGREEMENTS WHERE THE BANK AND
SERVICER AND THE HOMEOWNER
AGREE.
BASICALLY THAT WOULD BE STOPPED
BY THIS LEGISLATION.
SO I'M NOT TRYING TO UNDO THE
TARGETED WORK THAT YOU'RE TRYING
TO DO.
I'M JUST TRYING TO LET THE
F.H.A. DO THEIR JOB IN GENERAL.
I JUST WANT TO REMIND THE
GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS THAT THE
F.H.A. BY ITSELF CANNOT RECREATE
THE FINANCE PROGRAM THROUGH A
MORTGAGE LETTER.
IT CAN ONLY WORK -- IT CAN ONLY
DO SO IF IT'S LEGISLATION THAT'S
CLEARLY UNDERLYING THEIR ACTION.
AND ALL THE MORTGAGE LETTERS
MUST GO THROUGH DEPARTMENTAL
CLEARANCE AND BE VIEWED BY
O.M.B. BEFORE THEY BECOME
OFFICIAL GUIDANCE.
I'M ASKING THAT THIS AMENDMENT
BE ACCEPTED TO CLARIFY THE
ACTION OF THE BILL ITSELF.
THANK YOU.
DOES GENTLEMAN YIELD
BACK -- DOES THE GENTLEMAN YIELD
BACK?
GENTLEMAN MAY NOT RESERVE.
THEN I DON'T RESERVE.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.