[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 109 (Tuesday, August 9, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 9, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT OF 1993 
            REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 1993--CONFERENCE REPORT

  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of 
conference on H.R. 3474 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be stated.
  The Legislative clerk read as follows:

       The committee on conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 
     3474) to reduce administrative requirements for insured 
     depository institutions to the extent consistent with safe 
     and sound banking practices, to facilitate the establishment 
     of community development financial institutions, and for 
     other purposes, having met, after full and free conference, 
     have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective 
     Houses this report, signed by a majority of the conferees.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to 
the consideration of the conference report.
  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the 
Record of August 2, 1994.)
  Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate will now turn 
its attention to the conference report on H.R. 3474, the Riegle 
Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994. This 
conference report incorporates a number of provisions designed to 
foster community development, encourage lending to small businesses, 
remove unnecessary paperwork, streamline regulation, and protect 
consumers. It has already passed the House by a vote of 410 to 12.
  The Banking Committee has worked together in a bipartisan fashion in 
crafting and moving this legislation. We have also worked closely with 
the Administration. I believe this effort is reflected in the 
overwhelming bipartisan support that this legislation received both in 
committee, where the Senate version of the bill was reported favorably 
by a vote of 18 to 1, and here on the Senate floor, where it was 
approved without opposition.
  I particularly want to commend Senator D'Amato, the ranking 
Republican on the Banking Committee, for his leadership and input in 
developing this legislation.


                         community development

  Title I addresses Community Development and Consumer Protection. 
Subtitle A aims to help revitalize distressed communities by 
strengthening the capacity of local community development institutions 
and improving access to capital in these communities. It creates the 
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
  The CDFI Fund will promote revitalization by providing financial and 
technical assistance to new and existing community development 
financial institutions. These are financial institutions having a 
primary mission of community development such as community development 
banks, community development credit unions, and revolving loan funds. 
To maximize the impact of the Federal assistance provided to these 
institutions, each Federal dollar must be matched with a dollar of 
private funds. We have worked particularly closely with the 
administration on this portion of the legislation which represents the 
fulfillment of President Clinton's promise to develop a network of 
community development banks.
  The conference report authorizes $382 million over 4 years to carry 
out this subtitle. Two-thirds of the funds appropriated will be 
available to the CDFI Fund to support community development financial 
institutions.
  The other one-third of the funds appropriated will be used by the 
fund to encourage traditional depository institutions to provide loans 
and services in distressed communities through the Bank Enterprise Act. 
The Bank Enterprise Act was passed by the Congress in 1991 and 
originally was designed to incentivize banks and thrifts through 
credits toward their depository insurance premiums. Under this 
legislation, the Bank Enterprise Act will be administered by the CDFI 
Fund, and will have no relation to the deposit insurance system.
  The CDFI Fund will be directed by an administrator appointed by the 
President and confirmed by the Senate. A 15 member Advisory Board will 
consist of 9 private citizens with community development finance 
experience, as well as the Secretaries of the Departments of 
Agriculture, Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, and 
Treasury, and the Administrator of the Small Business Administration.


                          consumer protection

  Titie I also included the ``Homeownership and Equity Protection 
Act.'' This legislation amends the Truth in Lending Act to provide new 
consumer protections for certain second mortgages with exceptionally 
high fees or interest rates.
  At a February 17, 1993, hearing before the Banking Committee, 
witnesses testified that homeowners in low income and minority 
communities have been targeted for abusive mortgage lending practices. 
This legislation requires lenders who make high rate or high fee home 
equity loans to provide a separate disclosure that contains the annual 
interest rate and monthly payment of the loan, as well as a warning 
that the borrower could lose his or her home. The disclosure must be 
provided at least 3 days before settlement, creating an additional 
cooling off period.
  The legislation restricts the use of certain loan terms that have 
proven problematic in these loans, such as balloon payments on short 
term loans. The Federal Reserve is given authority to exempt loans from 
these restrictions, however, if such an exemption is in the interest of 
the borrowing public. Finally, the legislation transfers liability in 
connection with such mortgages from the originator to any subsequent 
purchaser of the mortgage. This provision is essential to make the 
market police itself.


                             small business

  Title II, Small Business Capital Formation, contains two provisions 
designed to ensure that small businesses have access to the credit they 
need to grow and create jobs.
  First, Title II includes legislation based on S. 384, a bill 
introduced by Senator D'Amato to facilitate the securitization of small 
business loans. In 1984, Congress enacted legislation to promote the 
securitization of home mortgages. Most observers believe that 
securitization of residential mortgages has increased the amount of 
capital available for home buyers, insuring a continuous supply and 
bringing down the cost.
  Under this legislation, financial institutions can originate loans to 
small businesses, and then sell them to an entity that would issue 
securities to investors. It makes changes to the Federal securities 
laws that parallel the 1984 statute. These changes will allow issuers 
sufficient time to pool and sell securities, and to file a single 
registration statement with the SEC.
  The legislation also changes bank capital requirements for small 
business loans sold with recourse--that is, where the bank remains 
liable for a portion of any losses on the loan. We have worked closely 
with the Federal bank regulators and the Treasury to develop an 
approach that will facilitate securitization of small business loans 
while maintaining bank safety and soundness.
  In fashioning this legislation, we have been mindful that banks are 
losing market share in the area of small business lending. We realize 
how crucial bank financing is to small and start-up businesses, and we 
want commercial banks to continue to be players in this market.
  Title II also includes a measure providing Federal assistance for 
State Capital Access Programs. Fourteen States have adopted Capital 
Access Programs. These programs encourage banks to make loans to small 
and medium-sized businesses that they might not make otherwise.
  Lenders may choose to participate in a Capital Access Program. For 
each loan enrolled in a program, the bank and the borrower contribute 
to a loss reserve fund. The State then matches the contribution of the 
bank and borrower. The loan loss reserve fund protects the lender 
against loss on the loan. Participating lenders assume the risk on 
their loans, if the losses exceed the total contributions to the 
reserve fund. Unlike a guarantee program, the Government is not exposed 
to the risk of the entire loan.
  The bill authorizes $50 million in Federal funds to match State 
contributions to Capital Access Programs. This will help States that 
already have such programs and encourage other States and localities to 
adopt such programs. The Federal role would be limited to certifying 
State programs for participation, receiving reports, and matching State 
contributions.


             paperwork reduction and regulatory improvement

  Title III of the conference report contains a number of directives to 
the regulatory agencies to improve the way they carry out their 
functions. Our goal is to harmonize and simplify the regulatory 
mandates imposed by multiple agencies. Upon enactment, examinations 
will be coordinated, and, within 2 years, each institution and its 
affiliates will receive a unified exam led by one regulator. This will 
eliminate the costs to banks of duplicative examinations. Also within 2 
years, the Federal banking agencies must conduct a top-to-bottom review 
of regulations, removing inconsistent, outmoded, and duplicative 
mandates. New regulations won't be issued without scrutiny of the 
administrative burden that may create--particularly for smaller 
institutions. The current system, of 4 different agencies adopting 4 
different guidelines on the same subject, will come to an end.
  The conference report also contains numerous amendments to existing 
laws that will reduce the paperwork and unnecessary regulatory burden 
that banks must cope with. For example, institutions with assets of 
less then $100 million which have received a composite rating of 
excellent from the bank regulatory agencies are currently exempt from 
the requirement of annual inspection and instead may be examined on an 
18-month cycle. Title II raises that threshold to $250 million for 
institutions with an excellent composite condition and allows similar 
treatment for institutions in the good category with assets less than 
$100 million. Further, the bank regulatory agencies are given authority 
to raise the $100 million level to $175 million after 2 years if doing 
so is consistent with safety and soundness.

  Other sections of the conference report provide that call reports no 
longer need be published in local newspapers. Loans that are made for 
commercial, agricultural or governmental purposes are exempted from the 
forms required under the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act. 
Securitization of commercial mortgages is simplified. In addition, 
Title III calls for studies of risk-based capital standards, sterile 
reserves, and regulatory impediments in the consumer lending process.
  A number of these provisions are drawn from Senate Bills 265 and 
1124, introduced by Senators Shelby, Mack, D'Amato, Bryan, Sasser, 
Dole, and others. I commend them for their leadership in this area.
  The measures in the bill reflect a thorough review and balancing to 
eliminate unnecessary restrictions while maintaining effective 
supervision, the safety and soundness of the banking system, protection 
of the Insurance Fund, and consumer protections. Establishing, 
ensuring, and maintaining a lasting framework for safety and soundness 
of the banking system has been my highest banking priority as Chairman 
of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee. Any actions that 
hinder effective bank regulation, or undermine bank safety and 
soundness, may save the banks money today, at the risk of causing 
losses to the insurance fund tomorrow. This legislation is a major step 
toward eliminating the duplicative and inconsistent regulation that 
increases costs for consumers and undermines support for essential 
regulation.
  As chairman of the conference, I would like to make clear our 
intentions in Title III regarding OCC and OTS rulemaking. The statutory 
language states that the Secretary of the Treasury may not intervene in 
any matter or proceeding before the OTS and the OCC, including 
enforcement actions, unless otherwise specifically provided by law. 
Moreover, with specific regard to rulemaking proceedings, the statutory 
language states that the Secretary of the Treasury may not delay or 
prevent the issuance of any rule or the promulgation of any regulation 
by the OTS and the OCC.
  It is the clear intention of the conferees that Treasury adhere to 
the amendments' terms. In the past, under the existing Treasury review 
and clearance process, Treasury staff has engaged in line by line veto, 
including modification and insertion into regulations of the agencies. 
Treasury staff has also delayed important regulations. Such forms of 
intervention are not consistent with the impartiality required of a 
regulatory agency.
  The conferees clearly did, and intended to, affect and change the 
existing working relationship between Treasury and the regulatory 
bureaus in the area of rulemaking. The conference report also makes 
this clear. The report states that regulations developed by the OCC and 
OTS shall no longer be subject to a Treasury Department review or 
clearance process that allows the Treasury to block, delay or rewrite 
any proposed or final regulation. However, Treasury is not precluded 
from communicating during a rulemaking process regarding the Treasury 
Department's policy goals and objectives.
  The conference committee voted against an amendment by a House member 
to eliminate rulemaking from the above nonintervention provisions. The 
amendment which was agreed to by the conferees specifies that in the 
rulemaking area, we mean to stop Treasury vetos and delays of proposed 
or final rules and regulations. These problems occur under the existing 
review and clearance process. Nothing in this clarifying amendment 
allows the continuance of the status quo, or the circumvention of the 
Conference Committee.


                            money laundering

  Title IV of the conference report contains a comprehensive package of 
amendments to improve the Nation's system for combating money 
laundering. These measures will facilitate compliance with the 
requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act, enable law enforcement officials 
to make better use of reports that are filed by financial institutions, 
and ensure that certain types of financial transactions are not used to 
circumvent anti-money laundering restrictions.
  The Bank Secrecy Act requires depository institutions to file 
currency transaction reports on most transactions above $10,000. The 
conference report seeks to facilitate compliance by establishing a two-
tier system of mandatory and discretionary exemptions from the 
reporting requirements of the Act. This will not only reduce the burden 
on depository institutions, but improve the value of the reports that 
are filed by eliminating an enormous amount of unnecessary information.

  The conference report directs the Secretary of the Treasury to 
designate a single officer or agency to receive reports of suspicious 
transactions. Currently, depository institutions file multiple forms on 
such transactions with different law enforcement agencies. Adoption of 
a standard form and collection point will eliminate duplication and 
streamline enforcement.
  Title IV also includes provisions designed to fill gaps in the 
current system. Reporting requirements are broadened to cover bank 
drafts drawn on foreign financial institutions. Likewise, the 
Comptroller General is directed to study the extent to which cashiers 
checks are vulnerable to money laundering schemes.
  This legislation is an important step to improve the Nation's anti-
money laundering efforts. I want to particularly commend Senator Bryan 
for his leadership in this area.


                            flood insurance

  Title V amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to reform the 
National Flood Insurance Program. The legislation seeks to improve 
compliance by lenders in mandating purchase of insurance for properties 
in flood hazard areas. Improved compliance will increase participation 
by owners of homes in flood hazard areas, thereby strengthening the 
financial condition of the flood insurance system and the overall 
protection that it provides to citizens who are victims of floods.
  The legislation creates a new supplemental insurance program to 
reduce the number of properties that do not comply with current flood 
protection standards. Structures will be rebuilt up to current building 
code standards, ultimately reducing the risk of future flood damage.
  Title V also codifies the current Community Rating System program 
implemented by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. This program 
provides incentives, in the form of reduced flood insurance premiums, 
for communities that voluntarily adopt and enforce measures that reduce 
the risk of flood damage.


                               conclusion

  Again, I would like to thank all the members of the Banking 
Committee, for their efforts in developing this legislation. I also 
want to thank all of the conferees and my colleagues for naming this 
bill The Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 
1994.
  Finally, I would like to pay special tribute to the staff. This bill 
was crafted on a bipartisan basis and Senator D'Amato and his staff, 
under the able leadership of Howard Menell, deserve tremendous credit. 
Recognizing the Democratic staff, I would like to compliment the 
outstanding work done by a number of people. Taking the bill title by 
title I would like to especially acknowledge and thank the following 
individuals: Title IA, the Community Development Banking and Financial 
Institutions Act, Jeannine Jacokes, Mark Kaufman, and Matt Roberts; 
Title IB, Home Ownership and Equity Protection, Mark Kaufman, Matt 
Roberts, and Glenn Ivey; Title IIA, Small Business Loan Securitization, 
Mitchell Feuer and Pat Lawler; Title IIB, Small Business Capital 
Enhancement, Clem Dinsmore and Mitchell Feuer; Title III, Paperwork 
Reduction and Regulatory Improvement, Tim McTaggart, Mark Kaufman, 
Sarah Bloom-Raskin, Kay Bondehagen and Tim Mitchell; Title IV, Money 
Laundering, Tim McTaggart and Andy Vermilye; and Title V, National 
Flood Insurance, Jeannine Jacokes, Jonathan Winer, Paul Weech and Tony 
Orza. I would also like to acknowledge and highlight the contributions 
of Mitchell Feuer, Marty Gruenberg and Courtney Ward who were 
especially helpful throughout the process and, in particular, the 
conference. The Banking Committee also has a terrific professional 
administrative staff and I would like to express my deep appreciation 
for the work done by: Amy Kostanecki, Teresa Ho, Tim Mitchell, Cindy 
Lasker, Sheila Duffy, Stefani Lako, Kris Warren and Emily Frydrych, as 
well as Kelly Cordes, Joseph Hepp and Paula Garfinkle.
  The conference report on H.R. 3474 is an extremely important 
legislative accomplishment, and I urge its speedy adoption.
  Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I urge the Senate's approval of the 
conference Report on H.R. 3474, the Riegle Community Development and 
Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994. The conference report contains 
numerous provisions and titles intended to facilitate the flow of 
credit to small- and medium-size businesses through the securitization 
and sale of loans, protect consumers from abusive lending practices, 
provide incentives for community development, and provide relief from 
burdensome regulation for banks and savings and loans without affecting 
essential safety and soundness protections. In addition, the conference 
report contains long overdue reforms to the National Flood Insurance 
Program.
  Mr. President, like all legislation that survives the rigors of the 
legislative process, the bill is the result of extensive collaboration 
between Senators on both sides of the aisle and colleagues in the 
House, between consumer interests and business perspectives and between 
the administration and Congress. Many individual members have played a 
role in introducing and perfecting the various titles of the bill.
  In the Senate, Senators, Bond, Mack, and Kerry have spent countless 
hours studying, debating, and finally agreeing on, important and 
balanced reforms in the National Flood Insurance Program. This bill is 
the culmination of efforts that began in the previous Congress. I want 
to commend them for their diligence.
  Mr. President, thanks to the leadership of Senators Mack and Shelby, 
the bill contains dozens of provisions intended to alleviate some 
unnecessary and costly regulatory burdens from our banking and thrift 
institutions. The goals of this regulatory pruning are to make it less 
costly and easier for these entities make loans to consumers and 
businesses. Our colleagues deserve credit for their efforts. It must 
also be said that the administration was helpful to this legislative 
effort as part of its program to alleviate the credit crunch.
  Mr. President, the bill also contains many provisions helpful to 
small business. I am proud to be the original sponsor of legislation, 
incorporated into this conference report, to increase the capital 
available to small business by removing impediments to the 
securitization of small business loans and leases. I want to 
acknowledge the efforts and support of Representatives John LaFalce and 
Paul Kanjorski who introduced legislation in the House of 
Representatives to achieve this same purpose. While the conferees 
adopted the Senate provision in large part, the final text reflects the 
close consultation with and the improvements of my House colleagues. I 
am sure we will continue to collaborate on legislation in the future to 
aid the small businesses community. I also want to acknowledge the 
cooperation and support of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce 
in working through the aspects of the bill within their jurisdiction.
  Mr. President, the title of the conference report dealing with 
community development warrants special mention. The chairman of our 
committee, Senator Riegle, deserves enormous credit for his initiative 
and dedication in developing constructive legislation designed to 
facilitate increased community development activity by traditional 
lenders and experimentation with new ideas. While the administration 
sent Congress a proposal in this area, it was Chairman Riegle that 
presided over many hearings, and dedicated himself to forging a 
compromise capable of achieving bipartisan support and he deserves a 
great deal of credit for the final provisions. I am especially pleased, 
and I want to note, that Representative Floyd Flake, my colleague from 
New York, has also left a strong and indelible imprint on this 
legislation. Represenative Flake's previous efforts, in the context of 
the Bank Enterprise Act, demonstrated his strong commitment to these 
kinds of programs. His district is a living example of what is 
achievable when innovation and dedication are joined with capital and 
credit to develop and redevelop parts of communities that have not been 
reached by traditional institutions of government or finance. Mr. Flake 
has proven once again that he is a leader in Congress as well as in his 
district.

  Finally, as the ranking minority member among the Senate conferees on 
the CDFI bill, I want to make clear the intention of the conferees with 
respect to the independence of the Office of Thrift Supervision and the 
Office of the Comptroller of Currency from the Department of Treasury 
with respect to rulemaking. Section 331 of the conference report 
plainly states that the Secretary of the Treasury ``may not delay or 
prevent the issuance of any rule or the promulgation of any 
regulation'' by the Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision or the 
Comptroller of the Currency. The accompanying narrative spells out the 
intent of the conferees in this area unambiguously, when it states 
``regulations developed by the OCC and OTS shall no longer be subject 
to a Treasury Department review or clearance process that allows the 
Treasury to block, delay or rewrite any OCC or OTS proposed or final 
regulation that the Comptroller of the Currency or the Director of the 
OTS has determined to issue.''
  There is nothing ambiguous about either the statutory language or the 
accompanying narrative. Nevertheless, an effort has been made on the 
floor of the House to reinterpret this provision as if the conferees 
intended it to have no effect--as if our real intent was for the 
Secretary to continue to review proposed regulations of the OCC and 
OTS, continue to rewrite and revise them, continue to delay or block 
their issuance, and so forth. Some of the conferees may have desired 
that outcome, but they did not prevail in the conference committee. 
Their characterization of the conferees' intentions lacks foundation. 
It directly contradicts both the legislative language and the narrative 
explanation of that language. Our intention--and I speak as one of the 
authors of this language--was not to leave the current review process 
in place. Our intention was to create a new process in which the 
Treasury Department would no longer review OTS and OCC rules and 
regulations. We opted for change. We rejected the status quo. The 
conference report, duly adopted by the conference committee, plainly 
and accurately describes the choices the conference committee made. It 
speaks for itself.
  Mr. President, in all, this is a significant legislative achievement. 
For the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, it 
will accomplish a major part of the legislative agenda for this 
Congress. Chairman Riegle and I have consulted closely every step of 
the way in an effort to work together in the spirit of bipartisanship. 
He has been exceedingly gracious and fair, since I became the ranking 
member. I believe all the members of the committee appreciate the 
hospitable environment he has fostered. It enables us to fashion 
significant legislation, such as the bill before us today, as well as 
to debate fully measures on which we disagree.
  Mr. President, I want to acknowledge my gratitude to all of the 
Members of the Banking Committee, to the staff, and to my colleagues in 
the House of Representatives.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I would like to thank and compliment 
Senators Riegle, D'Amato, Shelby, and Mack for the leadership they have 
exhibited on one or more titles of this bill.
  Title II of this conference report will enhance capital availability 
for small businesses lending and commercial real estate lending. Since 
we can't bring these small business and real estate buildings to Wall 
Street, this bill brings Wall Street resources to main street all over 
America using the process of securitization.
  I am very pleased that the conference report includes the Small 
Business Securitization Act. This legislation will make more funds 
available for lending to small business. It is a market driven approach 
that won't cost the Federal Government a single dollar. It 
significantly removes current legal impediments to the securitization 
of small business loans.
  Securitization is the banking world's version of recycling. A bank 
makes a loan to a small business, and rather than waiting for that 
small business to pay back the loan before the bank can make another 
loan, the bank sells the loan so that it can be pooled, securitized and 
sold in the secondary market. Once the local bank sells the loan, it 
receives the proceeds and it is then in the position to immediately 
make another loan to help another business. That is why I call 
securitization financial resources ``recycling.'' It means that more 
small businesses can be provided credit faster.
  This title of the bill will bring new sources of funds to small- and 
medium-sized businesses. It will enable pension funds, insurance 
companies, trust departments and other institutional and private 
investors to invest in small business loans made by other financial 
institutions. Additionally by increasing the number of market 
participants it will increase competition and lower interest rates. 
Eventually, this will enable financial institutions to increase their 
volume of lending to better meet the credit needs of small businesses.
  The bottom line is that this bill means more credit for small 
businesses at lower rates.
  Section 347 of the conference report addresses credit availability 
for commercial real estate by removing impediments to 
``securitization'' of commercial real estate loans. This is the process 
Wall Street uses to convert relatively illiquid real estate assets into 
marketable securities that can be purchased by a broad range of 
investors including pension funds, banks, insurance companies, mutual 
funds and investment funds. The securities are backed by pools of 
commercial mortgages or sometimes by a single property, such as a large 
urban, mixed use complex.
  Securitization makes money for commercial real estate lending 
``recyclable.''
  A banker makes a loan, sells it, takes the proceeds and lends it out 
again. Wall Street buys the loans, pools them, securitizes them and 
enables banks to make more loans without waiting for repayment years in 
the future.
  The same process has made trillions of dollars available for 
residential lending and has resulted in millions of families getting 
the mortgage capital they need to become home owners.
  Section 347 of this bill are based upon S. 1728, the Commercial 
Mortgage Capital Availability Act of 1993 which Senator Bryan and I 
introduced earlier this Congress. Section 347 amends the Secondary 
Mortgage Market Enhancement Act [SMMEA] to allow securities backed by 
mortgages secured by liens on commercial property to qualify as 
Mortgage Related Securities [MRS] as defined in SMMEA. This confers 
several significant benefits. It authorizes various federally and 
State-chartered institutions to invest in committed MRS. It preempts 
state blue sky laws--subject to a 7 year opt out mechanism. It provides 
various exceptions to the Securities Act of 1934 to allow for delayed 
settlements--up to 180 days--to account for the forward delivery nature 
of the mortgage market. MRS status is conferred on mortgage securities 
rated by at least two nationally known rating agencies in their top two 
investment grades. The mortgages themselves must be originated by 
federally regulated mortgagees. This section eases the margin 
requirements under the Federal securities laws and provides permission 
for depository institutions to purchase these commercial real estate 
backed securities under conditions established by their regulators.
  There are strong reasons to confer the benefits of SMMEA on the 
commercial real estate market. The expected greater credit availability 
should add stability to the commercial real estate market. While credit 
availability alone will not correct the effects of overbuilding, at 
least it would assure that as rents and values stabilize, credit will 
be more readily available to help assure orderly disposition of REO and 
assets acquired by FDIC and RTC liquidators.
  The Community Development Financial Institutions title of the bill 
gives the Government a role in selected private microloan fund lending, 
and low income credit union lending. This is lending that these 
nonprofits have been pioneering for years.
  These private initiatives have shown us that people and a little 
money can make a big difference. This bill takes the $382 million we 
are authorizing over the next 4 year period and puts into place the 
policies that will make the Federal Government a partner in some of 
these worthwhile endeavors.
  In New Mexico, we have two established community development 
financial institutions: The New Mexico Community Development Loan Fund 
and the Women's Economic Self-Sufficiency Team, both located in 
Albuquerque. We also have several CDFI Coalition Affiliates: Home 
Education Livelihood Program, Inc., of Albuquerque; Siete del Norte 
Community Development Corp., Embudo, NM; and the Navajo Townsite 
Community Development Corp. in Navajo, NM.
  Let me take one of these programs, the Navajo Townsite Community 
Development Corp. and tell you about the big difference it has been 
making with a little money. In the past 4 years, this group has worked 
with McKinley County, the New Mexico legislature, the U.S. Department 
of Health and Human Services, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the 
Navajo Nation's Division of Economic, and Community Development.
  The Navajo Townsite Community Development Corp. has used $5.4 million 
for social, economic and infrastructure programs to benefit the 3,100 
residents of Navajo, McKinley County, NM. It helped finance a shopping 
center; provided start-up funds for several businesses; and helped fund 
a day care center. All in all, the program has created almost 100 jobs.
  Another New Mexico fund is WESSTcorp which is a nonprofit agency 
created to help women start and grow their businesses. Over the past 5 
years WESSTcorp has helped more than 250 women develop their 
businesses. The fund has yet to experience a defaulted loan.
  The New Mexico Community Development Loan Fund is a private, 
nonprofit financial intermediary created in 1989, and dedicated to the 
economic and social empowerment of the people of the State. It 
currently has $820,000 in capital under management. Its capital has 
come from Catholic women religious groups, Protestant religious groups, 
Jewish synagogues, foundation program-related investments, 
corporations, and Federal economic development programs. It is well 
underway. It has made 17 loans totaling $284,571. All loans are current 
and the fund has experienced no losses.
  The New Mexico Community Development Loan Fund has helped people from 
one end of the State to the other. It has financed an organic grower's 
purchase of equipment; helped finance inventory for a nonprofit store 
which sells crafts made by low income New Mexican artisans. It has 
financed a transitional housing project in Santa Fe. It has financed a 
grass roots organization which provides various health and social 
services to low income villages near Las Cruces. It helped finance an 
expansion of a health care facility used by farm worker families and 
the elderly.
  Another interesting project helped finance the Costilla Co-op's 
purchase of doll making materials. The co-op makes and sells Hispanic 
folk art dolls. Another loan helped a Southwest fashion cottage 
industry in Costilla and Amalia buy industrial sewing machines. It 
helped finance land acquisition for the Grant County Cooperative 
Ownership Development Corp. in Silver City. This small business 
incubator center will help other small businesses develop by holding 
down the costs of offering services. Another loan helped the Santa Fe 
Housing Authority set a renters' fund for single mothers and fathers 
who needed down payment assistance.
  Nationwide, community development loan funds have loaned more than 
$100 million which has leveraged $760 million in public and private 
capital to finance 15,000 housing units and to create 3,500 jobs for 
poor Americans. This bill will make the Federal Government a investor 
in some of these worthwhile endeavors.
  This bill authorizes $382 million over a 4-year period. This isn't a 
lot of money when you measure it by the need. For this reason I am 
pleased that a leveraging provision--section 113--that a group of 
Senate Banking Committee members worked on is included in the bill.
  Senator Shelby and Senator Mack should be commended for their efforts 
on regulatory burden relief. This is one of the most significant titles 
in this bill and I am very pleased that Congress took this initiative 
to reduce the paperwork required of banks and other financial 
institutions.
  I am pleased that the conference bill includes a data collection 
provision which will in the future help the Banking Committee and 
lending institutions evaluate lending practices to women and other 
minorities.
  The conference report includes a provision which includes Indian 
reservation sin the definition of an eligible investment area. Senator 
Campbell and I authored an amendment to insure that the Indian 
reservations are treated like the urban and rural enterprise zones. 
These provisions, in conjunction with the provisions included in the 
Reconciliation Act of 1993 should help spur investment on Indian 
reservations.
  Another title of this bill is the home equity protection title. 
Predatory lending operates in a credit vacuum created when mainstream 
banks abandon direct lending in minority neighborhoods. This 
legislation will put a stop to some of the most predatory practices 
that equity skimmers engage in.
  I am pleased that the Senate is passing this piece of banking 
legislation.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I would like to ask the managers to clarify 
a point in this legislation. It is my understanding that nothing in 
this conference report changes the intent outlined by the chairman of 
the Banking Committee during the initial consideration of this bill in 
the Senate, that credit insurance will be treated consistently with the 
current provisions of the Truth in Lending Act.
  Mr. RIEGLE. I am pleased to clarify for my friend from Florida, that 
his understanding is correct.
  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
conference report be adopted and the motion to reconsider be laid upon 
the table; and that any statements relating to this conference report 
be printed in the Record at the appropriate place.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the conference report was agreed to.

                          ____________________