[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 97 (Monday, July 20, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H5874-H5879]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND EXPANSION
OF HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 208) expressing the sense of the
Congress regarding access to affordable housing and expansion of
homeownership opportunities.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Con. Res. 208
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the priorities of our Nation should include providing
access to affordable housing that is safe, clean, and healthy
and expanding homeownership opportunities; and
(2) these goals should be pursued through policies that--
(A) promote the ability of the private sector to produce
affordable housing without excessive government regulation;
(B) encourage tax incentives, such as the mortgage interest
deduction, at all levels of government; and
(C) facilitate the availability of capital for
homeownership and housing production, including by continuing
the essential roles carried out by the Federal National
Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation, and the Federal Home Loan Banks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Iowa (Mr. Leach) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach).
(Mr. LEACH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, this, I believe, is a non-controversial bill.
It underscores principles critical to the American family--the
desirability of achieving the dream of home ownership for as many
Americans as conceivably possible.
On this front, there is some good news, and also some challenging
circumstances. The good news is that home ownership is going up in
America, almost 1 percent in the last 4 years, until today it reaches
approximately 66 percent of the American public. The principal reason
for this relates to lower interest rates caused by restrained monetary
policy and the movement from a deficit to a surplus fiscal policy.
It also relates to aspects of tax policy, the importance of quasi-
governmental institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that have
served as extraordinarily helpful intermediaries in housing finance,
and to certain housing programs of the Federal Government itself.
But what this bill, and it is a small bill, does is simply underscore
what are the great principles of American housing, and underscore it in
such a way as to make it clear that this Congress is not going to be
backed down from those principles, particularly the principle that
relates to the interest deduction for home ownership mortgage loans.
Mr. Speaker, recognizing that this is an exceptionally modest bill,
but also one that relates to a subject very important to the heart of
the American people, I would urge its adoption at this time.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge).
Mr. MINGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for
yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I have faced repeated requests from communities that I
represent for action at the Federal level to
[[Page H5875]]
make sure that we have adequate affordable housing in this country.
Indeed, I have held four forums on this subject in communities in my
district. It is in this context that I have come to recognize the
importance of these programs that the Federal Government has sponsored
over the years, and, as a consequence, I rise in support of House
Concurrent Resolution 208, introduced by my colleague the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Lazio) of New York.
All Americans should have an opportunity to obtain decent and
affordable housing. However, the Nation's housing problems have
increasingly been concentrated in two segments of the population, first
time home buyers and low income households.
A much smaller portion of young households own their own homes today
than they did in 1980. Shortages of housing resources for both down
payments and monthly mortgage payments are largely responsible for this
trend.
Furthermore, growing numbers of less fortunate citizens are forced to
spend a very large portion of relatively small budgets to rent
apartments, and many these housing units suffer from physical
inadequacies as well. Homelessness can be a ragged-edge consequence of
formidable social and housing hurdles faced by the most disadvantaged
portions of our population.
Mr. Speaker, in order to attain our national housing goals, there is
a need for a voice for housing in community development at the Federal
level. We can take the first step today by voicing our support for this
resolution.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to briefly note that this bill is brought
to us by the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio), the
chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, who
has devoted a great deal of time and effort to not only this bill, but
other housing legislation. I apologize that the gentleman has been
detained intransit, but I wanted to reference the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Lazio) because of his leadership on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Metcalf).
(Mr. METCALF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. METCALF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 208. As
cochair of the Housing Opportunity Caucus, I share the goals of the
gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Leach) and the gentleman from New York
(Chairman Lazio) of expanding access to affordable housing and home
ownership opportunities.
Two years ago, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio), the
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Weller), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English)
and I formed a caucus to spotlight the need for housing in this Nation.
Working cooperatively, we have discovered we can create programs that
increase the production of affordable housing. For example, the low
income housing tax credit is one of the few Federal programs that
encourages the creation of new rental housing without excessive
government regulations. Since its inception, this program has generated
thousands of housing units for working parents who are struggling to
pay the increasing rents.
To help achieve the American dream, we cannot simply stop at making
rental housing more affordable. We have to help families own their own
homes. We can achieve this by continuing the support for the mortgage
interest deduction, reducing Federal barriers to home ownership, and
ensuring that financing is available. The mortgage revenue bonds and
FHA guarantee of loans have helped low income families finance their
home affordably.
This Congress can and should do more to increase the access to
housing. H. Con. Res. 208 is not just a simple statement in support of
housing as a national priority, it is a statement of our vision to help
make the American dream a reality for more people. I ask my colleagues
to support this important resolution.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I must say that I owe an apology to the supporters of
this. Having first read it, I was inclined to regard if as fairly
trivial. It is a resolution with no binding impact. It seemed to me to
just be sort of cheerleading.
I was somewhat struck that in the week in which we are passing a
housing appropriation bill which severely diminishes funds that should
be available for people at the low brackets, we are celebrating the
importance of affordable housing. In fact, there is a great
inconsistency between the legislation we will be adopting, which
significantly underfunds affordable housing and will allow the gap to
greatly widen for those who need it.
But it is not nearly as trivial as I thought. Indeed, there are some
very interesting things. I notice on page 2, lines 4 through 6, the
following: ``Encourage tax incentives such as the mortgage interest
deduction at all levels of government.'' The gentleman from Washington
also mentioned the low income tax credit.
I guess, Mr. Speaker, when the House passes this today, the
appropriate phrase will be, if I may lapse into a little bilingualism,
``sic transit gloria flat tax.''
We have heard a lot about the flat tax, and it seemed to be an idea
that had some support in some Republican circles. But those circles
appear not to be included in the circle of influence today.
The mortgage interest deduction is, of course, the biggest bump in
the flat tax. The mortgage interest deduction is very different than a
flat tax, and I am struck that the House is today apparently
repudiating the notion of a flat tax, because it is citing not simply
the fact of the mortgage interest deduction, which is a major bump in
that flatness, but it is celebrating the principles of using the Tax
Code to achieve social purposes. What we are saying here is home
ownership is a good thing, and let us use tax incentives to change what
the economy might otherwise do.
Now, I am for the mortgage interest deduction myself. I supported
putting a cap on it, but I think it ought to exist. I was not sure
whether my Republican colleagues remain as loyal to that as they
apparently are.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I would be delighted to respond to the
gentleman. As the gentleman knows, there is a lot of controversy within
the country and some differences of judgment within the party on the
flat tax, but it is my belief that the majority of Republicans strongly
support maintaining the mortgage interest deduction, even if there is a
movement towards a flat or a flatter tax.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would
thank the gentleman. I would say this is a day for people to come
together. I was particularly pleased to see the gentleman from Iowa
expressing his support for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and his talk
about the essentiality of this role.
I will have to say this though. It seems to me you can be for the
mortgage interest deduction and a flatter tax, but you cannot be and
still remain within the confines of the English language for the
mortgage interest deduction and a flat tax. It is very unflat, and,
indeed, it is not simply the flatness of the mortgage interest
deduction, it is the notion that it is legitimate to use the Federal
Tax Code to achieve policy goals.
Indeed, not just the Federal Tax Code. I notice this also encourages
the mortgage interest deduction to be maintained ``at all levels of
government.'' So apparently this is a case where the Federal government
is also giving some advice to State and local governments. Apparently
the people who drafted this believe that State governments, left to
their own, probably would not get the Tax Code right. So here is a
little advice to the States to follow the Federal example.
As I said, I am supportive of this, but I think we ought to note that
it is very much a deviation from the notion of a flat tax.
I also noted, because I agree with the gentleman from Washington who
talked about the low income housing tax credit, another bump, not as
big,
[[Page H5876]]
because it is the low income people and we would, of course, not do for
low income people anything of the magnitude of the mortgage interest
deduction, but it is another deviation from the principles of the flat
tax.
So I am in favor of this. The other thing though I do want to stress
so that no one misunderstands, subparagraph (A), just before
repudiating the flat tax, it says ``promote the ability of the private
sector to produce affordable housing without excessive government
regulation.''
Now, obviously no one is for more excessive government regulation. I
am against excessive government regulation.
{time} 1445
But lest anyone think that means no government regulation, let us
remember that last week we celebrated in this House the passage of a
new government regulation of the private housing market, the bill to
reform private mortgage insurance. That is private mortgage insurance,
a part of the private sector, and we passed a Federal bill here which I
supported, and I thank the chairman for bringing it forward, to
increase regulation.
So lest anyone think that there is an objection to excessive
government regulation, meaning they are opposed to regulation in
general, let me remind them that this House, which is about to pass
this resolution, passed the bill reforming private mortgage insurance.
The House and the Senate did it, and what that was was a new
regulation. Previously there was no Federal regulation of private
mortgage insurance that I am aware of, and we now have federally
regulated private mortgage insurance. I am glad of that. I think people
should understand that.
We also, by the way, have decided that the private insurance market
does not work too well without us, so we are about to pass, and I voted
for it in full committee, a very significant government intervention
into the flood insurance field. So once again, I would not want anyone
to think that just because we say we are against excessive government
regulation, we think we can leave the private sector to its own
devices. We reformed the private mortgage insurance; we are going to
reform flood insurance.
So I want to note that sometimes, and I say this in defense of my
Republican colleagues, sometimes they may appear more monochromatic
than they in fact are. There might be people who just read the
headlines and listen to the TV news, and they may get the sense that
this is a group of flat-taxers and people who never want to see any
kind of regulation. Instead, we have a group that now tells us that the
mortgage interest deduction is very important, not just at the Federal
level but at all levels; a group that decided that we better reform
private mortgage insurance; a group that has decided that the flood
insurance plan does not work on its own, the private flood insurance,
and we better get involved.
So I am delighted to support this resolution, not just because of
what it says but because it does advance a goal, which is having people
understand the true diversity ideologically of the Republican Party.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), my distinguished colleague.
(Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the remarks of the gentleman
from Massachusetts, and I appreciate the distinguished chairman of the
full committee for yielding me this time.
I appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts recognizing the
ideological diversity of the Republican Party. Most of the people that
are in favor of the flat tax, that is to say an unadapted flat tax, are
would-be Presidents or would-be, frustrated elected officials who
cannot get elected. But when I speak at my town hall meetings about
this subject, I warn people about the loss of the mortgage interest
deduction and about the fact that middle income Americans would pay a
lot more income taxes, proportionately, under an unadapted flat tax.
But back to the subject at hand in a direct sense and that is, I rise
in strong support of H. Con. Res. 208 as a cosponsor of the resolution.
It expresses a sense of Congress that affordable housing is a national
priority. I would like to commend the distinguished chairman of the
subcommittee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio), for introducing
this bill.
I could list a number of reasons for support of this legislation, but
I will list only three. One, the goals of the Housing Act of 1949
include among other things, the provision of a decent home and suitable
living environment for every American, have not yet been met. Much
still needs to be done to ensure affordable homeownership for American
families, and H. Con. Res. 208 is a step in the right direction. It
reminds us of those responsibilities.
Two, as referenced by the chairman, the distinguished gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Leach), our country is in the midst of a booming economy, and
that has resulted in an impressive 66 percent of all American families
owning their homes, which is a record rate. However, this economic
prosperity also increases the overall demand for both existing and new
construction, which in turn results in a lower supply of affordable
homes to be purchased. As a result, there is a substantial shortage of
affordable housing in America.
I would say a third reason to support H. Con. Res. 208 is to respond
and assist State programs focused on providing affordable housing.
Reasons for these legislative actions include the lack of Federal
emphasis and resources for affordable housing. I think it is fair to
say that is an accurate criticism. It is a criticism that could well
have fallen upon previous administrations as much as it falls on this
one; it could fall on previous Congresses in recent times as well as it
can fall on this one.
For those three reasons, among others, this Member endorses H. Con.
Res. 208. Of course, the private sector is still the main provider of
affordable housing. However, government should continue to play an
important role in providing or facilitating affordable housing.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H. Con. Res. 208.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I would inform the gentleman
I have at most one more speaker, so I will reserve the balance of my
time at this time.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Davis), our distinguished colleague.
(Mr. DAVIS of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I want to just once again thank
the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), chairman of the full committee,
and thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio) for introducing this
resolution.
I am pleased to have the opportunity today to speak in favor of H.
Con. Res. 208, which establishes this body's commitment to making
housing a national priority. In a couple of minutes I can only begin to
describe the importance of housing in this country, but housing has
impacts far greater than can be succinctly described here.
Let me say that when we take into account not only the economic
benefits of housing, such as increased job opportunities and tax
revenues, but the proven positive impact on communities and families
and homeownership, we cannot afford to deny housing a top spot on our
national agenda.
One brief but illustrious example of the impact of housing on our
economy is an estimate that the construction of 1,000 single family
homes generates 2,448 jobs in construction and construction-related
industries, not to mention more than $79 million in wages and more than
$42.5 million in Federal, State and local tax revenues.
Housing is an important issue in each and every congressional
district in this country, and decent shelter is one of the basic
necessities of this life. We owe it to American people to take this
issue to heart and help make sure that every citizen's needs are
considered.
Yes, we have the VA-HUD appropriation bill on the floor this week,
but this resolution talks not just about government's direct
involvement with negotiations but public and private partnerships that
can result, affecting the costs of land through zoning laws, through
our own Federal largesse; the
[[Page H5877]]
cost of construction, the cost of money, and the cost of regulations.
Even local governments, with permitting and processing and moving those
time periods through, have an effect on housing.
With every level of government working together with the private
sector, and of course encouraging the home mortgage interest deduction,
which I think is critical if we are going to remain the country in the
world with the highest percentage of homeownership, I think all go into
this ingredient. I think the resolution addresses all of these.
For these reasons I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 208.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Lazio), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on
Housing, who is principally responsible for this legislation, and in
fact its architect.
Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me this time. I appreciate not just the gentleman yielding to
me, but the support that he has lent to the concept of boosting
homeownership in America and our efforts to try to do the same.
Last year, Mr. Speaker, I had the great pleasure of helping to
construct a home in Washington, D.C., with Members on both sides of the
aisle. It was a great bipartisan effort to try and build a home through
the Habitat for Humanity. One of the great pleasures as we neared the
end of the day in construction was a statement by the woman who was
going to go into that house, who said to me, ``I never thought I would
ever see the day where I would be able to put a key in the door and
actually own my own home. The more I rented, the less money I had to
buy a house.'' What a happy day it was for her. That really speaks to
the essence of homeownership throughout America.
Every American has the same goal in achieving the American dream, to
own their own home, a home that is safe, clean and affordable. By
increasing homeownership, we can bring families closer together.
This resolution is an important first step in removing the many
roadblocks that stand in the way of this worthy goal. Quite simply, it
expresses the sense of Congress that the priorities of the United
States should include providing access to affordable housing that is
safe, clean, healthy and affordable, as well as making homeownership
more accessible.
This resolution expresses that these goals should be pursued through
policies that do three things: First, promote the ability of the
private sector to produce affordable housing without excessive
government regulations. Secondly, we encourage tax incentives, such as
mortgage interest deduction, at all levels of government. Lastly, we
will facilitate the availability of capital for homeownership and
housing production.
Owning one's own home means one can take care of one's family and
achieve a better quality of life. Last year for the first time in
history the homeownership rate reached 66 percent, largely because of
moving toward a balanced budget, decreasing pressure on interest rates,
bringing those interest rates down and making homeownership more
affordable.
Through the dedication and the hard work of public-private
partnerships, communities and individuals, we will accomplish our aim
of solidifying a strong foundation for sustaining homeownership into
the next century. These statistics mean that we are making headway in
the area of providing decent, safe, affordable housing for all
Americans, but we are not yet there. Even with these important gains,
however, young households, especially young married couples, are still
4 to 9 percent below their peak homeownership rates. Shortages of
household resources for both down payment and monthly mortgage payments
are largely responsible for this trend.
I also would mention, Mr. Speaker, that among African-American and
Hispanic heads of household and female heads of household, while
overall homeownership rates are up by 66 percent, those numbers are
down in the 40 percent range, so we have a lot of room to grow.
Our most pressing housing challenges are increasingly being faced by
first-time home buyers and low-income households and rental housing. As
we have seen, fewer young Americans are able to afford their own home
than in 1980. But what is worse is that growing numbers of less
fortunate citizens are forced to spend very large portions of small
budgets to rent apartments that are physically inadequate.
The struggle of many Americans to buy or rent a home is unnecessary.
There is an undeniable direct relationship between safe housing and
positive economic, social and political outcomes that stabilize
neighborhoods and communities and benefit all members of our society.
We in Congress need to give Americans the tools they need to be in
control of their family's housing.
This resolution must serve as a foundation upon which we build a
coherent, coordinated national housing policy that represents the
wealth of individual dedication and community spirit that characterizes
our great Nation. We cannot be satisfied with an all-time high
homeownership rate. We cannot be satisfied with anything less than
providing every available opportunity for all Americans to obtain
decent, affordable housing for every American citizen.
This Thursday the Subcommittee on Housing will hear testimony
regarding H.R. 3899. That is called the American Homeownership Act,
legislation that I and a number of our colleagues introduced in May.
The American Homeownership Act represents a continued commitment to
expanding homeownership opportunities into the next century. It
recognizes that homeownership helps provide the building blocks for
family security and stability, a healthy and prosperous community, and
a strong and vibrant Nation.
Our proposal will eliminate the bureaucratic red tape and excessive
regulations that stifle homeownership, will preserve and protect
opportunities for seniors to remain in their own homes, near families
and friends, by making FHA-insured reverse mortgage programs permanent.
We will expand opportunities for low-income families by allowing public
and assisted housing assistance to be used for down payments and
monthly mortgage payments. We will give local communities greater
flexibility to tap into Federal block grants for affordable housing
development, reclaiming distressed neighborhoods and empowering local
community development organizations.
This is what we stand for, Mr. Speaker. The resolution before us
today is a complement to this proposal and others designed to provide
all Americans every possible opportunity for achieving the dream of
owning a home.
I would ask each Member of this body to think about the importance of
housing to every single person in our Nation. How else can we directly
make a positive change in the lives of all Americans than by improving
their access to safe, clean and affordable housing. Let us pledge here
today to all Americans that we understand the critical importance of
housing, and that we in Congress are finally getting things done.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with all the positive programs that the
gentleman from New York mentioned, and I will be supporting them.
{time} 1500
My problem is I think there are couple of gaps. Years ago when we had
the failure in the savings and loan industry, and then in the
commercial bank area, many less in the commercial bank area, this
Congress, through the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity
took the lead in establishing affordable housing programs for both what
was then the Resolution Trust Corporation, dealing with the S&L crisis,
and the FDIC's resolution entity as well.
What they did was to take the houses that had come into the inventory
of the Federal banking regulators and sell them to low-income people at
a reduced rate. That is, we did not auction those off. We set them
aside so that low-income people could buy them. They were not given
away; they bought them. But they bought them at less than they might
have to buy at open auction. Unfortunately, when the current majority
took over the Congress they effectively ended those programs by not
appropriating for them.
[[Page H5878]]
So I would hope we would go back to that. I would hope we would say
to the extent that there is a Federal housing inventory taken over by
banks or taken over by HUD, we would also reinstitute programs which
made that available to lower income people, because there is this
danger that we will increase the difficulty for people at the lower
end.
It is obviously important to maximize home ownership across the
board, but we should not forget people at the low end. Indeed, the one
question I had, and we will pursue this on Thursday, when the gentleman
from New York said we would allow people to use some of their rental
assistance, public housing assistance, to buy housing, I am all for
that. But it ought not to come at the expense of existing housing.
There are ways to do that that would not cause problems, but there are
ways that could cause problems.
If, in fact, the result is that less money is available for
maintaining existing assisted and public housing, we will have some
problems. So, I do want to add to the ability of lower-income people to
own their own homes, but not in a way that is going to exacerbate the
problems of the people who rent. Because a certain percentage of the
people, because of the circumstances they live in, are going to
continue to be renters.
And, yes, it is important to promote home ownership. The gentleman
said, and the language said affordable housing for everyone. Some
percentage of that is going to be rental housing, and we are not now
doing nearly enough to help people at the low end live in decent,
affordable rental housing.
So I hope that we will not forget that, that we will not go forward
with home ownership in ways that will exacerbate that. The resolution,
as it is stated, is a reasonable one. I welcome the repudiation of the
flat tax that it includes. I think we will be doing people a service by
making clear that the flat tax is a rhetorical symbol, but the
presidential campaign of 2000 to the contrary notwithstanding, as the
gentleman from Nebraska stated, it is not to be a reality and people
ought not to worry too much about it, and we can go forward with a
series of programs which would include home ownership.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, in closing let me just stress first that there are 170
cosponsors of this bill. It is a bipartisan piece of legislation. And,
secondly, I am pleased that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Frank) has offered his support. I believe he has raised a series of
thoughtful perspectives that do deserve review.
Let me just stress, this bill underscores that mortgage deductions
are key to housing and should be protected. Most of us on this side of
the aisle would like to see the Tax Code simplified and the riddance of
hundreds of thousands of deductions that currently are in the Tax Code,
whether in the context of a flat tax or the maintenance of a
progressive tax. But the majority on this side of the aisle, I believe,
also insists that whatever happens to the Tax Code, that key deductions
like mortgage interest deductions, like charitable giving, for instance
for churches, be maintained.
Yes, the gentleman has correctly noted that there can be a role for
regulation, just as there is a role for taxes in American society. But
too much regulation, just as too much taxation, can be
counterproductive and constrain economic growth.
The gentleman has pointed out quite correctly that this House last
week passed a bill on private mortgage insurance. He joined us and we
are proud of passage of that legislation. In one sense one can argue
that it is a governmental intrusion in the markets. In another sense,
however, it should be stressed that what we did in that legislation is
take the effect of cost of regulation off of the American consumer at
such a point in time that a given percentage of the mortgage deduction
had been paid.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LEACH. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I know we are trying to
reach common ground here, but that simply defies the English language.
What we did with PMI was a government regulation of a private
operation.
Now, I agree it was beneficial. I had always been for it. But it was
not undoing of regulation as we used the word. What we did was to pass
a government regulation establishing new rules for what has heretofore
been an entirely private set of transactions. I am glad we did, but
that is what we did.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it is odd to be in an
argument about an issue which we both support. But I would simply say
it took a burden off the American people and that was a very
appropriate thing to do.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would again
yield, yes, I agree. Government regulation often has the effect of
unburdening people who should not be burdened.
Mr. LEACH. Mr. Speaker, fair enough. If I could proceed on my own
time, let me point out that in a broad macroeconomic way, this
Congress, in less than 3\1/2\ years, has moved from a fiscal deficit to
a fiscal surplus, something absolutely disbelieved by the American
public, disbelieved or doubted, I think, by many in this body,
including some in the party who helped to achieve this.
At this point we have three options. One of those options is to put
forth a tax cut, because we are in a surplus circumstance. This is a
credible option. Another option is to keep the status quo and continue
to pay back some of the enormous debts that have been built up over the
last several decades. This. also, is a credible option.
The third option is to increase spending because we are in a surplus
situation. That is an option that this side of the aisle thinks is less
credible. And so, I would suggest to my colleagues, as we move forth in
all areas of Federal spending, we are going to have to be very careful
to restrain the budget.
In this regard, we are talking this afternoon about housing. One of
the great reasons that there is more private home ownership in America
is that there are more jobs because of a growing economy and there is
lower cost to finance because of a more restrained fiscal and monetary
policy. This side of the aisle is very, very concerned that we do not
upset this mix of fiscal and monetary policy that has turned around our
economy.
So, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion I would just like to stress that the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) is entirely correct that we
still have a problem of affordable housing in this country especially
for lower income levels of America. We have just passed a housing bill
that is largely the framework, in a budget sense, of what the
administration has suggested, although spending is not as high as the
gentleman from Massachusetts would like. But we have tried to work with
the administration in a responsible way.
In fact, we have authorized higher dollars for spending on senior
housing and for housing for people with disabilities than proposed by
the administration. We are proud both of the spending and the tax
restraints that have been put into place and we are proud of the
principle undergirding this piece of legislation. I would urge my
colleagues to adopt it.
Mr. RILEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of homeownership.
That is a simple, but extremely important, statement.
Homeownership cuts across party lines, Mr. Speaker. It gives all
Americans hope that they too can reach the American dream.
I can't imagine a member here today who does not believe that
homeownership should be a national priority. It is important that the
House keep this priority for all Americans in mind when considering
this legislation.
We must remove unnecessary regulatory barriers that drive up the cost
of homeownership. Housing accounts for 12% of our nation's economy and
even modest decreases in the cost of a new home will open the door to
homeownership for families who are now priced out of the market.
We must never push out of sight the need to focus on raising the
nation's homeownership rate and allowing our nation's families and
communities to be strengthened. Please join me in supporting H. Con.
Res. 208.
Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I come to the well today to commend my
friend from New York, Chairman Lazio for moving this important
resolution to demonstrate the federal governments' commitment to safe
and affordable housing.
[[Page H5879]]
I believe that home ownership is a key part of achieving the American
Dream. Increased homeownership leads to stronger families stronger
communities and local economic growth development. That is why we must
work to reverse the decline in homeownership among those of us under 40
years of age. Making homeownership more affordable is a critical factor
in our effort to turn this trend around.
I am happy to report that the 104th Congress made great strides in
making homeownership more affordable. For example, I offered an
amendment that would reduce the cost of homeownership by $200 a year
for first time buyers using the FHA program. This provision was part of
the FY 1998 VA-HUD Appropriations.
While we all recognize the need to make government smaller, smarter
and more effective, I am committed to saving and improving programs
that provide an indispensable service. That is why I authored
legislation to make the FHA Single Family Program a government
corporation. My legislation ensures that FHA's mission will continue
and that the program will be given the latitude to create new products
to meet market changes. It will remain independent of federal
bureaucracy and will have to remain self sufficient. This format will
keep FHA mortgages affordable and will remove taxpayer liability. FHA
has made the dream of homeownership a reality for 250,000 families and
individuals each year who would not otherwise have been able to afford
a home; primarily first time buyers, minorities and those with low and
moderate incomes. We must do everything we can to preserve and improve
upon this success story.
FHA's Title One program is yet another success story that has been
under utilized in recent years. The program provides opportunities for
families to buy older homes, rehabilitate them and breathe new life
into tired communities. While the Title One program increased its
volume by 73% from 1994 to 1995 for a total of $1.324 billion, there
were only $273.3 million in Illinois. Many former industrial
communities that spread across this region could be revitalized with an
infusion of additional Title One loans.
There also remains a national need for affordable rental units. Each
year 100,000 units are lost to demolition, abandonment or a higher use
of income going to meet non-housing expenses such as food and health
care. The Low Income Housing Tax Credit has been responsible for
financing the construction of units to replace that are lost each year.
In addition to providing affordable housing, the success of this credit
can be seen in the thousands of jobs it has helped create. This credit
is a fine model of the public private partnership that we want to
foster. It empowers local communities to address housing needs with
minimal federal bureaucracy.
My Colleagues and I have founded a housing opportunity caucus to
promote programs like the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, FHA Single
Family and Title One Programs and other as building blocks for creating
sound and compassionate housing opportunity policy that fosters
homeownership as an opportunity for all Americans.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this
bill, which expresses the sense of Congress, that we must work towards
providing access to safe, healthy and clean accommodations for all
Americans.
The goals of this resolution are admirable. Adequate housing is an
issue which has been unjustly ignored for too long by this Congress. I
have always sought to ensure that the children of this great National
all have access to safe and secure shelter, and this resolution, in my
opinion, is a step in ensuring just that.
My district, which lies in the City of Houston, is suffering from a
housing crisis. Thousands of families are currently on waiting lists
for public housing. In fact, a recent report had this figure at over
6,000 people. For those families who have already endured the wait and
are currently living in public housing, many have found the
accommodations, unsafe, hazardous, and woefully inadequate. Public
Housing has merit, but it is not the best solution for every family
with a housing deficiency.
Not all government action has been fruitless, however. We have had
remarkable success with Federal programs which work in partnership with
private entities. One example is the Department of Housing and Urban
Development's Section 8 Housing Program. Under this program,
certificates or vouchers are issued to needy families who pay too large
a part of portion of their income in rent. The voucher that they
receive is for a modest amount, and just brings the rent down to a
manageable level.
One of the reasons that this program is so successful is because
Section 8 families are allowed to stay in private housing. That not
only means that Section 8 landlords get a fair shake in the deal, but
it also means that the individual families who use the vouchers have
some choice in where they live, work, and raise their children.
Just within the last few weeks, I have worked closely with the people
at Fannie Mae in my district. They recently undertook the
responsibility of funding a study that would look closely at how their
corporation, and other mortgage financiers, can enter the urban market
in a successful and lucrative manner. I look forward to the results of
that study, and to the benefits I believe it will bring to my
community, in the form of more options for prospective homeowners who
have typically been excluded from the American dream.
We must work closely together here in the House in order to find
viable and workable solutions for our housing deficiencies. This
problem afflicts all of our districts, and we must take a pro-active
stance if we are going to bring some sort of relief to our
constituents. I hope that this resolution signals a step in that
direction.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Stearns). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Leach) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res.
208.
The question was taken.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas
and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________