[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 36 (Thursday, March 10, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H1691-H1704]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1410

  Basically, what you have done on the bill is it says: effective on 
the date of the act there are rescinded and permanently canceled all 
unexpended balances remaining available as of such date of enactment of 
the amounts made available under title I of the Emergency Economic 
Stabilization Act. So you have cut out the top and you say it can't be 
used for mortgages, and I left that language alone.
  But then in that section you identify, specifically, mortgage letter 
2010-23. And you say, nothing can be used for that. I am not trying to 
turn over that apple cart.

[[Page H1692]]

  However, when you go to section 3, you say that the Secretary of 
Housing and Urban Development may not issue any regulation, any order, 
any notice, or any mortgage letter based on, or substantially similar 
to, such mortgage letter referred to above. Okay, so what you are 
saying is no notice, no orders, no mortgage letters, no communications 
on voluntary agreements between the bank, the lender, the servicer and 
the homeowner. So you are prohibiting FHA from working out a voluntary 
agreement with any of your constituents.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Reclaiming my time, the problem is the 
ambiguity is substantially similar. It kills this program, but it bans 
things that would be substantially similar so that innovator private 
sector entities trying to do something would be deterred because no one 
could tell them what substantially similar is.
  I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. LYNCH. Well, let me just say this: The idea here, it's a two-step 
problem. One, the gentlewoman's bill would seek to eliminate voluntary 
agreements. Okay, so that's a problem. So we are asking the FHA and the 
homeowner and the lender and the servicer all to agree that this 
mortgage should be modified and that the homeowner should be allowed to 
remain in their home, which is a good thing. But for some reason you 
don't want any of that, so you are eliminating all four of those 
programs. That's a problem.
  The underlying problem that we have here specific to this language is 
compounded by the fact that you are eliminating all voluntary 
agreements, not only the ones that you seek to eliminate in these four 
voluntary programs.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield at this point to the gentlewoman 
from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) to respond.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. I think what we are doing here is to 
terminate the mortgage letter which sets up the program and to make 
sure that there won't be a substantially similar letter.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Reclaiming my time, because the 
gentlewoman is simply not responding, we have the same general 
rhetoric.
  The point, as my friend has pointed out, is you were introducing an 
ambiguity which is substantially similar so that people will be 
deterred from further innovator activities.
  I yield again to my friend from Massachusetts.
  Mr. LYNCH. Thank you.
  Madam Chair, the funding authorization you have already deleted in 
section 2. So there is no funds and there is no authorization for FHA 
to issue a letter in connection with a program that no longer exists. 
So you have eliminated that.
  But when you are going further, section 3 is saying, and we don't 
want you even; we don't want you issuing a letter or a notice or an 
order that is substantially similar to the one we just eliminated. 
That's the problem, that you are taking the ability of the FHA to work 
out voluntary agreements that, I think on the merits, for the people in 
your district you would like to see occur, that are in good faith and 
that are affecting homeowners.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mrs. MALONEY. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Congresswoman Biggert, do you know how many underwater 
mortgages there are in your home State?
  Mrs. BIGGERT. No, I don't.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York is advised to address 
her remarks through the Chair.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Reclaiming my time, there are 431,000 mortgages that 
are underwater in the great State of Illinois where the residents would 
be eligible to participate in this program that the Republican majority 
is voting to terminate.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts will be postponed.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Paulsen

  Mr. PAULSEN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 6, line 15, strike ``and''.
       Page 6, line 16, before the period insert the following: 
     ``, and Members and Veterans With Service-connected 
     Disabilities and Their Families''.
       Page 7, line 11, strike ``or''.
       Page 7, line 17, strike the period and insert ``; or''.
       Page 7, after line 17, insert the following:
       (D) such members and veterans of the Armed Forces who have 
     service-connected injuries, and survivors and dependents of 
     such members and veterans of the Armed Forces with such 
     injuries.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Minnesota is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. PAULSEN. Madam Chair, last summer I met with a woman whose 
husband, who was born and raised in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, had died 
in Afghanistan; and we discussed issues that she was facing as the 
widow of a servicemember. One of the concerns she raised was absolutely 
paying her mortgage, given all the changes and stresses that had taken 
place in her life.
  This conversation led me to introduce legislation last year, which 
actually passed the House last fall, that directed the appropriate 
agencies to take into account and consideration the special 
circumstances of wounded servicemembers and widows of fallen soldiers 
and their families in housing programs.
  Along those lines, this amendment and my amendment today would add 
military servicemembers and veterans who have service-related injuries, 
as well as survivors and dependents of such individuals, to be included 
in the study on the use of the FHA refinance program.
  These families do face, often, new hardships. They may need 
modification to their houses if the servicemember is now in a 
wheelchair. They may have significant changes in their ability to move 
around, as well as the skills they are able to perform, which could 
have a significant impact on their livelihood.
  It's my hope, Madam Chair, through this amendment we can get a better 
understanding of how we can best provide for these families who have 
made that service and sacrifice. I urge adoption of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Al Green) in the committee offered amendments that would have 
provided some substantive protection to veterans.
  My Republican colleagues neither wanted to provide help to the 
veterans nor be caught not providing the help. So they came up with 
some study amendments that would give them the appearance of being 
concerned, but no reality. That was, unfortunately, adopted over Mr. 
Green's objections and mine, but it's part of the bill.
  This is in addition to what is largely a cosmetic amendment, and I 
see no reason to object to it or prolong the debate, so I urge 
everybody to vote for it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MALONEY. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Congressman Paulsen----
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is advised to direct her remarks to 
the Chair.
  Mrs. MALONEY. I would like to inquire from Congressman Paulsen if he 
is aware of how many mortgages are underwater in his home State, the 
great State of Minnesota.
  I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. PAULSEN. Congresswoman, I am not aware of the exact number. The 
amendment applies, actually, for addition to the study. But I would be 
happy if you would share that information.

[[Page H1693]]

  Mrs. MALONEY. Reclaiming my time, I would like to point out to the 
gentleman from Minnesota that there are over 90,000 homes, 90,000 
homeowners who are underwater in the great State of Minnesota and that 
could benefit if they meet the criteria in this important program that 
the Republican majority is urging to be eliminated today.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Inslee

  Mr. INSLEE. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 6, line 16, before the period insert ``and Replacement 
     Program''.
       Page 6, line 19, before ``the extent'' insert ``(A)''.
       Page 6, line 20, after ``section 2'' insert ``, 
     including''.
       Page 6, line 21, before the period insert the following: 
     ``, and (B) the need, and appropriate guidelines and 
     standards for, a mortgage insurance program of the Secretary 
     that (i) provides for loan modification involving a write-
     down of the remaining principal balance on existing mortgages 
     on 1- to 4-family residences under which such principal 
     balance exceeds the appraised value of the mortgaged 
     residence, and (ii) serves the needs of covered homeowners 
     with such mortgages''.
       Page 7, line 1, after ``paragraph (1)'' insert the 
     following: ``, setting forth the Secretary's determination of 
     the need for, and the appropriate guidelines and standards 
     for, the mortgage insurance program determined pursuant to 
     paragraph (1)(B),''.
       Page 7, line 1, after ``best practices,'' insert 
     ``including''.
       Page 7, line 3, before the period insert the following: 
     ``and to the mortgage insurance program identified and 
     described pursuant to paragraph (1)(B)''.
       Page 7, after line 17, add the following:
       (4) Implementation.--Upon the expiration of the 90-day 
     period beginning upon the submission to the Congress of the 
     report required under paragraph (2), the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development shall implement the mortgage insurance 
     program described in such report pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) 
     through issuance of appropriate guidelines and standards set 
     forth in the report.
                                  ____

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 4. STUDY OF BORROWERS OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE FOR FHA 
                   REFINANCE PROGRAM.

       Not later than the expiration of the 90-day period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall conduct a 
     study, and submit to the Congress a report regarding the 
     results of such study, to determine the effects that 
     authorizing bankruptcy courts, in bankruptcy proceedings 
     under chapter 13 of title 11, United States Code, to reduce 
     the debt secured by a mortgage on the principal residence of 
     a debtor would have on mortgagors who, but for termination of 
     the FHA Refinance Program under this Act, would have 
     qualified for refinancing of a mortgage under such Program, 
     under the terms of such Program as in effect immediately 
     before the enactment of this Act.

                              {time}  1420

  Mrs. BIGGERT. I reserve a point of order against this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. INSLEE. Madam Chair, we know how dire the situation is for tens 
of thousands of Americans with underwater mortgages who are making good 
faith efforts to make the right decisions both for themselves and for 
the lender. And we are very concerned that if this program prematurely 
is destroyed, we will be yanking back a lifeline that Congress has sent 
to these folks. And, of course, this is important because it's not just 
the people who own these homes that are underwater right now that are 
affected by the collapse in housing values, but all of us are because 
that housing debacle has affected employment in the construction trades 
and in the real estate industry broadly. We all have a stake in this 
issue.
  So what my amendment would do is to basically say that we want the 
FHA, if, in fact, this situation moves forward like this bill is, that 
they will conduct a study and essentially implement a substitute 
program that will fix anything that needs fixing in this program to 
achieve the ends that we ought to be able to have as our goal.
  Now, the basic underlying theory of our amendment is simple. Before 
you take away a lifeline from some American to solve a problem that 
thousands are experiencing, come up with a substitute, come up with an 
improvement, come up with an alternative. And that's what our amendment 
simply says. If we're going to eliminate this program in its current 
embodiment, let's come up with an alternative and have it implemented 
in a way that we keep this lifeline out there.
  Now, the reason we feel that this is important is that all too 
frequently in this Congress we have seen the majority party remove 
these solutions to programs and not replace it with an alternative. 
We've seen this in health care, where they have wanted to remove a 
health care program arguing it's ineffective or they think they have a 
better program but not come up with a substitute to replace it. That's 
not good enough. Americans deserve better.
  The same thing with the Environmental Protection Agency. Today, my 
friends in the majority party sought in the Energy and Commerce 
Committee to eliminate protection against airborne pollutants that are 
hurting human health, but they did not come up with any alternative to 
solve that problem.
  Now, we want to join in a bipartisan fashion, if there are 
impediments or imperfections in this bill, to come up with a solution. 
Let's not allow those Americans to be hanging out there without a 
lifeline. My amendment would do that. And I would commend it to my 
fellows.


                             Point of Order

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because in my opinion it violates clause 7 of rule XVI, which 
requires that an amendment be germane to the matter it's amending.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of 
order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. INSLEE. Thank you.
  Briefly, I would hope that the Chair would consider a couple of 
salient points. Number one, it is our intent, and I believe universal 
intent, that by this amendment we don't intend to change the basic 
nature of this program. It does apply this benefit to those homeowners 
who are current on their mortgage obligations. We would intend that 
that standard and condition would continue.
  And I would point out to the Chair the language of our amendment 
specifically says that this program would only be carried out under 
``appropriate guidelines and standards.'' We think this solves that 
problem. We seek our congressional intent to continue. We hope that the 
Members will be able to be heard on this.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentlewoman from Illinois makes the point of order that the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington is not germane.
  The bill addresses repeal of a Federal Housing Administration program 
that provides for refinancing of a specified set of mortgages.
  One of the fundamental principles of germaneness is that the 
amendment must relate to the subject matter of the underlying bill. The 
bill is confined to a specific type of refinancing program. The 
amendment seeks to address a different type of refinancing program, a 
matter outside the ambit of the bill.
  The amendment is therefore not germane. The point of order is 
sustained.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise today for each and every 
person who owns a home. I rise today for every American who has 
struggled to pay their mortgage each month. I rise for every person who 
has watched their home, their piece of the American Dream, slip away 
because they lost their job through no fault of their own or because 
they got cancer and are no longer able to work and pay their medical 
bills.
  I rise to condemn what these bills are trying to do today. Make no 
mistake; repealing these programs will close the

[[Page H1694]]

door on the American Dream for more and more Americans.
  Madam Chair, when I was a young boy, my family did not own a home. My 
father was a sharecropper. My mother and father had to ``go without'' 
for years. They saved and they saved. They prayed. They waited. My 
father could never get a mortgage. Mortgages were not available where 
we lived. They were not available for families like mine. It's just the 
way it was.
  In 1944, my parents bought a house with three rooms and 110 acres 
outside of a small town called Troy in rural Alabama. It cost us $300. 
I couldn't imagine that much money changing hands at once. I look 
around this Chamber, and I see some suits in this room that cost much 
more than what my father paid. Up until the time she died, my mother 
spoke about the day we moved in. How proud she was. It was a huge 
achievement for us. It changed everything. That house, that land, it 
was ours. Ours.
  Looking back, I can't imagine what it would have been like to have 
lost it all for reasons beyond my father's control--the harvest or the 
weather or because it would fix someone else's bottom line.
  Madam Chair, I know that buying a house is the biggest decision most 
people will ever make, and it is the greatest source of pride. For most 
people, their dream is their house. It was for me. When I bought my 
house, I thought of my mother and my father. His house made it possible 
for me to buy mine.
  This American Dream is built from hard work. But that dream is also 
made of bricks and mortar. It's a house, Madam Chair. It is a home. And 
this Chamber is shutting the door on that house. They're locking the 
door on the American Dream. These two bills today would end two new 
programs that are helping struggling homeowners who have lost their job 
through no fault of their own. To me, it is unthinkable.
  Madam Chair, I strongly oppose H.R. 836 and H.R. 830. We must stand 
up for the American homeowner. We must stand in their corner. We must 
not walk away from them in their time of need.
  I urge all of my colleagues to stand with me and defeat these bills. 
Don't lock the door on the American Dream.
  The Acting CHAIR. Are there any other amendments to section 3 of the 
bill under consideration? If not, the Chair is prepared to entertain 
other amendments.


                 Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Waters

  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 4. STUDY ON IMPACTS REQUIRED.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall, in consultation with the Secretary of the 
     Treasury, conduct a study on the negative impacts of 
     underwater mortgage loans on the housing market and the 
     economy of the United States and report to the Congress on 
     the findings of such study, including recommendations to the 
     Congress on how to mitigate such impacts.
       (b) Underwater Mortgage Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``underwater mortgage'' means a mortgage 
     loan on an owner-occupied residential property that has an 
     appraised value that is less than the outstanding obligation 
     under such mortgage loan.

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order against this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, my amendment would mandate that the 
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of the 
Treasury conduct a study on the negative impacts of underwater mortgage 
loans, or loans where the borrower owes more than the house is worth, 
on the housing market and the economy of the United States and report 
those findings to Congress. Importantly, the report would also include 
recommendations to Congress on how to mitigate the effects of these 
underwater mortgages.

                              {time}  1430

  Before I go any further talking about these underwater mortgages, I 
think it is extremely important for me to help everyone understand that 
my friends on the opposite side of the aisle are moving to eliminate 
all of the programs that we have worked so hard to develop; good, 
strong public policy to assist homeowners of America in a number of 
ways.
  They are eliminating this FHA program that will assist with refinance 
on homes that are underwater. They are eliminating the HAMP program 
that we are going to hear more about. They are eliminating the 
neighborhood stabilization program, commonly referred to as NSP. And 
they are eliminating the program for homeowners who find themselves out 
of a job who would be able to borrow and, of course, to pay back the 
money that is loaned to them--they cannot afford to pay their mortgages 
because of the loss of their job.
  So while they are eliminating all of the programs that many of us 
have worked so hard to develop--in the former Congress, I was the chair 
of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, and so I know 
these programs very well. Not only do I know these programs very well, 
I understand very well what has happened here in America that has 
caused homeowners to be in the situations they are in now.
  We have a situation that occurred that created this crisis with the 
subprime meltdown. We had loans that were initiated in this country 
that were exotic loans, loans that were teaser loans, no documentation 
loans, liar loans, loans that reset. People were encouraged to sign up 
for mortgages that they did not understand.
  Now we have millions of Americans, really through no fault of their 
own, and I have said it once and I will say it again: That all of a 
sudden homeowners didn't decide that they were going to default, that 
somehow they weren't going to pay their bills. It certainly didn't 
happen like that. It happened because of what I just alluded to, all of 
the tricks and the fraud that were perpetrated on American homeowners 
who were simply trying to live the American dream.
  We don't have the numbers in committee any more or on this floor. My 
friends on the opposite side of the aisle are in control. They have the 
majority, and they are going to eliminate the programs. We have made 
every argument possible that you can make in committee to try and hold 
on to these programs. As you have seen on the floor today, we have the 
gentlelady from New York reminding them how many homes they have 
underwater. And, of course, they know because they are getting the 
calls, just as we are getting the calls, from homeowners begging for 
assistance. So while we won't be able to stop them, I'm trying to make 
sure that at least we do this study so we can help bring to light what 
has taken place and how these underwater mortgages pose a severe threat 
to our economy.
  If you owe more than your home is worth, you can't pick up and move 
if you get a new job. You're stuck. That impedes our economic recovery. 
Likewise, you can't move if you want to go attend school somewhere. And 
you can't move in order to care for an elderly parent.
  The chief economist for First American CoreLogic noted last month 
that negative equity is a significant drag on both the housing market 
and on economic growth. It is driving foreclosures and decreasing 
mobility for millions of homeowners. Since we expect home prices to 
slightly increase during 2010, negative equity will remain the dominant 
issue in the housing and mortgage markets for some time to come. The 
FHA refinance program is a modest step to address the problem of 
underwater mortgages. This program would provide that if banks agree to 
at least a 10 percent principal write-down for the borrower, the 
borrower can refinance into a FHA loan. Only borrowers current on their 
mortgages, not those in default, qualify for the program. So this study 
will help people to understand the impact it is having. I ask for an 
``aye'' vote on my amendment.


                             Point of Order

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chair, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because in my opinion it violates clause 7 of rule XVI, which 
requires that an amendment be germane to the matter it is amending. It 
is not germane to the bill because it expands the scope of the bill.

[[Page H1695]]

  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order?
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word, I suppose.
  If we terminate a program, we should understand the impacts of such a 
termination, and so this is relevant.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman will suspend. The gentlewoman has 
been recognized to speak to the point of order.
  Ms. WATERS. This is the point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman may proceed.
  Ms. WATERS. The point of order indicates that this is not germane. I 
am maintaining that this is germane because if we terminate a program, 
we should understand the impact of such termination. I believe that 
does speak to the point of order.
  The Republicans say this program doesn't work. So our regulators 
should suggest to Congress what they think will work. This is just a 
study. This is not a new program or an extension of the FHA short 
refinance program.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentlewoman from Illinois makes the point of order that the 
amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California is not germane.
  The bill addresses repeal of a Federal Housing Administration program 
that provides for refinancing of a specified set of mortgages.
  One of the fundamental principles of germaneness is that the 
amendment must relate to the subject matter of the underlying bill. The 
bill is confined to a specific type of refinancing program. The 
amendment seeks to address mortgages more generally, a matter outside 
the ambit of the bill.
  The amendment is therefore not germane. The point of order is 
sustained.


     Amendment No. 15 Offered by Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California

  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Chairman, I have an 
amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. USE OF FUNDING FOR FHA REFINANCE PROGRAM.

       Effective on the date of the enactment of this Act, all 
     unexpended balances remaining available as of such date of 
     enactment of the amounts made available under title I of the 
     Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (Public Law 110-343; 12 
     U.S.C. 5211 et seq.) that have been allocated for use under 
     the FHA Refinance Program (pursuant to Mortgagee Letter 2010-
     23 of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development) of the 
     Making Home Affordable initiative of the Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall be available to the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development for carrying out a program for insuring 
     mortgages made to refinance existing mortgages on 1- to 4-
     family residences, in accordance with such guidelines and 
     standards as the Secretary shall issue, which shall provide 
     that under such program--
       (1) the residence subject to a mortgage being refinanced 
     and to the insured refinancing mortgage shall be the 
     principal residence of the mortgagor;
       (2) the mortgagor under the insured refinancing mortgage 
     shall have an annual family income not exceeding $180,000;
       (3) the insured refinancing mortgage shall have a term to 
     maturity of 30 years;
       (4) the insured refinancing mortgage shall bear interest at 
     a single rate of 4.0 percent annually for the entire term of 
     the mortgage; and
       (5) the mortgagor under the insured refinancing mortgage 
     may not have failed to timely make any payments due under the 
     mortgage being refinanced.

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order against this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Chair, I rise today in 
support of this amendment that I am sponsoring.
  My amendment replaces the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act and 
would allow the use of unexpended funds to create a program that will 
allow qualifying homeowners to apply to refinance a 30-year mortgage at 
4 percent as long as the mortgage they are refinancing is on their 
primary home, that they are up to date on their mortgage, and that 
their annual income, adjusted gross income, does not exceed $180,000.
  People back home are hurting, and they are desperate to keep their 
home. I know there are many who have lost their homes. There are some 
who are behind on payments, and they haven't kept up with their 
payments, but what about the people who have actually held onto their 
home? They have actually paid. They have had to actually give up their 
car, they are walking to work, they are taking the bus because they 
understand how important it is for them to hold onto their house 
because a house is not just a house. Your primary residence is your 
home. It is where your kids are. It is where they find a stable life. 
So while this program is not perfect--there is not a perfect program we 
have come up with--we have tried to help people who have been losing 
their houses, people who through no fault of their own, who have either 
lost their jobs, have had to take a lesser job, who were swindled, who 
were talked into loans they didn't understand what they were signing 
because they were hit by the subprime lenders, and they are paying too 
much, and people are sometimes paying in the double digits with respect 
to their loan. Maybe they are at 10 percent or 9.5 percent 12 percent 
on their loan. This program would actually say to those who somehow 
have held on, we are going to refinance your primary home at 4 percent 
because there are a lot of people who could do this and their payment 
would come down significantly, but today, they can't refinance. To 
refinance today on a 30-year loan is 4.9 percent. There are a lot of 
people who are paying 8 percent. It means a lot. It could be anywhere 
between $2 and $2,000 in their payment a month. But they can't qualify. 
They don't have the chunk of money they need, their home is underwater, 
et cetera.

                              {time}  1440

  So this is a very important thing we could do. Let's take the money. 
Let's take that money that we have not spent on this program and let's 
put it to help the people who have done the right thing, the people 
who, no matter what, have continued to pay on their loan, because there 
are many of them out there.
  I would hope that we could find a compromise, that we could find a 
way in which we can keep people in their homes. No program is perfect, 
but I think we have the opportunity to do the right thing, Madam Chair.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against this 
amendment because it violates clause 10 of rule XXI as it has the net 
effect of increasing mandatory spending within the time period set 
forth in the rule.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Madam Chair, this is about 
eliminating a program. I understand that those people who are behind on 
their payments, you're just going to let them go. You're just going to 
let them lose their home. Then they're going to have a hard time 
finding an apartment. I understand that. But this is about helping the 
people who truly, the middle class, the lower-income class, who have a 
home, who need to hold onto that home.
  I do believe that this is germane to the underlying bill. I 
respectfully request that we consider this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentlewoman from Illinois makes a point of order that the 
amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California violates clause 10 
of rule XXI by proposing an increase in mandatory spending over a 
relevant period of time.
  Pursuant to clause 10 of rule XXI and clause 4 of rule XXIX, the 
Chair is authoritatively guided by estimates from the chair of the 
Committee on the Budget that the net effect of the provisions in the 
amendment would increase mandatory spending over a relevant period of 
time as compared to the bill.

[[Page H1696]]

  Accordingly, the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not 
in order.


                 Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Inslee

  Mr. INSLEE. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF FORECLOSURE LAWS.

       The Attorney General of the United States, in consultation 
     and coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, the 
     Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Director of the 
     Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development, the Board of Governors of the Federal 
     Reserve System, the Director of the Bureau of Consumer 
     Financial Protection of the Federal Reserve System, any other 
     appropriate Federal banking regulatory agencies, and the 
     Attorneys General of the States, shall pursue, to the fullest 
     extent of the law, criminal prosecution of directors and 
     officers of any financial institutions that the Attorney 
     General, in such consultation and coordination, determines 
     have failed to comply with State laws relating to foreclosure 
     of mortgages on residential real property and shall provide 
     appropriate assistance to such State Attorneys General in 
     such prosecutions.

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order against this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. INSLEE. Thank you very much.
  Madam Chair, one thing that I think there is universal anger about, 
Republicans, Democrats and independents alike in this country, is the 
lack of responsibility that has been shown, criminal responsibility, 
for the huge malfeasance and criminality that got us into this economic 
pickle that we are in. To my knowledge, there has been not one person 
go to jail as a result of the economic collapse precipitated by the 
shenanigans and outright criminality in the highest financial places in 
the land. All Americans, I think, are very angry, with justifiable 
reasons, about that. If you read any of the books about the collapse on 
Wall Street, you will share that anger, if you read any of those books.
  We do not want to see that replicated in this scandal regarding the 
mortgage servicing situation. We are now advised that there are 
multiple cases of people knowingly signing affidavits that were false. 
We are told there are numerous occasions of this robo-signing 
situation. These nefarious acts have resulted in losses by Americans 
that should not have happened.
  We want to send a message, on a bipartisan basis, that the criminal 
laws need to be respected. My amendment would simply call upon the 
attorneys general, both Federal and State, to prosecute, as 
appropriate, these criminal violations. The amendment does not change 
the responsibility under the criminal statutes for any officers or 
directors if they are not personally responsible for these wrongful 
acts. There's no criminal liability. But we do think where there were 
violations of these criminal statutes, they ought to be prosecuted.
  This Nation has been brought to the brink of financial ruin because 
of many, many instances of violation of these standards. The least we 
can ask is that we prosecute these cases where it is appropriate.
  We think it's the right thing for us to do on a bipartisan basis to 
make that statement today. I hope that Members will join me in making 
that statement and make sure justice in fact is meted out here where it 
has not been in other instances.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because, in my opinion, it violates clause 7 of rule XVI, 
which requires that an amendment be germane to the matter it is 
amending. It is not germane to the bill because it is outside the scope 
of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. WATERS. I do think this amendment is germane, for a number of 
reasons. The gentleman talked about the fact that this country was 
almost brought to the brink of total disaster because of this subprime 
meltdown. He pointed to things, that have already been identified, that 
we can put squarely on the shoulders of the servicers who are 
responsible for the management of these mortgages after they have been 
packaged, securitized, and then sent on their way to be collected on.
  This gentleman is talking about the fact that many of these servicers 
when they are trying to collect on these mortgages can see that fraud 
has taken place, but they do nothing about it. They can see that 
amendments have been slipped in that the homeowners did not know about. 
They can see that sometimes the signature does not even belong to the 
homeowner, but they continue to try and collect on these mortgages.
  I think that this amendment is germane. I would ask that the Chair 
rule in favor of this amendment. It is time somebody paid a price for 
what has been done to the American public.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentlewoman from Illinois makes a point of order that the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington is not germane.
  The bill addresses repeal of a Federal Housing Administration program 
that provides for refinancing of a specified set of mortgages.
  One of the fundamental principles of germaneness is that the 
amendment relate to the subject matter of the underlying bill. The bill 
is confined to a specific type of refinancing program. The amendment 
seeks to address foreclosures generally, a matter outside the confines 
of the subject addressed by the bill.
  The amendment is therefore not germane. The point of order is 
sustained.
  Ms. HIRONO. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Hawaii is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. HIRONO. Madam Chair, an amendment offered earlier directing the 
Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and 
the Secretary of the Treasury to study the negative impacts of 
underwater mortgages on the housing market and on the U.S. economy and 
to report the findings of this study to Congress, including 
recommendations on how to mitigate the effects of these mortgages, 
makes eminent sense to me.
  About 12 million to 15 million homeowners, nearly one quarter of 
homeowners in this country, are currently underwater on their 
mortgages, meaning that they owe more on their mortgages than their 
homes are worth. These borrowers are diligently making their mortgage 
payments but need some kind of lifeline to reduce their debt burden.
  We all agree that we need to look at ways to cut government spending 
to address our country's fiscal crisis, but what is the purpose of this 
underlying bill? Why are my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
trying to end programs that were established to assist families 
suffering from the foreclosure crisis without offering any plan or 
remedy to help the millions of Americans who are trying to stay in 
their homes?
  Families in every single one of our congressional districts are 
desperately seeking help to stay in their homes, the American Dream. 
Last year, I met with an owner of a car dealership in Kihei, Maui. This 
constituent had a successful business until the economic downturn 
reduced the number of her car sales. Increasingly, former customers of 
hers were returning to her dealership to return the cars that they had 
purchased from her, handing back their keys because they could no 
longer afford to make their car payments.
  This car dealer eventually found herself in dire straits, so much so 
that her lender wanted to put her dream home up for a short sale. She 
didn't understand why the lender was only considering a short sale and 
didn't want to work with her to help her keep her house.

                              {time}  1450

  It was only when my office contacted the lender on her behalf that 
she was able to receive a forbearance on a portion of the principle and 
get a permanent modification. Sadly, stories like hers are commonplace 
these days.

[[Page H1697]]

  The Federal foreclosure mitigation programs, which unfortunately have 
not helped as many homeowners as we would like, still provide a 
lifeline. Without these programs, many more lenders would be pursuing 
short sales and foreclosures rather than trying to help meet homeowners 
halfway in helping them keep their homes.
  The FHA Refinance Program, also known as the FHA Short Refinance 
Option, assists underwater borrowers by facilitating voluntary mortgage 
principal write-downs and refinancing the loans into a new stable FHA-
insured mortgage, thereby enabling borrows to have a reduced monthly 
payment and a mortgage that is more aligned with actual property 
values.
  FHA just started implementing this program a few months ago; we need 
to give the agency time to get it off the ground. We should also focus 
on what can be done to make the programs more effective so that the 
maximum number of underwater borrowers who are eligible for the program 
can benefit.
  Instead of coming up with new initiatives to assist thousands of 
homeowners or working to improve existing foreclosure mitigation 
programs, bills like this will only serve to destabilize an already 
fragile housing market and further delay our economic recovery. With 
bills like this, the House majority continues to turn their backs on 
the middle class families and our country. Let's focus on what can be 
done now to stabilize the housing market, create jobs, and get the 
economy back on track.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against the underlying bill.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.


                  Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Holt

  Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following:

     SEC. 4. MODIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY STANDARD DEDUCTION.

       (a) Extension.--Subparagraph (C) of section 63(c)(1) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``in 
     2008 or 2009'' and inserting ``after December 31, 2007, and 
     before January 1, 2015''.
       (b) Adjustments for Inflation.--Subparagraph (B) of section 
     63(c)(4) of such Code is amended by striking ``and'' at the 
     end of clause (i), by striking the period at the end of 
     clause (ii) and inserting ``, and'', and by inserting after 
     clause (ii) the following:
       ``(iii) `calendar year 2010' in the case of dollar amounts 
     contained in paragraph (7)(B).''.
       (c) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply 
     to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.
       (2) Inflation adjustment.--The amendments made by 
     subsection (b) shall apply to taxable years beginning after 
     December 31, 2011.

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order against this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, instead of focusing on job creation, 
innovation, retirement security or fair taxes, today we're considering 
legislation that would terminate a program that has the potential to 
help struggling homeowners stay in their homes. We are not here to 
debate fixing the program or to consider replacing it with a more 
effective alternative; but, rather, we're here to end the program that 
is only a few months old, to declare it a failure and go home. This is 
not good government. It will not help the middle class. This is not 
what my constituents sent me to Washington to do.
  New Jerseyans, as so many around the country, are burdened by high 
property taxes. While we allow individuals who itemize their Federal 
taxes to deduct State and local taxes, many non-itemizers--particularly 
retirees on fixed incomes--feel the impact of high rates. The amendment 
before us that I present would provide real help to millions of 
homeowners, especially senior citizens, across the country and, yes, in 
central New Jersey, my district.
  Specifically, my amendment would renew for 5 years the property tax 
deduction for American homeowners who don't itemize on their Federal 
taxes. It would allow single filers to deduct $500 and joint filers to 
deduct $1,000 on top of the standard deduction and index these 
additional deductions for inflation. This property tax provision--based 
on legislation that I wrote and was signed into law by former President 
Bush in 2008 and was extended through the 2009 tax year--would continue 
that.
  Unfortunately, although the extension of this tax credit for 2010 was 
passed by this House, it failed to become law. So that is why on the 
first day of this Congress I introduced the Universal Homeowners Tax 
Relief Act. And with this amendment, we have the opportunity to pass my 
legislation to provide an estimated 30 million people nationwide, and 
600,000 in New Jersey, with a few extra hundred dollars that I'm sure 
they could use. In these uncertain economic times, it is no small 
matter. And unlike the bill before us today, my amendment would provide 
real help for American homeowners.
  I urge passage of the amendment.


                             Point of Order

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against this 
amendment because in my opinion it violates clause 7 of rule XVI, which 
requires that an amendment be germane to the matter it is amending. And 
it is not germane to the bill because it's outside the scope of the 
bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, I recognize that under the structure of this 
bill this amendment is not in order. I only say it should be.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. WATERS. Thank you very much.
  Madam Chair, I rise to support the amendment. I'm opposed to the 
point of order. I think it is absolutely germane. Not only do we have a 
bill before us that will eliminate taxpayers' ability to have their 
homes that are underwater refinanced; this also impacts their taxes. 
They will continue to have to be taxed on those homes at the same rate. 
And so here we have before us the Universal Homeowner Tax Relief Act 
that would impact 30 million Americans nationwide.
  And I must add that if we can, in this House and in this Congress, 
give tax breaks to the richest 1 percent of Americans in the way that 
we have done, certainly we can support these homeowners who are 
underwater, these homeowners who have been tricked into mortgages that 
they didn't understand, these homeowners who are the victims of fraud. 
And I think this is germane.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California must confine her 
remarks to the point of order.
  Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of order. If not, 
the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentlewoman from Illinois makes the point of order that the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey is not germane.
  The bill addresses repeal of a Federal Housing Administration program 
that provides for refinancing of a specified set of mortgages.
  One of the fundamental principles of germaneness is that the 
amendment must confine itself to the jurisdiction of the committees 
represented in the underlying bill. The bill was referred to and 
reported by the Committee on Financial Services. The amendment proposes 
a direct amendment to the Internal Revenue Code, a matter within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  The amendment is therefore not germane. The point of order is 
sustained.


                Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Garamendi

  Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 4. TREATMENT OF BONUSES FOR FINANCIAL SECTOR EMPLOYEES.

       The Federal regulatory agencies for banking and financial 
     institutions and for securities regulation shall jointly 
     issue regulations that--
       (1) require all new employees of any institution, company, 
     or entity regulated by such a regulatory agency, upon hiring, 
     to sign a contract stipulating that any bonus income provided 
     to such employee will be paid in securities or obligations 
     that such institution,

[[Page H1698]]

     company, or entity creates or deals in in its regular course 
     of business;
       (2) require that any such bonuses paid shall be held in 
     escrow for such period as may be necessary to determine 
     whether the such securities or obligations created or dealt 
     with by such institution, company, or entity are of 
     substandard quality or cannot be readily identified as an 
     asset or a liability;
       (3) require such escrow accounts to be portable so that an 
     employee may change jobs without hindrance; and
       (4) prohibit use of any such bonuses to hedge against 
     future losses.

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order against this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Chair, 10 weeks ago on this floor there was 
great celebration by our colleagues in the Republican Party as they 
took control of this House, and there were many sermons given to all of 
us by the Members in the majority party about the need to listen to 
Americans. I suggest we do that at this moment as we consider this 
bill.
  Madam Chair, 10,780,236 American families are crying out for help. We 
should be listening to them.
  I know the gentlewoman from Illinois has a big heart, and she knows 
that 430,000 of the homeowners in Illinois are crying out for relief. 
And I'm certain, Madam Chairman, that the author of this bill, the 
gentleman from Alabama, is well aware that in his State 35,000 
homeowners are crying out for relief. And I'm certain that all of the 
Members of the Republican Party are listening to the 10,780,236 
families in America that are crying out for relief. I can assure you 
the Democrats are listening.
  My amendment, Madam Chair, is one that goes to one of the three 
reasons why they are crying out for relief.

                              {time}  1500

  There was no regulation imposed during the years 2001 to 2009. That 
was one problem. We attempted to address that with the Dodd-Frank law 
that's now in place.
  The second reason was irresponsibility; and certainly some of those 
homeowners who are crying out for relief were irresponsible, and 
certainly some of those who lost their homes already that are crying 
out for relief were irresponsible. But the big irresponsibility were 
the bankers in this Nation. They took advantage of millions upon 
millions of homeowners and engaged in irresponsible activity.
  The third item is where my amendment goes, and that is to Wall Street 
greed. We know, from the commission that was assigned the 
responsibility of looking at why the great crash occurred, we know from 
that report that greed was the underlying motivation for Wall Street. 
My amendment goes to that greed.
  In the future, not in the past--and some of my colleagues have spoken 
to the need for criminal action, which is also part of that report done 
by the commission--this goes to the future. This amendment goes to the 
future and says for those in Wall Street, the high and the mighty that 
get the huge bonuses, most of whom were just in the newspaper this 
week, that their bonuses should be in the stock of the company in which 
they are operating and that those bonuses be held in an escrow account 
for a period of time so that either the good or the bad effect of their 
action would be known and so that they could not take immediate benefit 
from their irresponsible actions.
  This amendment would put a damper on Wall Street greed. This 
amendment is necessary to put a damper on Wall Street greed, and it 
goes directly to one of the reasons why this bill is before us. This 
bill is before us, I think in an inappropriate way, to deal with the 
housing crisis. The housing crisis was caused in part by Wall Street 
greed. We ought to be addressing that. That's what this amendment does, 
by withholding from immediate benefit those members of Wall Street who 
have created the crisis in the past and who may very well be in the 
process of creating tomorrow's crisis.
  I ask for the support of this amendment.


                             Point of Order

  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment of my good friend and colleague because in my opinion it 
violates clause 7 of rule XVI, which requires that an amendment be 
germane to the matter it is amending. It is not germane to the bill 
because it is outside the scope of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of 
order?
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. I think that it's necessary when we take up a bill 
that would eliminate a law that is intended to help 10,780,326 
homeowners that we look to the underlying reason why the problem 
exists. This amendment does that.
  We ought not be using artificial rules that prevent us from the 
underlying problem, allowing those rules to stop us from taking up the 
real problem.
  I oppose the proposal to rule this out of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member seek to speak to the point of 
order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentlewoman from Illinois makes the point of order that the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from California is not germane.
  The bill addresses repeal of a Federal Housing Administration program 
that provides for refinancing of a specified set of mortgages.
  One of the fundamental principles of germaneness is that the 
amendment must relate to the subject matter of the underlying bill. The 
bill is confined to a specific type of refinancing program. The 
amendment seeks to address regulation of the financial industry, a 
matter outside the confines of the subject addressed by the bill.
  The amendment is therefore not germane. The point of order is 
sustained.
  Mr. BACHUS. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. BACHUS. Madam Chair, there seems to be some confusion on what the 
underlying bill does and what the amendments are trying to accomplish. 
In fact, in certain cases, it's quite evident that some of my 
colleagues don't understand the bill.
  This bill authorizes $8 billion to go towards the FHA refinance plan. 
It has already disbursed $50 million. Now we're hearing these claims of 
10 million and 11 million homeowners. There are probably closer to 12 
million homeowners that are underwater than 11. I think the numbers are 
understated. So let's assume 12 million.
  This Federal program that we've disbursed $50 million to, how many 
American families have had their mortgages refinanced? Forty-two.
  Now, who refinanced those? Who paid for that? Was it the lenders who 
loaned the money? No. Was it the borrowers who borrowed the money? No. 
It was these children, because it was taxpayer money.
  Now you say they're not taxpayers. No, but they're going to have to 
pay this back because we're spending $8 billion more every day than 
we're taking in in revenue.
  It was announced earlier this week--I think the American people, and 
I don't blame them, don't want to really put their arms around this--
but we just announced a deficit for the month of February, 28 days, 
that was more than the deficit 4 years ago for the entire year. We're 
hemorrhaging red ink.
  Are we better off than our parents? Most of us are. Are these 
children going to be better off than we are? Not if we don't start 
cutting spending. And the American people, those who are parents and 
grandparents, are crying out for this Congress to address this. And 
that's what we're on this floor today to do.
  Now, if I were one of the 12 million homeowners who was underwater, I 
might say, Why those 42? But if I were the taxpayers, I would say, Why 
are you taking money from me that we have to borrow from other 
countries--42 cents out of every dollar that we're putting into this 
program--why are you paying this mortgage down? Isn't that the lender--
if a loan gets in trouble, is it up to the taxpayers to bail that 
lender out?
  Someone mentioned Bank of America. Somebody mentioned Citibank. If I 
were Citibank or Bank of America and someone who was making their 
payments who was underwater who may

[[Page H1699]]

walk off, yeah, I'd say if the taxpayers will come in and take that 
obligation off my hands, I would love that.
  My district, the average home is worth $212,000. And it's the 
highest--one of the highest in the State. And actually when I say that, 
let me say the community I live in, which is one of the more--it's 
above average in income.
  But the average loan here that people borrowed was $313,000--the loan 
itself. That's quite a loan. And to say that the taxpayers need to pay 
that mortgage down makes no sense when these are the children, this is 
the generation that's going to have to pay it back.
  We need to get serious. We need to get out pictures of our children 
and our grandchildren and we need to say, Do we really need to come to 
the rescue of these banks when they've overextended loans?

                              {time}  1510

  How about all of those Americans who are making their payments and 
didn't buy a house and are not underwater? Should you ask those 
Americans to pay to banks money that they didn't obligate themselves 
to? The answer is ``no.'' ``No'' to more government spending.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Yes, we ought to look to the children. Last Sunday on 
``60 Minutes'' was a report about our children in America today. 
Twenty-five percent of our children in America today are hungry, and 
many of them are homeless because their parents have lost their homes.
  Forty-two families. Yes, this program hasn't yet kicked into its full 
potential. Forty-two families are in their homes today, and those 
children are not out on the street homeless.
  Listen to America. Listen to the 25 percent of children in America 
today that are hungry, and a large percentage of them are homeless. 
Listen to their cry. Listen to them. Yes, we have an obligation as good 
citizens of this Nation to see to it that our neighborhoods, even if 
they are the high-end neighborhoods in Alabama, that those problems are 
addressed.
  Ten months ago, the new majority took this floor and they said, 
Listen, listen to Americans that want jobs. Not one job bill has passed 
this House. The only bill that's passed this House that dealt with jobs 
was H.R. 1, the continuing resolution, that destroyed 700,000 jobs and 
will put more of those children homeless, will destroy more families. 
Yes, we ought to be listening to the generations ahead of us. But if we 
do not listen to today's problems, those problems in the future will 
only be worse.
  And $8 billion, yes, that's a lot of money. But it happens to be 8 
percent of what we spend every year in the Afghan war. Get our 
priorities straight here on this floor. You bet I'm worried about the 
children of today. But 25 percent of Americans' children are hungry, 
and a large percentage of them are homeless because their parents have 
been unable to meet the mortgage commitments.
  This program is one of four that is going to be terminated by the 
Republican majority.
  So what is it that you are offering those children? The children of 
today, what is it that you are offering them? The opportunity to be 
homeless. That's what you're offering.
  Come to this floor and talk to me about tomorrow's generation. Yes, 
do that. And that's my concern also. But I'm concerned about those that 
are homeless and hungry today.
  So don't eliminate this program. Make it work. Don't eliminate the 
other three programs that are an effort to try to keep people in their 
homes so that they don't go homeless.
  Madam Chair, I know my colleagues on the Republican side care about 
the children of America, today's children. Why they would put four 
bills forward this week and next week that eliminate the opportunity 
for those parents to stay in their home I do not understand. We need 
compassion. We need to be aware of the deficit. We need to make 
choices. If our choice is to force more families to be homeless, that's 
the wrong choice.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I rise because I want to make sure that the 
chair of our committee, who just took the floor, understands that we 
understand the bill. When our chairman first took the floor to talk 
about what this bill is and what it is not, he said he did not think 
that we really understood what the bill was all about. I would like to 
assure you that the Members on this side of the aisle understand this 
legislation. I would like to assure you that those of us who work on 
the Financial Services Committee, who put these bills into operation, 
who organized these bills, who presented these bills, who got these 
bills passed into law to help homeowners, understand what is now 
happening to them.
  We understand that the bill before us would eliminate this program. 
This is an FHA program that's designed to provide refinance 
opportunities for those homes that are underwater.
  What do we mean when we say ``underwater''? We mean that when middle 
class homeowners, hardworking citizens went and signed for that 
mortgage where they were paying $250,000, $300,000, $400,000 for a 
home, they signed that mortgage, that was supposed to be the value of 
that home. That's what it was assessed at at the time. That was what it 
is supposed to be worth.
  Now, because of this crisis that we are in, the subprime meltdown 
that we are in, this economic difficulty, these homes have lost their 
value. They are no longer the homes that they signed that mortgage for. 
The value has changed. That $400,000 home, that $300,000 home that 
middle class citizens were now buying is 35 percent less, or 50 percent 
less in some areas.
  Mr. BACHUS. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. WATERS. No, I will not yield.
  These homeowners are saying, Will you please help me? Will you please 
do something about the fact that I am working every day, paying a 
mortgage amount for a home that's 35 to 50 percent less than what I 
signed up for? Will my government please help me? This is not fair. 
They're simply saying, Can't you do something? And we said, Yes. We put 
into play legislation, FHA, that would help to refinance these homes. 
Let's get the amounts right.
  I now yield to the gentleman from Alabama, because I don't want to 
deny my friend the opportunity to have his say.
  Mr. BACHUS. Would the gentlelady tell the Members, when you write 
that check to help them with their underwater home, that check goes to 
Bank of America. That check goes to Citibank. That check goes to just 
fill in the bank, fill in the mortgage company. It goes to whoever 
loaned the money. It doesn't go to the homeowner. Are they benefited? 
Yes. And tell the Members of this body who pays for that check. We do. 
The American people.
  Ms. WATERS. Reclaiming my time, I am focused on the homeowner who was 
supposed to be protected by the regulators that have been appointed and 
given the jobs of regulation so that they could make sure that our 
consumers are being treated fairly. We failed them. We let them down. 
We allowed them to get into mortgages where fraud was quite evident. We 
did not do the job. And so now they have these homes that are 
underwater, and they're saying, Help us. And we did. That's what this 
FHA legislation would have done, helped to refinance so that they could 
lower their mortgage payments.
  Now, my friends on the opposite side of the aisle are saying to the 
taxpayers and to the homeowners, No, we're not going to help you. We 
know your home is underwater. We know this information. We know what 
the servicers have done to you. We know that you are working every day 
to pay a mortgage for a home that you thought was worth an amount that 
is no longer so.
  So we are saying please don't do that. We're saying please don't do 
that. Don't strip the homeowners of this opportunity to refinance this 
home.
  In addition to stripping the homeowners of this opportunity, the 
other programs that you are going to hear about, the other three 
programs, the HAMP program, the NSP program, the

[[Page H1700]]

program for homeowners who have lost their jobs who simply want a loan, 
we're saying no to all of this. We're saying, No, homeowners, we're not 
going to help you.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1520


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Ms. Waters

  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 4. PUBLICATION OF MEMBER AVAILABILITY FOR ASSISTANCE.

       Not later than 5 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall publish to its Website on the World Wide Web in a 
     prominent location, large point font, and boldface type the 
     following statement: ``The FHA Short Refinance Program, which 
     would have provided borrowers who are current on their 
     mortgage but owe more than their home is worth with the 
     ability to refinance into an FHA loan with better terms, has 
     been terminated. If you owe more on your mortgage than your 
     home is worth, please contact your Member of Congress for 
     assistance.''.

  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 6 
be modified with the modification that is at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Modification to amendment No. 6 offered by Ms. Waters:
       Strike all after the section heading and insert the 
     following:
       Not later than 5 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall 
     publish to its website on the World Wide Web in a prominent 
     location, large point font, and boldface type the following 
     statement: ``The FHA Short Refinance Program, which was 
     intended to provide borrowers with refinance opportunities, 
     has been terminated. If you are having trouble paying your 
     mortgage and need help contacting your lender or servicer for 
     purposes of negotiating or acquiring a loan modification, 
     please contact your Member of Congress to assist you in 
     contacting your lender or servicer for the purpose of 
     negotiating or acquiring a loan modification.''

  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the modification?
  Without objection, the amendment is modified.
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Chair, this amendment that I've worked on with my 
colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle is simply about 
transparency. It is simply about making ourselves available to the 
homeowners who are trying to get some help because they are under 
water. This amendment would simply say that the program is no longer in 
existence and that you may call us to help you to get to your lender or 
to get to your servicer in some way.
  It is certainly not what I would prefer to have to do, but I 
understand we're going to lose. The Members on the opposite side of the 
aisle have made up their minds, and they have decided that this is 
important and that this is what they're going to do.
  So I would simply like our citizens to know that this program that 
they may have started to hear about is no longer in existence and that, 
if they call us, we will agree that we will try and help them, in some 
modest way, to get to their servicers or to their lenders.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BACHUS. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. BACHUS. Let me say this: I would prefer that this amendment 
notify all Americans, particularly taxpayers, that we are stopping a 
program that authorizes $8 billion worth of spending.
  Having said that, I think this is a good amendment. I know there may 
be Members who say they don't want to be contacted, but I will tell you 
this: People do call us from time to time, and they say, I'm having 
trouble with paying my mortgage. I'm facing foreclosure, and I can't 
get in touch with my lender or my servicer, and I'm not sure who I 
should talk to.
  We put them in communication many times with the servicer or the 
lender. We go further and actually help some of them with their 
applications. On 18 occasions this last year, we helped citizens with 
applications to lenders for modifications.
  I think it's a good service, particularly with the recession we have 
now. I think it's a far, far better approach than a government program 
that uses taxpayer dollars, because we are contacting the lender or the 
servicer, and that is who ought to talk to the borrower. That's who 
could have an obligation or who has an interest in working it out. On 
almost every occasion with the mortgages, it is in the interest of the 
borrower and the lender to work it out.
  Ms. WATERS. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BACHUS. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. WATERS. Thank you so much.
  First of all, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for your 
cooperation on this amendment. I know that there are other words that 
you would, perhaps, use to explain to the homeowner or to the citizen 
your point of view; but you did work with me on this, and you thought 
that this kind of transparency was good.
  I do commend you because I know that you have worked directly with 
some of your constituents. We found out, as we talked with you, that 
you had helped 18 people with loan modifications and that you were 
willing to contact the servicers. As you know, there are those who tell 
us that we shouldn't be doing any of this, but I think you and I agree 
that we should offer some assistance to the homeowners who contact us.
  I would like to thank you for that.
  Mr. BACHUS. Thank you.
  If I continue to have time, let me say this in closing: I do want to 
caution Members that it is not an obligation of Congress or of Members 
of Congress--and I think Ms. Waters would agree--to intervene and to 
suggest to the lenders that they do anything other than give due 
consideration. We simply put them in communication. Now, we will help 
them with the applications, but I think it is important, in all our 
dealings, that we do not try to intervene in legal obligations or in 
any way appear to coerce or influence that outcome.
  I think this is a very good amendment, and I would encourage Members 
to support it. There are also VA programs and FHA programs that we can 
put borrowers in touch with. This, I believe, is an amendment I will 
support.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment, as modified, 
offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment, as modified, offered by the gentlewoman 
from California will be postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in the Congressional Record 
on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Lynch of Massachusetts.
  Amendment No. 6 by Ms. Waters of California, as modified.
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for the second electronic 
vote in this series.


                  Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Lynch

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch) on which further proceedings were postponed 
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 184, 
noes 243, not voting 5, as follows:

[[Page H1701]]

                             [Roll No. 168]

                               AYES--184

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--243

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Diaz-Balart
     Giffords
     Manzullo
     Reyes
     Smith (WA)

                              {time}  1553

  Messrs. DUFFY, ROGERS of Alabama, HUNTER, DENHAM, BROOKS, TIPTON, 
TERRY, LAMBORN, McHENRY, ROONEY, and Mrs. MYRICK changed their vote 
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. GARAMENDI, CARSON of Indiana, DINGELL, DOGGETT, and Ms. 
SPEIER changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


           Amendment No. 6 Offered by Ms. Waters, as Modified

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Waters), as modified, on which further proceedings were 
postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 278, 
noes 147, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 169]

                               AYES--278

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Andrews
     Austria
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baldwin
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Bass (CA)
     Bass (NH)
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Berg
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonner
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cassidy
     Castor (FL)
     Chaffetz
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Gallegly
     Garamendi
     Gardner
     Gerlach
     Gibson
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Grijalva
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Marino
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nugent
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Petri
     Pingree (ME)
     Platts
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schock
     Schwartz
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Speier
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Whitfield
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman

[[Page H1702]]


     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--147

     Adams
     Altmire
     Amash
     Bachmann
     Barton (TX)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Carter
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Culberson
     Denham
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Ellmers
     Fincher
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith (VA)
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Mica
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nunes
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Pitts
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Ribble
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schrader
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Southerland
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Walberg
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Wilson (SC)
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Giffords
     Hurt
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Poe (TX)
     Reyes
     Smith (WA)

                              {time}  1559

  So the amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Chair, on rollcall No. 169 I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
  Stated against:
  Mr. HURT. Madam Chair, on rollcall No. 169, I was unavoidably 
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Chaffetz) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Miller of Michigan, Acting 
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 830) to rescind the unobligated funding for the FHA Refinance 
Program and to terminate the program, and, pursuant to House Resolution 
150, reported the bill back to the House with an amendment adopted in 
the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment 
reported from the Committee of the Whole?
  If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. DEUTCH. I am, in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Deutch of Florida moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 830, 
     to the Committee on Financial Services with instructions to 
     report the same back to the House forthwith with the 
     following amendments:
       In section 3(b), before ``shall continue'' insert the 
     following: ``, and any amounts made available for use under 
     such Program pursuant to subsection (d),''.
       In section 3(c), after ``such enactment,'' insert ``or 
     pursuant to a commitment to insure made pursuant amounts made 
     available for use under such Program pursuant to subsection 
     (d),''
       In section 3, strike subsection (d) and insert the 
     following new subsection:
       (d) Continuation of Program for Senior Homeowners.--
       (1) Identification of amounts for refinancings for senior 
     homeowners.--Not later than the expiration of the 180-day 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall--
       (A) determine the amount necessary to provide assistance 
     under the FHA Refinance Program described in subsection (a) 
     to senior homeowners (as such term is defined in paragraph 
     (3) of this subsection); and
       (B) submit notice of such determination to the Congress 
     that specifies such amount.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--Effective upon the 
     submission to the Congress by the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development of the notice required under paragraph (1), 
     there is authorized to be appropriated, for assistance under 
     the FHA Refinance Program referred to in section 2 only for 
     mortgages for senior homeowners, the amount identified in 
     such notice.
       (3) Senior homeowner.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     term ``senior homeowner'' means a homeowner who is a member 
     of a household composed of one or more persons at least one 
     of whom is 62 years of age or older.

  Mr. DEUTCH (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
to dispense with the reading.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Speaker, I present an amendment to this legislation 
that will help the seniors who built America from the bottom up. This 
amendment provides us with an opportunity not to stall this bill, but 
improve it, right here and right now. The contributions of the men and 
women who became known as America's greatest generation should humble 
us all.
  As teenagers, Mr. Speaker, they confronted unspeakable evil and 
endured incredible sacrifices during World War II. In the aftermath of 
the Great Depression, their love of country and commitment to hard work 
created the world's most vibrant economy. They were doctors and nurses, 
teachers and engineers, steelworkers and pipefitters, secretaries and 
truck drivers. Today, they are seniors who deserve to live their 
retirement years with dignity and self-sufficiency.
  Unfortunately, throughout the financial crisis and this devastating 
recession, seniors have often gone forgotten. For many, their pensions 
have dried up or come under attack. Their life savings were decimated 
by recklessness on Wall Street. They have not received a Social 
Security cost of living increase for 2 years. Finally, Mr. Speaker, 
their homes, often their last standing pillar of equity and economic 
security, have lost their value through no fault of their own.
  The community of South Florida I am so privileged to represent is 
home to one of our Nation's largest populations of retirees. But it is 
also ground zero for the foreclosure crisis. In 2010, Mr. Speaker, 
South Florida outpaced the Nation for new foreclosure filings. The 
counties of Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami Dade have suffered the 
majority of these foreclosures in Florida, and my office fields calls 
from struggling homeowners every day.
  Statewide in Florida, nearly 1 million families and seniors have lost 
their homes since 2009. Today, nearly half of all Florida homeowners 
are underwater on their mortgages. They owe banks more money than their 
homes are now worth. Through no fault of their own, thousands of 
seniors who built this Nation face the tragedy of losing their homes.
  Now, America's greatest generation has never been one to ask for 
handouts, and today is no exception. What we have the opportunity to do 
here today is to give our seniors a chance--a chance--to rearrange 
their deal with their lenders, make their payments, and keep their 
homes. The mortgage program abolished by the bill needs to be fixed. So 
let's start by fixing it for seniors, as my proposal will do.
  Before us is a real opportunity to amend these programs for the 
future. It will not send this legislation back to committee. It will 
not stall this bill. It will simply preserve these mortgage

[[Page H1703]]

modification programs for seniors and open the door to improving these 
initiatives.
  According to leading economists, high foreclosure rates and our 
struggling housing sector remain the biggest challenge to our economic 
recovery. In Florida, with unemployment at 12 percent, the real estate 
industry is so integral to our economy, we must stem foreclosures in 
order to grow the private sector and create jobs. We can begin 
stabilizing the housing market today and do right by Americans who made 
this country great for every one of us in this Chamber.
  Seniors answered the call of Uncle Sam every week of their working 
lives, paying taxes for America's schools, roads, military and health 
care. When asked to serve, these Americans always said yes. Now, when 
these same men and women are asking for a modest amount of time to 
renegotiate in good faith, to prevent foreclosure, to remain self-
sufficient as retirees, what answer will this body give them?
  Every day, it seems, mortgage lenders have their day in Washington. 
Every day, Wall Street executives have their day in Washington. Every 
day, Mr. Speaker, banks have their day in Washington. Isn't it time to 
give the seniors who made America great their day in our Nation's 
capital?
  Let's make today a day for the people who rebuilt this country after 
the Great Depression, who started the businesses small and large so 
important to our economy, the people who are our parents and our 
children's grandparents, who served our nation, who made America what 
it is today, the people who taught us what it means to be Americans. 
They're not asking for credit or recognition or attention, but we owe 
it to them to honor their lifetimes of hard work and responsibility and 
decency by making it possible for them to live out the rest of their 
lives with four walls around them and a roof over their heads.
  Vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
  Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to 
recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Speaker, this is simply a procedural measure to stop 
this legislation which cuts yet again another wasteful government 
program. This program has already allocated $50 million and it has only 
helped 42 American families. Do that math. It authorizes $8 billion. 
That's at a time when this country has a record deficit for this year.

                              {time}  1610

  And yet they don't get the message, my Democratic colleagues. They 
simply do not realize this money goes to the lender, this goes to the 
banks, that's who the checks are made out to. And who pays for it? The 
taxpayers. And, ultimately, this is who pays for it: our children and 
our grandchildren. We can't pay it back because we borrow 42 cents out 
of every dollar. And let me tell you, a lot of them have grandparents. 
When you talk about seniors, let's talk about our children and our 
grandchildren. Let's talk about that we're endangering their future.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Grimm).
  Mr. GRIMM. Thank you, Chairman Bachus.
  You know, I just came back from my district in Staten Island and 
Brooklyn, and I visited several senior centers. And I'll tell you, the 
seniors are nervous, they're worried. You know what their number one 
fear is? Their number one fear is that their children and grandchildren 
will not have the opportunities that they had. I heard countless story 
after story that their children are out of work. So when I hear about 
another failed program, I think of the mandate--and it was a mandate. 
I'm not sure if everyone in this room heard it in this Chamber, but I 
heard it--and the mandate was very simple: cut the spending, grow the 
economy, and create jobs.
  This program is broken, and to think that somehow suddenly--
miraculously--it's going to work for seniors is outrageous. And I have 
to tell you, I cannot, in good conscience, go back to my district, go 
back to those senior centers, look those seniors in the eye and tell 
them that I supported another failed program because someone stood up 
and said, well, it's for seniors. You can label it any way you want, 
you can put anything you want on this, but at the end of the day it's a 
failed program.
  And for that reason, I strongly urge my colleagues to support the 
chairman and end this reckless spending.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of passage.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 185, 
noes 243, not voting 4, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 170]

                               AYES--185

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--243

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta

[[Page H1704]]


     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Giffords
     Manzullo
     Reyes
     Smith (WA)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There is 1 minute left in 
the vote.

                              {time}  1630

  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 256, 
noes 171, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 171]

                               AYES--256

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Cardoza
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chandler
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Walz (MN)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--171

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kissell
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Farr
     Giffords
     Manzullo
     Reyes
     Smith (WA)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There is 1 minute left in 
the vote.

                              {time}  1637

  Mr. McINTYRE changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________