[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8001-8006]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5818, NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION 
                              ACT OF 2008

  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1174 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1174

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 5818) to authorize the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development to make loans to States to acquire 
     foreclosed housing and to make grants to States for related 
     costs. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. 
     All points of order against consideration of the bill are 
     waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. 
     General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
     exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
     chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Financial Services. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall 
     be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
     of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Financial Services now printed in the bill. The committee 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered 
     as read. All points of order against the committee amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute are waived except those arising 
     under clause 10 of rule XXI. Notwithstanding clause 11 of 
     rule XVIII, no amendment to the committee amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed 
     in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the 
     order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
     designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall 
     be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
     divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
     shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
     to a demand for division of the question in the House or in 
     the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 
     amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 
     10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
     bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 
     bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.
       Sec. 2.  After a motion that the Committee rise has been 
     rejected on a legislative day, the Chair may entertain 
     another such motion on that day only if offered by the 
     chairman of the Committee on Financial Services or the 
     Majority Leader or a designee. After a motion to strike out 
     the enacting words of the bill (as described in clause 9 of 
     rule XVIII) has been rejected, the Chair may not entertain 
     another such motion during further consideration of the bill.
       Sec. 3.  During consideration in the House of H.R. 5818 
     pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 
     the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 
     consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated 
     by the Speaker.

                              {time}  1215

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I am pleased 
to yield the customary 30 minutes to my colleague from the Rules 
Committee, Mr. Hastings from Washington. All time yielded during 
consideration of the rule is for debate only, and I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative 
days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House 
Resolution 1174.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1174 provides for 
consideration of H.R. 5818, the Neighborhood Stabilization Act of 2008, 
under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate 
controlled by the Committee on Financial Services. The rule makes in 
order seven amendments listed in the Rules Committee report, each

[[Page 8002]]

of which is debatable for 10 minutes. The rule also provides for one 
motion to recommit, with or without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Neighborhood 
Stabilization Act of 2008 and this rule. This New Direction Congress, 
led by Democrats, understands the impact of this unfortunate Bush 
economy on neighborhoods throughout America. In order for our country 
to recover from this economic downturn, it is critical that we 
stabilize housing for our neighbors and rebuild communities with more 
affordable housing.
  In fact, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke urged Congress to take 
action earlier this week. He stated in part, summarized in this news 
report, ``The reasons behind surging late payments and foreclosures can 
vary, and that needs to be taken into account when developing 
solutions. For instance, in parts of New England, States in the Great 
Lakes, including Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin, show increased 
mortgage delinquencies and notable increases in unemployment rates. 
California, Florida, and parts of Colorado, on the other hand, saw 
delinquencies rise during a period when unemployment generally 
decreased but the value of homes declined.''
  He said, ``A widespread decline in home prices, by contrast, is a 
relatively novel phenomenon, and lenders and servicers will have to 
develop new and flexible strategies to deal with this issue. Rising 
foreclosures add to the glut of unsold homes, and that put more 
downward pressure on prices, aggravating the housing slump. More rapid 
declines in house prices could have an adverse impact on the broader 
economy.''
  See, this affects us all, and it affects the stability of the 
financial system overall. So it is vitally important that we bring this 
package today, this first bill, the Neighborhood Stabilization Act and 
more to come because of the record number of foreclosures facing our 
neighbors back home.
  Under President Bush's economic policies, the number of families 
entering into foreclosure has increased from over 700,000 to 1.5 
million last year, but today, we're going to bring new hope to our 
communities through revitalized neighborhoods and targeted affordable 
housing to families that need it most.
  The Neighborhood Stabilization Act of 2008 provides our local 
communities with the tools they need to purchase and rehabilitate 
vacant and foreclosed homes. Now we all know a vacant, deteriorated, 
foreclosed home in our neighborhood has a devastating impact. We've all 
seen them. We've driven by them. They're overgrown. They are not paying 
the taxes like everyone else in the neighborhood is paying. They're 
causing a drain on services and local governments.
  Our initiatives today will help these nonprofit agencies and our 
local governments purchase those properties, turn them around, 
rehabilitate them and make them available to families that need them 
most, and in order to see that families with the greatest needs receive 
housing first, these new loans and affordable homes will be targeted 
especially to middle class families and those hardworking families back 
in our communities.
  I know this will help families in my home State of Florida which has 
been among the Nation's hardest hit States, particularly in my 
community in the Tampa Bay area. In fact, it was not long ago that one 
of my neighbors called to tell me that he recently lost his home to 
foreclosure, and he was dealing with the repercussions from that loss, 
trying to find another affordable place to live for him and his family.
  He was pleased to know, however, that this Congress had already acted 
on a mortgage forgiveness debt relief act signed into law last year, 
and because of that act, he will not suffer a double whammy and get hit 
with an unaffordable tax bill to accompany the loss of his home.
  This legislation will help families from my community and communities 
across this Nation to rebuild and create more affordable housing. I am 
proud that this Congress has been so proactive and taken so many steps 
to combat the housing crisis. Millions of Americans will be helped 
because of the proactive leadership of Chairman Barney Frank on the 
Financial Services Committee and Chairwoman Maxine Waters.
  I am pleased to witness firsthand that this new Democratic Congress 
has made the lives of folks in my neighborhood and my community a whole 
lot better. Today, we will continue to move forward by passing the 
Neighborhood Stabilization Act and follow on that with the American 
Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act. These efforts reflect 
the continued work of this New Direction Congress and offer the most 
comprehensive response yet to the American mortgage crisis. We are 
providing much-needed help to hardworking families in this unfortunate 
Bush economy.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague 
from Florida (Ms. Castor) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and 
I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this is an oppressive rule, written to restrict debate 
in the House and to strip away rights from the minority.
  This rule makes in order four Democrat amendments and only three 
Republican amendments. This means that 80 percent of requested Democrat 
amendments were made in order, but just 33 percent, or one-third, of 
Republican amendments filed with the Rules Committee were made in 
order. Mr. Speaker, this isn't balanced. It's restrictive and not in 
the tradition of having an open debate on important issues.
  Last night at the Rules Committee, Financial Services Committee 
Chairman Frank said that he supported allowing debate on an amendment 
relating to illegal immigration and legitimate concerns of ensuring 
that persons illegally present in this country do not benefit from the 
new Federal program created by this bill.
  Rules Committee Democrats responded by making in order the least 
substantive, most meaningless and unenforceable immigration amendment 
possible. A Republican amendment by Representative Ginny Brown-Waite. 
of Florida had very clearly and explicitly made certain that anyone 
illegally present in this country cannot rent or buy a house from this 
new government program. That amendment was not made in order. Every 
Democrat on the Rules Committee voted to deny the House voting on this 
meaningful amendment.
  Mr. Speaker, when Democrat leaders aren't totally shutting down 
debate, they are giving the House window dressing instead of substance 
on important issues. Not content with blocking two-thirds of Republican 
amendments and restricting the opportunity of every Member of this 
institution to come to the House floor and offer amendments to improve, 
fix or alter this bill, House Democrat leaders went even further to 
shut down the minority, squelch dissent and take away their 
parliamentary rights.
  Section 2 of this rule takes away the right of any Member of this 
House to make a motion that the House rise out of the Committee of the 
Whole and places it solely in the hands of the Democrat majority leader 
or the Democrat chairman of the Financial Services Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, the new majority promised to run the most open, honest 
House in history. Instead of keeping their promises to the American 
people, Democrat leaders are acting with impunity as they shed any 
semblance of openness, fairness or regular order.
  I don't believe many of the freshmen Democrat Members who were 
elected in the last election came to Congress to block debate and 
prohibit Members from offering amendments on the House floor. Yet, Mr. 
Speaker, they have joined lock-step with Speaker Pelosi in stooping to 
a level of oppressive partisanship that far exceeds the sins of any 
previous Congresses. It's a shameful record that shatters the promise 
Democrat leaders made to the American people to run an open, honest 
House.

[[Page 8003]]

  Mr. Speaker, all this is being done to pass a bill that would create 
a brand new, Big Government, $15 billion Federal program to buy, 
remodel, resell or rent thousands and thousands of houses across the 
country. Who will profit from this new $15 billion government program 
are the lenders who made the bad loans and then foreclosed on families 
who didn't make their mortgage payments. It's a bailout for home 
lenders that knowingly took risks.
  It's terribly unwise and wasteful of taxpayer dollars to create a new 
government program that invites other lenders to take gambles on home 
loans because the American taxpayer will come along and wipe away their 
bad decisions. Mr. Speaker, why should American taxpayers be footing 
the bill for calculated mistakes made by others? Why should American 
taxpayers, who are making their mortgage payments each month or who are 
paying rent, have to come along and fund billions of dollars to give 
away grants and zero interest loans for those who speculated, gambled 
and lost? Mr. Speaker, taxpayers should not take this hit.
  Now I recognize that this bill is titled the Neighborhood 
Stabilization Act and that its stated intent is to help rehabilitate 
neighborhoods in metropolitan cities and urban communities that have 
multiple foreclosed homes sitting vacant and empty. But, Mr. Speaker, 
why should rural and middle America be forced to have their tax dollars 
used to bail out lenders in big cities and urban areas? I believe, Mr. 
Speaker, we should work to find incentives for people to purchase these 
homes and improve these neighborhoods.

                              {time}  1230

  But we should oppose a new $15 billion spending program so the 
Federal Government can be involved in flipping houses or renting out 
homes.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this oppressive rule and 
the bad underlying bill.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning in support of 
this very, very important measure.
  Today, this House of Representatives will vote on the most 
comprehensive response yet, bringing badly needed help to this Nation's 
troubling mortgage crisis.
  These House measures we will debate today will help in several areas: 
Number one, it will help families facing foreclosures to keep their 
homes; two, it will help families avoid foreclosures in the future; and 
three, it will help the recovery of communities in cities and towns 
across this Nation who are harmed by empty houses that are caught in 
the foreclosure process. And that's why I rise to support this bill 
today.
  This is our first bill out of the gate on this important measure. And 
it is extraordinarily important, Mr. Speaker, and that's why I support 
this rule.
  As we look across the landscape of America today, in neighborhood 
after neighborhood, homes empty, buildings empty, vandalism on high, 
violent crime on high, neighboring homes' property values going down, 
and right today, mortgages that are higher than the actual value of the 
property. And my good friends on the other side of the aisle question, 
why are we moving? Why is this a bailout? This is not a bailout. If 
anything, my dear friends, this is a bail-in. This is a bail-in to save 
communities.
  Some of the same arguments that I heard on this side were heard 
during when we had other disasters. This is a disaster, just as we had 
Katrina, just as we had tornados, just as we had unforeseen 
circumstances. I even heard some say, when Katrina was coming, well, 
they knew the hurricane was coming, why didn't they get out of the way? 
This country needs help, and they're looking for their government to do 
what government is supposed to do, help their country in a moment of 
greatest need. And there is no greater need today than to help in this 
mortgage crisis.
  And foremost for that help is to get into these communities, give our 
State and local governments, whose fire departments, whose police 
departments, already strained, are overstrained, and to help those 
neighboring homes who are going down in value because these properties 
are standing there idle and empty and are nothing but havens for crime. 
That's why, Mr. Speaker, this bill is so important.
  I commend Ms. Waters and Chairman Frank for putting together the 
leadership of this bill, which I'm proud to be a cosponsor of, because 
it goes to the heart of the matter, and that is, saving America's 
communities. Fifteen billion dollars spread in two fashions, 7.5 for 
loans, 7.5 for grants. It's an excellent idea whose time has come.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
each side get an additional 2 minutes so I can engage the gentleman and 
so he can have the time to yield to me.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I object. I do not yield for that purpose.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman does not yield for that 
request.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the gentlelady from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), a member of 
the Financial Services Committee.
  Mrs. CAPITO. I thank the gentleman for recognizing me.
  I am on the Financial Services Committee. And we have debated and had 
many hearings on what we all share is an issue before us with great 
urgency. We are facing serious challenges here in the housing market, 
and I think our committee has done great work on a bipartisan basis to 
pass numerous measures and to listen to the concerns all across the 
board.
  But I think the greatest concern for me and for all of us here should 
be that individual in that home who stays up late at night or can't 
sleep at night because they can't figure out how they're going to stay 
in their house and afford to keep their home, keep their family safe in 
their home, and meet the challenges of either an adjustable rate or a 
house that maybe has devalued so much that they feel like their only 
option may be to walk away from their mortgage.
  So we have two bills before us today. Later on, we're going to be 
considering H.R. 5818, which is the Neighborhood Stabilization Act of 
2008. This doesn't help that individual who can't sleep at night who 
we're most concerned about. The aim is to help big cities and other 
urban areas that have foreclosed properties, to revitalize that. That's 
an issue for another day. In my view, the issue we need to debate today 
is how we're going to help that individual who can't meet the 
challenges and wants to stay in their home.
  And so on the larger bill that we're going to be considering later, 
unfortunately the bipartisan tone of our committee sort of broke down 
in the process. We had, I think, very spirited debates in front of our 
committee where our philosophies were shared and we actually found a 
lot of common ground, which is the way it should be. Because when an 
originator came forward with a bad loan or didn't ask for financials or 
didn't ask for background information on a potential buyer, they didn't 
ask, are you a Republican or a Democrat? This isn't a partisan issue. 
That's why I think we should have a full and open debate here, and 
that's why I advocated for an open rule in front of the Rules 
Committee.
  So the solutions that we're offering today are going to be diluted 
because we're not going to be able to hear the debate on the floor 
because the Rules Committee has decided, in their infinite wisdom--and 
I'm a former member of a Rules Committee, so I can say that--that the 
majority is using a seldom used rule that will really prevent our side 
from offering even a motion to recommit, where we can at least have our 
voice heard on this floor.
  So I'm very disappointed that at this day in time, when we have that 
person at night staying up, that family wondering how they're going to 
stay in their home that night, they are not going to be able to see the 
choices that are before us as a body where we can say, we think this is 
more helpful, or we think this direction is the way we

[[Page 8004]]

should go. For that I'm tremendously disappointed, especially in light 
of the committee that I serve on, Financial Services, where we did have 
this debate and we had ideas that came forward and more ideas that 
could come forward on this House today.
  With that, I oppose this rule.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, we're going to do everything we can in our 
power to help American families across this Nation that, yes, are 
facing foreclosure. In this package we bring today we will help the 
folks who are facing those adjustable rates and keep them out of 
foreclosure. But I don't think we should turn a blind eye to the 
significant increase in foreclosures, the rate of foreclosures that has 
happened since 2003 under the Bush Administration. In 2003, 734,000 
foreclosures; 2004, 835,000 foreclosures. More in 2005 and 2006. 2007, 
a record-breaking 1.5 million foreclosed homes in America. This 
Neighborhood Stabilization Act will address those vacant foreclosed 
homes in our neighborhoods.
  I am going to call upon my colleague from the Rules Committee, Ms. 
Matsui from California, to further address the issue. I yield 3 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for 
yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the underlying 
legislation.
  The housing crisis has had an unprecedented effect on our economy. 
Our families, our neighborhoods, our communities are facing daily 
challenges, seeing increased foreclosures and vacancies everywhere they 
turn.
  My own hometown of Sacramento is among the hardest hit in this 
country. Just last quarter, nearly 5,300 homes were foreclosed on. And 
sadly, there is no end in sight. My district is fifth in the Nation in 
adjustable rate mortgages, many of which are reset to higher rates in 
the near future.
  To make matters worse, Forbes magazine ranks Sacramento among the 
highest in homeowner debt. Twenty-eight percent of homeowners in my 
district hold second mortgages and/or home equity lines of credit, 
making it much more difficult for them to save their homes.
  This crisis is affecting everyone; homeowners who are in danger of 
foreclosure, renters who are being forced to move, and even families 
who are secure in their mortgages are seeing their home values fall, 
and increased neighborhood blight.
  Mr. Speaker, this year I have met with many Sacramento families that 
are struggling with their mortgages in today's volatile economy. I have 
seen the sadness in their eyes and the emotional toll this crisis has 
taken on them. It is truly devastating. I met Susan at a foreclosure 
workshop. She had a traditional mortgage that was in good standing. 
Then, after repeated calls, she was steered by a lender to refinance 
her traditional loan into an adjustable rate loan so she could do home 
improvements. Now the loan is scheduled to reset soon, and she will 
have a difficult time making ends meet.
  Another constituent, Jeanie, e-mailed me just last week. She has been 
forced to move twice already this year because the homes she was 
renting were foreclosed on. Without some stability in the housing 
market, Jeanie and her family, including their young daughter, will be 
forced to move again.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to help these honest, hardworking homeowners 
immediately. This legislation is a step in the right direction. I urge 
support of this rule and this legislation.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan).
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule that brings 
this bill to the floor and to this $15 billion bailout bill, and I 
thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I think up here we lose sight of how much $15 billion 
really is. Fifteen billion dollars would operate the entire State 
government of Tennessee for almost 1 year, our education, our medical 
care, our prisons, our roads, our parks. And Tennessee is almost dead 
on average, statistics-wise, in regard to all the States.
  Over 95 percent of the people are paying their mortgages on time. 
Consistent with that, about 95 percent of the people who have contacted 
my office or spoken to me about this bill, they don't want us to bail 
out people who have taken out loans that they couldn't afford. But even 
worse than that, the $15 billion that's in this bill, even worse, we're 
going to pass later today a $300 billion housing bill that we really 
can't afford. Tomorrow we're probably going to pass a $250 billion 
supplemental appropriations bill. That's $565 billion in 2 days. And 
all three of these bills are outside the regular or don't even count 
the regular appropriations bills that we'll be taking up.
  Next week, we're going to pass an almost $300 billion farm bill. A 
couple of weeks ago it came out that the Pentagon has had $295 billion 
in cost overruns on just their 72 largest weapons systems, not counting 
the cost overruns that would be in all the thousands of other large and 
medium size and small contracts.
  Last week, we rejected an effort by the administration to save $50 
billion over the next 10 years on the Medicaid rules even though 
payments to hospitals under the Medicaid program have gone up two to 
three times the rate of inflation every year for the last 15 or 20 
years.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Tennessee has 
expired.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield the gentleman 1 additional 
minute.
  Mr. DUNCAN. What I'm getting at, Mr. Speaker, is this: This Congress 
is going to go down as the most fiscally irresponsible Congress in the 
history of this Nation if we keep spending at this rate. No one can 
legitimately call themselves a fiscal conservative if they vote for all 
these bills.
  David Walker, who just retired as the head of the GAO, respected by 
both sides, said that even worse than the $9 trillion national debt 
that we have is the 53 to $54 trillion in unfunded future pension 
liabilities. It's not going to be many years, Mr. Speaker, before we're 
not going to be able to pay all our Social Security and veterans 
pensions and all the other things we promised our people if we keep 
spending in the reckless manner that we're doing so today and in the 
days ahead.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to an 
outspoken advocate for the hardworking families of Ohio and all 
Americans, Ms. Kaptur of Ohio.
  Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, and I rise 
today in reluctant opposition to the rules on both housing bills that 
are before us because they are not coming up before us in regular 
order. Neither one is an open rule on such an important subject.
  I truly want to thank Chairman Frank and Congresswoman Waters for 
their efforts to improve these bills as they move forward. But on a 
matter so serious, the membership should be afforded the respect our 
offices bestow to represent their people and be allowed to amend and be 
heard in this body.

                              {time}  1245

  Every day, between 7,000 and 8,000 American households lose their 
homes to foreclosure. Meanwhile, the banks responsible are being 
rescued by the Federal Reserve, an instrument of our government. Today, 
the major bills before us to assist with foreclosures will unleash the 
power of the taxpayer-insured Federal Housing Administration to catch 
some of the homeowners in its rescue net. But these bills do nothing to 
hold the lenders and servicers responsible.
  Despite the promise of rescue hotlines and Federal and State 
government compacts, Federal action to help homeowners being foreclosed 
lacks bite. It is voluntary. It pushes to the FHA what the private 
sector should be making whole.
  The two plans to be considered today, again, ask mortgage servicers 
to voluntarily, and I underline that word voluntarily, enter into an 
agreement with the FHA to insure these troubled loans

[[Page 8005]]

if servicers offer modest loan concessions. The problem: The voluntary 
aspect of the program leaves homeowners yet again at the mercy of the 
mortgage loan holder.
  Take Countrywide. The CEO of that company had his compensation 
approach over $200 million, with salaries, bonuses, options, and 
everything over the last 5 years. Yet the Federal Reserve still rewards 
Countrywide as one of its privileged primary dealers trading in U.S. 
Government securities. The FHA rescue plan promises to save maybe 
500,000 homeowners, or half a million Americans. That equals maybe 25 
percent of the more than 2 million additional homeowners still at risk 
of foreclosure. Let me ask, is helping 25 percent, perhaps, of 
homeowners at risk the best America can do? Because the bills are not 
being considered under an open rule with the ability to amend, we 
cannot perfect this legislation.
  So it's fair to ask, where have these voluntary rescue plans gotten 
us so far? Housing counselors in my area tell me dozens of servicers 
refuse even to come to the table and return phone calls, for heaven's 
sake. Not restructuring the loan is one thing but not picking up the 
phone is another. When servicers refuse to answer the phone, no degree 
of local government effort or foreclosure prevention counseling can be 
effective.
  Who is not picking up the phone? Some of these characters: 
CitiFinancial, HSBC/Beneficial, Chase Mortgage, Countrywide, Sovereign 
Bank, Indymac Bank, Popular Mortgage, GMAC, NovaStar, EMC Mortgage.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman from Ohio has 
expired.
  Ms. KAPTUR. May I have an additional minute?
  Ms. CASTOR. We have a list of additional speakers, so at this time I 
cannot yield additional time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman 1 
minute of my time.
  Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  To continue . . . ASC Servicing, HomeEq, Wilshire, Nationalstar, 
EquiFirst, Litton Loan, Flagstar, and Saxon Mortgage Services.
  In fact, the Federal Reserve still has among its privileged list of 
primary Treasury security dealers Countrywide, HSBC, and Citigroup, 
some of the very companies that aren't answering the telephone.
  Banks and mortgage servicers should be mandated to disclose contact 
information, phone numbers, and lay services for their loss mitigation 
departments. Citizens attempting to do workouts on loans must have 
these recalcitrant institutions at the table.
  In addition, as I've said for months, forthcoming improvements to the 
bill should include a short-term foreclosure moratorium, perhaps 3 
months, to help hundreds of thousands of Americans avoid foreclosure. 
And, most importantly, Congress should vote again on allowing judges 
the flexibility to modify the terms of mortgage loans in bankruptcy 
court proceedings. Frankly, the Senate should filibuster on this issue. 
In other words, do for the homeowner what the Federal Reserve has done 
for the big banks.
  Without enacting tougher legislation, a ``no'' vote on this rule and 
the one to follow will allow for a more effective set of bills to come 
before us that will really address the comprehensive foreclosure needs 
of the American people. I'm glad to see the progress we've made, but we 
could go so much further.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus).
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the ranking member a 
question on what's really going on in Florida.
  One of the reasons we are objecting to this is because of the 
previous question. Can you mention the previous question?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. If the gentleman will yield, I am going 
to ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we 
can address another issue of tremendous import in this country that has 
hit every family, and that's the high prices of gasoline. So I will ask 
my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can address 
issues, allow Members on the floor to be able to debate the issue of 
lower gas prices.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. So a ``no'' vote on the previous question allows us to 
debate lowering energy costs in this country; is that correct?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. It would give us the opportunity to do 
that because there are some ideas here. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. And that would be in conjunction and probably would meet 
with the Speaker's promise in 2006 that Democrats have a commonsense 
plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices. She made that quote. 
That would allow us to bring that plan to the floor, would it not?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. If the gentleman will yield, the 
gentleman is correct.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Likewise, Jim Clyburn said, ``House Democrats have a 
plan to help curb rising gas prices.'' That would allow us to find out 
what that plan is; am I correct?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. If the gentleman will yield, the 
gentleman is correct.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. And when Steny Hoyer said, ``Democrats believe we can do 
more for the American people who are struggling to deal with high gas 
prices,'' that would allow us to address the majority leader's plan to 
help bring down energy prices; is that correct?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. If the gentleman will yield, the 
gentleman is correct.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. And it's tied to this debate, and I know my colleague 
who just spoke, it would probably be important for her to vote ``no'' 
on the previous question so that some of her concerns would be aired; 
would that be correct?
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. If the gentleman will yield, I think 
every Member should allow every Member the opportunity to address these 
issues.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Well, Mr. Speaker, high energy costs really affect this 
debate because high energy costs are causing people to make tough 
decisions where they can't meet their bill payments.
  Just last year the cost for natural gas for an individual homeowner 
went up 5.9 percent. Just last year the price for home heating 
increased 37.2 percent. The cost for propane increased 22.2 percent. 
The cost for electricity increased 4.3 percent. Why? We have no plan. 
The Democrat plan to lower energy costs was no plan.
  There was a plan. It did this: Crude oil was at $58.31 when the 
Democrats came into the majority. Today, $121. Yesterday it hit $122. 
I've been doing this for 4 weeks. It hasn't gone down; it keeps going 
up.
  What has that done at the pump? When Democrats came into control, 
$2.33. What is it today? On average, $3.60. That's no plan. That's a 
plan to fail. That's higher costs.
  If you want people to be able to meet their mortgage payments, let's 
lower energy costs. Let's lower the price of a gallon of gasoline.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 1 
additional minute.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Now bring in climate change. On average, climate change 
is going to add 50 cents to a gallon of gas. That would raise the price 
to $4.16. Nobody wants to pay that.
  How can we solve this problem, Mr. Speaker? Let's go after our 
natural resources in the Outer Continental Shelf. Billions of barrels 
of oil, billions of cubic feet of natural gas right on the OCS. 
Democrats keep blocking the ability to get that. Let's do coal-to-
liquid technologies. Go after our coal reserves, 250 years' worth in 
Southern Illinois alone, and turn that into liquid fuel.
  Let's lower the cost for homeowners so that we don't have to rely on 
bailouts, we don't have to rely on government. My individuals want 
independence from government. They want

[[Page 8006]]

independence on fuel costs. They want to pay lower costs.
  Democrats can bring a bill to the floor. They promised it in 2006. We 
have yet to see it.
  Ms. CASTOR. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and in strong 
support of H.R. 5818, as well as H.R. 5830 and H.R. 5720, which 
together constitute a comprehensive package of legislation that will 
help us address our Nation's housing crisis by providing assistance to 
those who are suffering the most.
  The numbers characterizing this crisis are truly staggering. The 
National Association of Realtors reports that median home prices fell 
in 2007 by nearly 2 percent. RealtyTrac reported last week that in the 
first quarter of 2008, 1 in every 194 homeowners faced a foreclosure 
notice.
  The loss of a home, or value in a home, is a loss of an asset which 
many Americans often work their entire lives to own, and it is a loss 
of a dream that many may never again have the chance to achieve for the 
rest of their lives.
  Further, the decline of the housing market has pulled our economy to 
the brink of recession. Our Nation has lost some 260,000 jobs since 
January of this year, and economic growth slowed in the first quarter 
of 2008 to less than 1 percent.
  The reality is that many Americans long ago entered their own 
personal recessions. And the legislation before us today finally begins 
to provide the aid that our Nation's families so urgently need to get 
back on their feet.
  Together, these pieces of legislation will do the following:
  Provide mortgage refinancing assistance to keep families from losing 
their homes and protect the values of neighboring homes; expand FHA 
assistance so that borrowers in danger of losing their homes can 
refinance into lower-cost, government-insured mortgages they can afford 
to repay; and provide States $10 billion in additional tax-exempt bond 
authority in 2008 to refinance subprime loans and refinance the 
building of affordable and rental housing.
  I applaud Chairman Frank and Chairwoman Waters for their determined 
leadership and for these great pieces of legislation, and I urge the 
adoption of each of these measures.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on 
each side?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Holden). The gentleman from Washington 
has 13\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from Florida has 
12\1/2\ minutes remaining.

                          ____________________