[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8016-8025]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENTS TO H.R. 3221, 
                   FORECLOSURE PREVENTION ACT OF 2008

  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on 
Rules, I call up House Resolution 1175 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1175

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 
     3221) moving the United States toward greater energy 
     independence and security, developing innovative new 
     technologies, reducing carbon emissions, creating green jobs, 
     protecting consumers, increasing clean renewable energy 
     production, and modernizing our energy infrastructure, and to 
     amend the Internal

[[Page 8017]]

     Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for the 
     production of renewable energy and energy conservation, with 
     the Senate amendments thereto, and to consider in the House, 
     without intervention of any point of order except those 
     arising under clause 10 of rule XXI, a motion offered by the 
     chairman of the Committee on Financial Services or his 
     designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment to the 
     text with each of the three amendments printed in the report 
     of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. The 
     Senate amendments and the motion shall be considered as read. 
     The motion shall be debatable for three hours, with two hours 
     equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Financial Services and 
     one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     motion to its adoption without intervening motion except that 
     the Chair shall divide the question among each of the three 
     House amendments.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of the motion specified in the first 
     section of this resolution, a motion that the House concur in 
     the Senate amendment to the title shall be considered as 
     adopted.
       Sec. 3.  During consideration of the motion to concur 
     pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 
     the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 
     consideration of the motion to such time as may be designated 
     by the Speaker.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Vermont is recognized for 
1 hour.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I 
yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Sessions). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I also 
ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in 
which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1175.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Vermont?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1175 provides for 
consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 3221, the American 
Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008.
  The rule makes in order a motion by the chairman of the Committee on 
Financial Services, Mr. Frank, to concur in the Senate amendments with 
three House amendments. The rule provides 3 hours of debate on the 
motion, with 2 hours controlled by the Committee on Financial Services 
and 1 hour controlled by the Committee on Ways and Means. The rule also 
provides for a division of the question on the adoption of the three 
House amendments listed in the Rules Committee report.
  Mr. Speaker, I think we all know why this rule and the underlying 
bill are so important. Millions of Americans are confronting the 
growing prospect of losing their home. Hundreds of thousands, if not 
millions, have already lost their home in a foreclosure epidemic that 
is the legacy of the subprime mortgage crisis.
  According to recent reports, the most severe real estate recession in 
decades is going to continue to weigh down the economy, the pace of 
foreclosures is going to continue to rise, and homes continue to lose 
their value at increasing rates. This foreclosure epidemic has spread 
to virtually every major city in the United States.
  What the Committee on Financial Services has done here is brought us 
a bill that addresses this problem directly. It's not a bill that 
intends to lay blame. There is plenty of that to go around. It's a bill 
that's intended to solve a problem.
  Here are some of the sobering facts about the problem:
  The number of homes entering foreclosure in the first 3 months this 
year was double the same period as last year.
  One in every 194 homes received a foreclosure filing in the first 
quarter of this year.
  And home prices are down, on average, 12.7 percent, which is 
basically the first time that's happened since the Great Depression in 
the early 1930s.
  As the foreclosure trends intensify, the problem can only get worse. 
As foreclosure signs go up in neighborhoods, the value of the property 
in that neighborhood declines, even if the creditworthiness and the 
ability to pay of the homeowner is as strong as ever.

                              {time}  1530

  Mr. Speaker, this legislation is about, as I mentioned, solving a 
problem. It creates opportunity for the lenders and the mortgage 
servicers to minimize their loss; it provides an opportunity for 
homeowners to stay in their homes, but it shares the pain as well as 
the opportunity. In order for lenders to take advantage of the 
opportunity presented in this bill, they are going to have to write 
down the value of the loan consistent with the current appraisal value. 
In order for homeowners to have an opportunity to participate in this 
program, they are going to have to give up the equity that they thought 
they had, including any moneys they had paid in downpayments.
  House Resolution 1175 provides for the consideration of three House 
amendments to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3221, the American Housing 
Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008.
  Amendment No. 1 includes H.R. 5830 regarding the FHA refinancing, 
H.R. 1852 regarding FHA modernization, H.R. 1427 regarding government-
sponsored entity reform, those being Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and 
H.R. 1066 regarding community development investments, among other 
bills. Each piece of legislation in this amendment has already been 
passed by the House so we are really going over work that this entire 
body has considered before, or it has been rigorously debated and 
amended through the committee process in Financial Services and Ways 
and Means.
  Amendment No. 2 includes H.R. 5720, the Housing Assistance Tax Act of 
2008 under which middle-class families would be eligible for a loan of 
up to $7,500 toward the purchase of a new home, and homeowners filing 
jointly would receive an additional deduction from their property taxes 
of $700. States will also receive a temporary increase in low-income 
housing tax credits and $10 billion of additional tax exempt bond 
authority for low-interest loans to build low-income rental housing and 
to refinance certain subprime mortgages.
  One of the underlying causes of the subprime crisis was that more and 
more Americans who wanted to rent couldn't and had to get themselves 
housing by getting into loans they couldn't afford.
  Amendment No. 3 is a bipartisan amendment offered by Congressman 
Miller and Congressman LaTourette regarding the preemption of State 
laws regulating foreclosure.
  The centerpiece of this legislation is H.R. 5830, the FHA 
Stabilization and Homeownership Retention Act included in amendment No. 
1. That bill would enact a voluntary program, voluntary, for homeowners 
and lenders, and I emphasize voluntary, nothing is being forced on 
anyone except the opportunity to work this out. The process would begin 
with a homeowner or servicer of an existing eligible loan with an FHA-
approved lender, and the FHA-approved lender would then determine the 
size of the loan that meets the requirements of the program and that 
the borrower could reasonably repay. The plan targets a group of 
homeowners who would be able to stay in their homes if they had a 
reduction in principal and monthly servicing charges.
  The Congressional Budget Office says that this legislation could save 
500,000 mortgages from foreclosure. Other estimates put that number 
much higher, at over a million.
  Just as important as keeping Americans in their homes, this 
legislation protects American taxpayers. The government's liability 
under this program is limited and only applies if a borrower defaults 
and the amount recovered in foreclosure is below the outstanding debt 
still owed. This is a program that will be paid for largely by the 
folks participating in it and benefiting from this option as an 
alternative to foreclosure, and that is through a series of financing 
and copayments that will be assessed at the

[[Page 8018]]

time of closing as the life of the loan continues through fees for a 
period of about 5 years.
  There are going to be about $300 billion made available under this 
bill for guarantees, but the CBO scored the legislation as having an 
outside risk to taxpayers of about $2.4 billion. And I would like to 
have my colleagues think about that for a moment in the context of the 
$29 billion that was made available to back the rescue of the 
investment banks when Bear Stearns collapsed.
  The biggest cost to the taxpayer would be to let the economy unravel, 
to let neighborhoods decay, and to let thousands if not millions of 
homes go into foreclosure.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5830 and other critical parts of this legislation 
provides an avenue to stability, to restoring economic stability to our 
neighborhoods, to our working families in this country, and to our 
lenders. We all thank the excellent leadership of the Committee on 
Financial Services and the Committee on Ways and Means for working 
together, Republicans and Democrats, to bring this legislation to the 
floor for consideration.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from Vermont for 
yielding me this time to discuss the proposed rule for consideration of 
this omnibus package of legislation being returned from the Senate.
  On behalf of the Republican Conference, Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong 
opposition to this closed rule and to this entirely closed process 
which is being manipulated for the sole purpose of silencing 430 
Members of Congress and denying the Republican minority a motion to 
recommit.
  I want every single Member to understand what today's vote really 
does mean. It means a vote for this rule is going to give only Ways and 
Means Chairman Charles Rangel, Financial Services Chairman Barney 
Frank, and Speaker  Nancy Pelosi the opportunity to determine the shape 
of this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, that means that for anyone who is tuning in to watch 
today's debate on C-SPAN who is not sitting in Harlem, New York City; 
New Bedford, Massachusetts; or San Francisco, California, your vote is 
being silenced by the new majority's rule.
  A vote for this rule is also a vote to once again break the Democrat 
leadership's numerous campaign promises to provide this House with 
regular order, including the bare minimum that can be done to protect 
minority rights through the inclusion of a Republican substitute.
  I wish I could say that this disavowal of last year's campaign 
promises is precedent setting. Unfortunately, breaking these promises 
to the House and to the American people has become all too common in 
what has officially become the ``most closed Congress in history.''
  What is precedent setting about this rule is that it directly 
contradicts the past statements of the chairman of the Committee on 
Financial Services, Chairman Frank, who prior to today's rule had an 
unblemished record of at least asking for his party leadership and the 
Rules Committee to stick to their word.
  In the past Rules Committee hearings, Chairman Frank has advocated 
allowing this House to debate amendments:
  (1) where there is a genuine issue of public policy;
  (2) that allow for debate of a significant issue; and
  (3) when amendments are germane and not duplicative.
  Despite the fact that the broken promises Democrat majority made it 
clear that no amendments, not even significant, genuine, germane and 
unique ones would be considered by this House, 10 Republicans brought 
amendments to the Rules Committee that would have met each and every 
one of these prior requirements.
  Unsurprisingly, all of these thoughtful amendments were summarily 
denied by the Rules Committee last night in what might well be renamed 
the ``Graveyard of Good Ideas Committee'' in the House of 
Representatives.
  So despite the fact that there is no policy reason for completely 
shutting down the legislative process and even going so far as denying 
the minority a basic motion to recommit in moving this unvetted omnibus 
through the House, the Democrat majority has once again taken the path 
of least political resistance. And in doing so, they have again 
diminished this institution and the rights of the overwhelming Members 
who have a privilege to serve in this body.
  Because the Republican Members of this House overwhelmingly oppose 
this lock-down rule that denies our party any substantive input into 
this process, including any amendments from a taxpayer bailout that may 
or may not solve the problems that it claims to, I have a number of 
Members who are interested in speaking up against this rule. I plan to 
save the majority of my time for them to provide their own thoughts on 
the shortcomings of this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, this is the most important issue 
facing the American people today, and it is so important that the 
American people are watching this debate to see, as we are focusing our 
energies on this and to also, Mr. Speaker, take a look at the other 
side and the unfortunate distractions. We are not dealing with the war 
supplemental here. We are dealing with the issue that is on the minds 
of the American people. The American people are hanging on by their 
fingernails to their houses. Millions of families are losing their 
homes. An average of 7,500 people every day in this country are filing 
for foreclosure on their homes. As we debate this bill in this one hour 
alone, there will be 875 people who will file for foreclosure in each 
hour we are debating. That is important, Mr. Speaker.
  There is nothing more important on the American people's minds than 
to do something that brings some reasonable end to this miserable 
nightmare we are in as a result of this mortgage-foreclosure issue.
  Millions of families are seeing their home values drop. Trillions of 
dollars of household wealth and property values have been lost. 
Homeowners now owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth, 
and the housing mortgage crisis has caused businesses to lay off 
workers. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost their jobs. This 
is what is at stake, Mr. Speaker.
  In terms of liquidity, we are in the worst economic times since the 
Great Depression, and that is why it is important that we lay this 
backdrop so the American people can see what we are doing to respond to 
this issue that is before us today in H.R. 5830 which is a very 
thoughtful, which is a very responsive response to this very, very 
serious issue. H.R. 5830, the FHA Housing Stabilization Homeownership 
Retention Act is the answer to this problem. I commend Chairman Barney 
Frank for having the foresight in our Committee on Financial Services 
to put it forward.
  Essentially what it does is it gives just $300 billion in authority, 
not cost, Mr. Speaker. It is very important because I know the other 
side is going to come and talk about a $300 billion bailout. This is a 
bail-in that is going to cost the American taxpayers just $2.7 billion 
that has been outlaid and scored by the Congressional Budget Office.
  Later in the debate we will explain exactly what these costs are. And 
what this bill will do, it will ensure a refinancing of loans for 
borrowers who are struggling to afford their current mortgages. 
Participation is voluntary. The mortgage holder would have to agree to 
a substantial reduction of the current loan's outstanding principal and 
provide new loans that that borrower can afford.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I yield the gentleman an additional 1\1/2\ 
minutes.
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. That is what is important here, Mr. Speaker. 
What we are seeing on our side as what is

[[Page 8019]]

critical is keeping people in their homes. And in order to do that, we 
are simply offering that we extend the FHA ability to authorize and 
simply place a guarantee of loans up to $300 billion which in fact is a 
$300 billion reinvestment in our economy. And again as I mentioned, the 
cost is only $2.7 billion.
  To help defray the government's cost and prevent unjust enrichments 
such as borrowers' flipping, the bill requires that the borrower shares 
with the government a substantial position of any profits from selling 
or refinancing homes.
  Mr. Speaker, I come from the State of Georgia which is suffering 
dramatically because of home foreclosures. The State of Georgia ranks 
number eight in home foreclosures.

                              {time}  1545

  It is at the top of my agenda to make sure that we bring some relief, 
certainly to the people of my beloved State of Georgia, but certainly 
the 13th District, which even has a greater preponderance of 
foreclosures because of the subprime mortgage meltdown. This is 
extremely important.
  And, Mr. Speaker, as I conclude, let me just say this point.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I will continue that point in the debate.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for 17 months this new Democrat majority 
has led this country down their pathway of what they want, higher 
taxes, more spending, which has resulted in the gasoline crisis that we 
have today by cutting off supplies that would come to make America 
energy independent. And here we are now with a housing crisis. After 
all the years that we've had a growing economy, no wonder our country's 
in trouble. The new Democrat majority has taken over.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from San Dimas, 
California, the ranking member of the Rules Committee, Mr. Dreier.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, and I want 
to begin by saying that I agree with many of the points that my dear 
friend from Atlanta, Mr. Scott, has made. He has put forth some very 
thoughtful arguments. And he is absolutely right. He comes from 
Georgia. I come from California. We're in the midst of a very serious 
housing crisis. In fact, the foreclosure issue is one that has impacted 
my State of California, and I know it has impacted Georgia and other 
segments of the economy.
  But I have to say, as I listened to my friend's remarks, I was really 
struck with the fact that he failed, Mr. Speaker, he failed to look at 
the overall picture. It is true, there are Americans who are hurting. 
But to describe the economic challenges that we face today as the worst 
economic times since the Great Depression is, at least, a slight 
exaggeration.
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DREIER. I would be happy to yield to my friend.
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. It has been made clear, my good friend from 
California, by the Federal Reserve, by noted economists from my beloved 
school of Wharton, as well as Harvard, that in terms of liquidity, we 
are in the worst times of depression.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if I could reclaim my time, let me recognize 
the gentleman did describe this as that.
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Liquidity.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the second point that he made, which I think 
is a very important one, is to say that this is the number one issue 
facing Americans.
  Now in the debate on the last rule, our friend from Pasco, Washington 
(Mr. Hastings) pointed to a survey that was done, I think it was a CNN 
survey or some other survey, in which they talked about the priority 
issues.
  Guess what issue number one is? Its the issue that our friend from 
Dallas was just talking about, gasoline prices. That happens to be, Mr. 
Speaker, the number one issue, and you have to go down the list to get 
to this as a priority issue.
  All I'm arguing, and I'm not saying that this isn't, Mr. Speaker, a 
very, very important issue. It impacts the people whom I'm honored to 
represent here in a very negative way. But what needs to be recognized 
is, we have to look at where we are. We had anemic growth the last 
quarter, six-tenths of 1 percent. What that means is that while we may 
be possibly at the beginning of an economic recession, while we had 
anemic growth, it was not negative growth, which it takes, as my 
friend, Wharton-educated, has just pointed out, two quarters of 
negative economic growth for us to be in the midst of an economic 
recession. That is not to in any way diminish, Mr. Speaker, the pain 
that so many of our fellow Americans are feeling at this point.
  Now let me just say about this issue. The President of the United 
States very much wants, as he said to Republican Members today, to have 
a bill that he can sign. And I've just spoken with my very good friend, 
the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, who last night 
in the Rules Committee came forward with a very thoughtful alternative. 
That alternative focuses on strengthening a number of the very 
important existing programs that we have. They include, reform of the 
Federal Housing Administration, FHA reform legislation which we've 
worked on; the government-sponsored enterprises, GSE reform, very, very 
important; the FHA secure program; Hope Now. There are a wide range of 
programs that are out there.
  And we've regularly encouraged our constituents who are facing the 
challenge of foreclosure to call that 800 number that has been put 
forward, because I know full well, from having spoken with many 
lenders, there is a desire not to take back these homes. My friend from 
Atlanta was absolutely right when he closed his statement by saying 
that the priority is to make sure that these Americans are able to stay 
in their homes. We want to make sure that they stay in their homes.
  And guess what? To the surprise of many, these lenders don't want to 
take these homes backs. They don't want the responsibility of being 
saddled with them. And so the issue of forbearance is something that I 
know for a fact lenders want to engage in with these borrowers.
  But as my friend from Dallas has pointed out very well, we have 
before us a structure which is very unfortunate. Yes, we know we went 
through the committee process. We know that we have seen a very fair 
process by the chairman of the Financial Services Committee. But, 
unfortunately, what we're doing here is taking up a Senate amendment.
  So while tomorrow, if we consider this wartime supplemental, for the 
first time ever we are going to be completely ignoring the committee 
process, the subcommittee, committee process. And, of course, we'll 
look at the prospect of taking a shell bill here and denying the 
minority an opportunity for a motion to recommit. That's why so many 
members of the Appropriations Committee have been here demonstrating 
their outrage on this process. But on this bill what we're bypassing is 
floor consideration of the measure because we're simply taking a Senate 
amendment.
  Now what does that do, Mr. Speaker? Just as the proposed plan to deal 
with the supplemental appropriations bill, it denies the members of the 
minority a right to offer that very important cherished motion to 
recommit.
  And so I have to say, Mr. Speaker, I'm very, very troubled with this 
process, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Al Green).
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I thank the gentleman for yielding the time. 
I'd like to thank the chairman, Barney Frank, for this outstanding 
piece of legislation.
  Let me quickly say that Hope Now is good, which is what my friend 
referenced. Hope Now is good. However, help now is better.
  We didn't give Penn Central hope now. We gave Penn Central a $7 
billion bailout. Lockheed Martin got a $250 million bailout. Franklin 
National Bank, $1.7 billion bailout. Chrysler, $1.5 billion bailout. 
Continental Illinois,

[[Page 8020]]

$4.5 billion bailout. Farm Credit System, $4 billion bailout. First 
Republic, $1 billion bailout. Major airlines, $5 billion bailout. Steel 
companies, $7 billion bailout. And Bear Stearns, if we talk about the 
bare facts, $29 billion, plus a $13 billion loan through J.P. Morgan, 
which makes a total of $42 billion, if we talk about the bare facts.
  This is a good piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker. This piece of 
legislation is voluntary, as has been indicated. But more importantly, 
it is a guarantee, not a loan. It does allow FHA to guarantee loans, 
about $300 billion, and that's going to help a lot of families to stay 
in homes. But it will also help this economy.
  This economy is right now in a credit crisis. And in this credit 
crisis we've got to realize that there is interconnectivity. There's an 
interconnectedness, that we are living in a world wherein we are 
related to each another in a certain way. In this crisis, Mr. Speaker, 
when one home in a community has a for sale sign up, it impacts other 
homes in the community. It impacts the tax base of the community. It 
impacts the lives of children who are going to school in the community. 
So this piece of legislation will help us to keep people in their 
homes, but it will help to maintain the community. We sleep in houses 
and live in neighborhoods. This legislation helps neighborhoods.
  I would also add that flippers don't benefit because you have to be a 
resident of the property. The government maintains a lien on the 
property. And there's an amendment in this bill, the Watt-Velazquez-
Green amendment, which will help those persons who are being evicted, 
who happen to be tenants. Many persons who have their rent paid, their 
rent is paid, but they're being evicted because the owner of the 
property was foreclosed on. This amendment will help them to stay in 
their homes.
  I ask that my colleagues please support this amendment, and please 
remember that we bailed out a lot of companies in this country. This is 
a hand up for a lot of people who are suffering and who may lose their 
homes, others who have their rent paid but who are about to be evicted.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 5 
minutes to the gentleman from Alabama, the ranking member of the 
committee, Mr. Bachus.
  Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Vermont, who is leading 
the debate of the opposition, I would like to appeal to the gentleman 
from Vermont.
  Our constituents today are under a lot of stress because of the high 
cost of energy, gasoline prices, heating bills this winter. And 
Vermont, and I congratulate Vermont. Seventy-three percent of their 
electricity is powered by nuclear energy. Seventy-three percent. That 
compares to 19 percent in all other States. So I congratulate y'all.
  Nuclear energy is a source of very cheap energy, very cheap 
electricity. It could really wean us off our dependency on foreign oil. 
I would appeal to the Vermont delegation, both Mr. Sanders, Senator 
Sanders, yourself, we need more nuclear power plants. And we would just 
urge our representatives from Vermont to stop voting ``no'' and 
allowing other States to have a source of low-cost energy. So just on a 
personal basis, I'd appeal to you.
  Now we find ourselves in a very serious situation, a crisis--it's not 
too strong a word--in America. We have high food prices. We have high 
energy prices. And many of our citizens are under stress in paying 
their mortgages. Fifty-four million American families make a mortgage 
payment each month. An additional 34 million American families make a 
rent payment every month. I would say that a great percentage of those 
are under stress. There's 25 million Americans who own their own home 
or don't have a mortgage, and some of them are under stress.
  Now we all agree that foreclosures are serious. They're bad for the 
community. But we fundamentally disagree in how we address the problem. 
I, for one, most of my colleagues, say let's not take from the 34 
million American families who are renting, let's not take their tax 
dollars. Let's not take from the 51 million American families who are 
paying a mortgage payment. Many of them struggling under high gas 
prices, high food prices. Let's not take from those other 25 million 
American families who don't have a mortgage on their home, let's not 
take from them and reward lenders who unwisely extended credit, because 
that's what this bill is about. It's not about benefiting borrowers 
because the guarantee doesn't go to borrowers. It goes to lenders.
  Three years ago we started an effort to rein in subprime lending 
abuses, and the lenders came before us and they lobbied and they killed 
our efforts to bring some structure and some control over the mortgage 
market. They said, thanks but no thanks. You stay out.
  But, now, now that the chickens have come home to roost, they've come 
back in and said, bail us out. And they're turning to 110 million 
American families and saying, we need $300 billion. These are 
speculators. Many of them speculated. Many of them are investors on 
Wall Street who bought high-risk, high-yield, structured investment 
vehicles containing these mortgages. And now they're saying, we're in 
trouble. And they're saying, we want to offload these bad loans on to 
the government.
  And we'll decide today whether we take from 110 million American 
families, take their hard-earned money, and we bail out these lenders 
and these speculators, many of which are guilty of criminal, fraudulent 
acts. They trapped people into these loans, and when the loans have 
become illiquid, they've asked for the taxpayers to come in and stand 
behind it.
  This program is, and y'all have said to us, or you have said, it's a 
voluntary program. Absolutely, it's voluntary. The lender can choose 
which loans he offloads on the Federal Government. Which loans will he 
offload? He'll offload his bad loans. He'll offload the very worst of 
the loans.

                              {time}  1600

  And the American taxpayers, those I represent who are making those 
rent payments, who are making those mortgage payments, and don't assume 
that those 51 million American families who are making their mortgage 
payment, don't assume they're not under stress. When you say, We're 
going to share the pain, why would you ask a renter or an American 
family that's paying their bills to share the pain? They have enough 
pain.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I will be happy to engage my 
good friend from Alabama and both of us go to the Department of 
Justice, the SEC and begin to file legal action against the 
unscrupulous investors on Wall Street who took these mortgages knowing 
that they had a cheap deal. If he will join me, we will walk down to 
the Department of Justice right now to get the Attorney General to 
begin filing major litigation against these scandalous, unscrupulous 
individuals, if that's what he would like to do.
  But right now on the floor of the House we have major legislation 
that is going to address the question of the suffering of Americans. 
And I'm going to take this brief opportunity to acknowledge the bill 
sponsored by my good friend and colleague, Congresswoman Waters, on 
H.R. 5818. We've passed the rule, but I want to support the underlying 
premise that once we get through with the major reconstruction, that 
the bill that we are now discussing and the rule that we're now 
discussing, we will have $15 billion to go into these communities and 
be able to buy back these properties and to take them off of the 
streets and to make sure that low-income individuals that need 
affordable houses, families that are broken because of the foreclosure 
scandal will be able to get back into their community. This is good 
legislation.
  Now, as we move forward on the FHA stabilization on the Senate 
amendments that we're now discussing, the American Housing Rescue and 
Foreclosure Prevention Act, let us put this

[[Page 8021]]

in the right perspective. We lost 20,000 jobs in April. We have the 
bailouts of corporate America everywhere you can see. Airlines are 
merging, Bear Stearns got $42 billion or more to bail them out, and yet 
my good friends on the other side of the aisle are not interested in 
having us do things that the President wants us to do.
  He wants us to have, if you will, the government sponsored enterprise 
reform. He wants us to fix Freddie Mac. He wants us to fix Fannie Mae. 
He wants to make sure that we provide for disabled veterans. He wants 
us to be able to invest in the important housing matters, and he wants 
to make sure that we put Americans back in their houses and put them 
right side up.
  We're not in a recession; we're moving towards a 1929 depression. And 
I don't know why the other side cannot wake up. This is a good rule for 
a good bill.
  As we make this march toward passing this legislation, I hope that we 
will also include that those who have lost good credit ratings because 
they suffered a foreclosure will be able to get back into the good 
credit rating by being eligible for these programs. Let us not punish 
those that fell victim to foreclosure because of unscrupulous practices 
that we're fighting against and their credit score went down to keep 
them from getting another house. Let's make sure we work that out. That 
is an idea and an amendment that I have, and I look forward to working 
with the committee so that as we move forward, we can get this done.
  Again, if you can bail out Tom, Dick and Harry, you can at least bail 
out Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Smith and Mr. Garcia, because these are the 
hardworking Americans. I stand with them.
  Let them stand with the big, rich guys all the time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 1175, the Rule Providing 
for Consideration of H.R. 3221, the ``American Housing Rescue and 
Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008.''
  I am pleased to support this much needed Housing and Urban 
Development legislation, to help States purchase and rehabilitate 
foreclosed homes to stabilize as many properties as possible.
  All Americans--homeowners, lenders, communities--indeed our entire 
economy is worse off when a foreclosure occurs and when significant 
quantities of homes are foreclosed in a short amount of time.
  H.R. 3221 responds directly to the current crisis facing middle class 
Americans while providing the tools to prevent a repeat of these 
problems. Modernizing the FHA and reforming the Government Sponsored 
Entities, GSEs, will provide crucial liquidity to our mortgage markets 
now, and also strengthen regulation and oversight for the future.
  This legislation will begin to repair not bailout the economy, 
restoring confidence in the markets, limiting the damage to families 
and neighborhoods, and rejuvenating the communities with new affordable 
housing.


                                 Texas

  There are five steps in the foreclosure process: Step 1: delinquency; 
Step 2: Notice to cure, where the lender notifies borrower of 
delinquency and gives him 20 days to amend the problem; Step 3: Default 
notice and posting--in Texas, foreclosure sales occur on the first 
Tuesday of the month; Step 4: Foreclosure sale--if borrower is unable 
to cure default, the property is sold; and Step 5: Active foreclosure.
  While there are five steps there are only two stages: Preforeclosure 
and active foreclosure. In looking at those two stages we see where 
Texas stands. Last year, Texas ranks fourth behind California, Florida, 
and Illinois in preforeclosures. Active foreclosures are foreclosed 
properties sold at auction and now in the lenders' real estate owned 
accounts. Texas held the top seat in 2007 for active foreclosures. 
While being number one is something Texans usually strive for, in this 
case we'd prefer to be much farther down the list.
  Texas reported 13,829 properties entering some stage of foreclosure 
in April, a 16 percent increase from the previous month and the most 
foreclosure filings reported by any State. The State documented the 
Nation's third highest State combined foreclosure rate--one foreclosure 
filing for every 582 households.
  Dallas County documented the most new foreclosure filings of any 
county in the region and a foreclosure rate of one foreclosure filing 
for every 320 households, an 18 percent increase from the previous 
month.


                      Texas and what HUD is Doing

  In March, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, 
announced the Texas State Program and the cities of Houston and New 
Braunfels will receive a total of $234,868,077 to support community 
development and produce more affordable housing. HUD's annual funding 
will also provide downpayment assistance to first-time homebuyers; 
assist individuals and families who might otherwise be living on the 
streets; and offer real housing solutions for individuals with HIV/
AIDS.
  The funding announced includes: Community Development Block Grant 
(CDBG) funds; HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) funding; American 
Dream Down payment assistance; Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG); and, 
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA).


                              Amendment I

  Title I--The FHA Housing Stabilization and Homeownership Retention 
Act--Creates a voluntary FHA program to provide mortgage refinancing 
assistance to allow families to stay in their homes, protect 
neighborhoods, and help stabilize the housing market.
  Program--if the current lender agrees to take a substantial write 
down on the existing mortgage, the FHA lender will pay off the current 
lender and issue to the borrower a new FHA-insured mortgage at that 
lower amount.
  Profit-sharing--to help defray the Government's costs and prevent 
unjust enrichment, e.g., borrower flipping, will require the borrower 
to share with the Government a substantial portion of any profits from 
selling or refinancing the house.
  No speculators--only owner-occupied primary residences will qualify 
for the program, which also contains protections to exclude persons who 
have committed mortgage fraud.
  Risk reduction--to further protect the Government: The FHA will 
charge higher fees to build up a loss reserve; the new FHA loan will 
substantially reduce the borrower's monthly payments, thus reducing 
default and foreclosure risk; and in addition to other underwriting 
requirements, riskier borrowers must make at least 6 months of payments 
at the new rate before closing on the new FHA mortgage.
  Sunset--program expires in 2 years (with possible 6-month extensions 
not to exceed 2 years).
  Additional provisions--creates an Office of Housing Counseling within 
HUD and authorizes additional FBI and DOJ funds to combat mortgage 
fraud.


                      Title II--FHA Modernization

  Loan limits--makes permanent the temporary FHA loan limit increases 
in the economic stimulus bill, setting FHA limits at the lower of (a) 
125 percent of the local area median home price, or (b) 175 percent of 
the nationwide GSE conforming limit.
  Fee protections for lower income and lower credit borrowers--directs 
HUD to serve borrowers with slightly higher credit risk, raises fees to 
cover the additional risk, and provides for a refund if borrower makes 
5 years of on-time payments.
  Reverse mortgages--expands FHA reverse mortgage loan program by 
authorizing a nationwide loan limit equal to 132 percent of the current 
GSE conforming loan limit; capping and reducing loan origination fees; 
and adding consumer protections.
  FHA personal property manufactured home loans--modernizes and 
rejuvenates the FHA manufactured loan program for personal property 
manufactured homes.
  FHA condo and manufactured home loans--makes changes to rules to make 
these loans more flexible, while retaining basic underwriting 
protections.
  Maximum FHA loan term--extends the maximum FHA term from 35 to 40 
years.
  Integrity of appraisals--strengthens protections against inflated 
appraisals, authorizing penalties on parties to FHA loans who 
improperly try to influence appraisal values.
  Borrowers lacking sufficient credit history--creates a pilot program 
for credit-worthy borrowers that lack a credit history through the 
normal credit reporting process.
  Downpayment simplification--Simplifies the basic FHA downpayment 
calculation, while generally preserving the current FHA loan to value, 
LTV, levels.
  Foreclosed FHA multifamily properties--preserves the affordability of 
such properties, by requiring FHA to use accurate appraisals reflecting 
the cost of rehabilitating the units.


        Title III--Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE) Reform

  Includes the House-passed bill to reform prudential and mission 
oversight of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the 12 Federal Home Loan 
Banks (the ``GSEs'').
  Strong independent regulator--brings GSEs under a single independent 
regulator with broad safety and soundness powers, including 
conservatorship and receivership authority.
  Enhanced housing mission--enhances Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's 
housing mission through improvements in targeting of their

[[Page 8022]]

affordable housing goals and duties in underserved markets.
  New affordable housing fund--establishes a new affordable housing 
fund modeled on the Affordable Housing Programs of the Federal Home 
Loan Banks.
  Increased loan limits--makes permanent the increases in conforming 
loan limits included in the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008. Limits in 
high cost areas would be set based on area, rather than national 
prices, with conforming loan limits for each area set at 125 percent of 
the local area median, capped at 175 percent of the national median.


     Title IV--Castle/Kanjorski Facilitation of Loan Modifications

  H.R. 5579, The Emergency Loan Modification Act of 2008, adopted by 
the Financial Services Committee on April 23, 2008:
  Provides clarity for servicers, consistent with existing servicing 
contracts, about their duties when making loan modifications for 
troubled mortgages.
  Provides protection from investor lawsuits to servicers who make 
specified long-term loan modifications.
  Does not limit other loss mitigation efforts by servicers, and does 
not prevent borrowers from pursuing claims against lenders, services, 
or others involved in the mortgage process.


               Title V--Miscellaneous Housing Provisions

  Protecting disabled veterans in bankruptcy from discrimination--
ensures that a governmental unit that has a mortgage loan program may 
not deny a disabled veteran the benefits of such program because the 
veteran is or was a bankruptcy debtor. The Bankruptcy Code currently 
prohibits various forms of discrimination against bankruptcy debtors by 
governmental units and others, including a denial of a student grant, 
loan, loan guarantee, or loan insurance to someone because he or she is 
or was a bankruptcy debtor.
  Public welfare investments--the bill broadens the types of 
permissible public welfare investments for national and state member 
banks, restoring the pre-2006 standard for eligible types of affordable 
housing and community and economic development investments. It also 
grants thrifts similar authority to make public welfare investments of 
up to 15 percent of their capital and surplus.


                              Amendment 3

  Brad Miller-LaTourette Amendment--affirms the right of States to 
prevent abusive foreclosure practices and to establish rules concerning 
the foreclosure process by clarifying that this Act, the National Bank 
Act and the Home Owner's Loan Act do not preempt State laws regulating 
the foreclosure of residential real property or the treatment of 
foreclosed property.


                               Conclusion

  Thank you, Madam Speaker, for your leadership in this area, I urge my 
colleagues to support H. Res. 1175 providing for consideration of H.R. 
3221.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, my good friends on the other side need 
to bone up on their language, I believe. A recession is confirmed when 
there are two quarters where the economy is down. We have not even 
reached that point yet, and yet already we find out on the floor that 
the Democrat Party is willing to say we're in a complete crash equal to 
1929. My gosh. Let's at least tell the American people the truth.
  We can get over the problems that we have in this country, but let's 
not make things worse than what they already are. Let's not lie to the 
American people. Let's tell them the truth. Let's provide leadership. 
Let's show them the right way. Let's have an open bill. Let's get the 
things done that need to be done.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SESSIONS. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Were you referring to my remarks? I have 
great respect for the gentleman. I assume that he was not suggesting 
that I am a liar.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I did not suggest that at all.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I would appreciate not having the words 
drawn down, but I am yielding to the gentleman to just correct the 
record.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I will be point blank to the gentlewoman. The 
gentlewoman said, We are headed to a recession like 1929.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. But are you calling me a liar?
  Mr. SESSIONS. And that is not a true statement.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Well, I am just asking you if you are calling me a 
liar. If the gentleman will yield.
  Mr. SESSIONS. It's not a true statement.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Is the gentleman calling me a liar on the 
floor of the House?
  Mr. SESSIONS. We have not blown through any sort of recession.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Is the gentleman calling me a liar?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Baldwin). The gentleman will suspend. 
The gentlewoman will suspend.
  The gentleman from Texas controls the time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman yield for a parliamentary 
inquiry?
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, the American people are fair 
people. And they expect their representatives to remain cognizant of 
and reflect that fairness in all actions.
  This House has moved from fairness, from deliberation and from proper 
recognition that would allow all Members the opportunity to actively 
represent their constituents to repeated tyranny of the Majority. Madam 
Speaker, there is a crisis of leadership by this majority.
  Every person in America has the right to have his or her voice heard. 
No Member of Congress should be silenced on the floor guaranteeing that 
the voices of the people are heard.
  Do you recognize those words, Madam Speaker? You should, for they are 
yours. And they're being violated.
  The minority possesses their equal rights, which equal law must 
protect and to violate would be oppression. Recognize those words, 
Madam Speaker? You should. They were spoken by Thomas Jefferson and 
quoted by you and they are being violated. Why? It's either political 
expediency or a broken promise, one or the other, neither of which the 
American people support because they are a fair people.
  Madam Speaker, I submitted four thoughtful, substantive amendments 
which deserve the consideration of all 435 Members of this house. But 
they were denied that opportunity by this restrictive and unfair 
process. Madam Speaker, the American people understand that the rules 
aren't rules if you follow them only when you want to. Democrats 
promise to use fair and open rules for everything, but they're breaking 
rules and they're breaking promises to the American people.
  I urge the Speaker and the majority to be true to their word. Stop 
playing politics. Stop breaking promises. Allow the Members of this 
House to represent their constituents. What idea, what amendment is so 
scary that it couldn't be considered on this floor? I call on my 
colleagues not to destroy the very fiber of our representative 
democracy.
  Vote ``no'' on this rule so that we may have an open and fair debate. 
The American people deserve no less.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for 
his leadership on this very important rule, and I rise in strong 
support of the rule and for the underlying bill, a housing stimulus 
package that will provide real relief for struggling homeowners and 
will bring certainty to the markets.
  We are at a critical juncture in the subprime mortgage crisis. All of 
the data we have clearly demonstrate the severity of the problem. We 
have seen the perfect storm of stagnant wages, rising mortgage 
payments, and decreased home values, all of which have led to a record 
level of delinquencies and foreclosures. One recent study by the Pew 
Charitable Trust has found that one in two New York homeowners is 
projected to face foreclosure, primarily in the next 2 years, due to 
the subprime crisis.
  This same study documents the ripple effect this crisis is having on 
our

[[Page 8023]]

entire economy. Their analysis found that 52 percent of all homeowners 
will likely feel the ripple effect of foreclosures from the subprime 
loan crisis. Communities are negatively affected as foreclosures drive 
down home prices overall, diminishing homeowners' equity in entire 
neighborhoods. Costs also accrue to our local government in the form of 
lost tax revenue and direct expenses for securing, policing, and 
disposing of abandoned properties.
  This is why this housing stimulus package is so terribly important. 
This is a well-crafted package which includes an expanded FHA Refinance 
Program totaling $300 billion. This voluntary program would permit FHA 
to provide up to $300 billion in new guarantees to help refinance at-
risk borrowers into viable mortgages.
  The only way we are going to solve this problem is through a multi-
prong strategy. We have fully engaged the regulators, industry is 
working with homeowners; but we also need sound public policy that 
allows for many of these unaffordable subprime loans to be refinanced 
into viable mortgages homeowners can afford.
  Another key part of this package includes the FHA and GSE 
modernization bills which we have already passed in this House but has 
yet to pass the Senate. The FHA bill will modernize the program opening 
it up to new homeowners and providing opportunities for long-term fixed 
mortgages. The modernized FHA will be the new financing option of many 
previous subprime borrowers, and it will be done in a way to ensure 
borrowers are receiving viable and affordable loans. The GSE bill will 
provide for a strong dependent regulator for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae 
and the 12 Federal home loan banks.
  Again, this is a well-crafted package. I ask permission to revise and 
extend to include all of the important parts of this package.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on this underlying bill.
  I rise in support of a housing stimulus package that will provide 
real relief for struggling homeowners and will bring certainty to the 
markets.
  We are at a critical juncture in the subprime mortgage crisis. All of 
the data we have clearly demonstrates the severity of the problem.
  We have seen the perfect storm of stagnant wages, rising mortgage 
payments and decreased home values. All of which have led to a record 
level of delinquencies and foreclosures.
  One recent study by the Pew Charitable Trust has found that one in 32 
New York homeowners is projected to face foreclosure, primarily in the 
next two years, because of subprime loans.
  This same study documents the ripple effect this crisis is having on 
our entire economy. Their analysis found that 52% of all homeowners 
will likely feel the ripple effects of foreclosures from subprime 
loans.
  Communities are negatively affected as foreclosures drive down home 
prices overall, diminishing homeowners' equity in entire neighborhoods. 
Costs also accrue to local governments in the form of lost tax revenue 
and direct expenses for securing, policing and disposing of abandoned 
properties. That is why this housing stimulus package is so important.
  This is a well crafted package which includes an expanded FHA 
Refinance Program totaling $300 billion.
  This voluntary program would permit FHA to provide up to $300 billion 
in new guarantees to help refinance at-risk borrowers into viable 
mortgages.
  They only way we are going to solve this problem is through a multi-
prong strategy. We have fully engaged the regulators, industry is 
working with homeowners, but we also need sound public policy that 
allows for many of these unaffordable subprime loans to be refinanced 
into viable mortgages homeowners can afford.
  Another key part of this package includes the FHA and GSE 
modernization bills that we have already passed the House, but have yet 
to be passed by the Senate.
  The FHA bill will modernize the program opening it up to new 
homeowners and providing opportunities for long-term, fixed mortgages. 
The modernized FHA will be the new financing option of many previous 
subprime borrowers and it will be done in a way to ensure borrowers are 
receiving viable and affordable loans.
  The GSE bill will provide for a strong independent regulator for 
Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and the 12 Federal Homeloan Banks. It will also 
enhance Freddie and Fannie's mission to provide affordable housing. 
This bill will also make permanent the increased loan limits passed as 
part of the economic stimulus package. This increase is incredibly 
important in high-cost areas such as New York City in ensuring these 
products are available to our constituents.
  Again, this is a well crafted package and I urge my colleagues to 
support it.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer), a member of the Committee on 
Financial Services.
  Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, for nearly 35 years prior to coming to 
the United States Congress, I was involved in the housing business in 
one form or the other. I've built housing for sale, I've built housing 
for rent. And one of the things that you learn very quickly and housing 
and how to make sure that the American people have safe, affordable 
housing, whether it's to own that housing or to rent that housing is 
you have jobs and opportunity because when people, the American people 
have jobs and opportunity, they don't have trouble making their 
payments or making their rental payments.
  And so I would think that the 110 million people that are paying 
their rent or making their house payments today are wondering why this 
Congress is not down on the floor today debating an energy policy that 
lowers the cost of gasoline, that lowers the cost of electricity so 
that American families can have more money, so that they can have more 
money to pay on their rent or pay on their mortgage payment.
  But more importantly, they will wonder why we're not down on this 
floor talking about how we have a tax code in this country that 
promotes jobs and opportunity that allows small businesses to thrive 
and to create jobs. Small businesses are our number-one job creators. 
You know what? When people have jobs, they're able to make their 
mortgage payments. When people have jobs, they're able to make their 
rental payments.
  So it's frustrating to me and others to see we have a process today, 
as other Members have pointed out, that lock us out of the process. We 
swore in two new Members of Congress in the last 24 hours. 
Unfortunately, neither one of those gentlemen will be able to 
participate in this debate because they've been locked out of 
thoughtful consideration of this bill.
  Madam Speaker, we need to be down on this floor doing policy that 
will impact the American people. Fifty-one million Americans have a 
mortgage in this country, 94 percent of them are making their mortgage 
payments. The 110 million people that are scraping and making sure that 
they are a step up and make their payments, are wondering why we're 
down on the floor asking them to make the payments for those who can't.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott.)

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I just wanted to correct an 
item. I made the statement about us having the worst times since the 
Depression. I want to bear those facts out. So I want you to know that 
I am telling the truth.
  In this statement from the Joint Economic Committee, it says 
mortgages exceed equity in homes with falling housing prices. More than 
10 percent of homeowners now owe more on their mortgages than their 
homes are worth. Homeowners' debt on their houses exceeds their equity 
in their homes for the first time since 1945. In terms of liquidity, 
money in the marketplace, it is the worst time since the Depression.
  Now the important thing to understand as we move forward is to 
understand the seriousness of the condition. You bring up gas prices. 
We bring up food prices. We've got all of these problems, but today, 
the American people are expecting us to deal with the housing crisis.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.

[[Page 8024]]


  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Let us deal with the housing crisis. We've got 
several problems to deal with. And simply because we're dealing with 
the housing prices, you come down here and want to throw up the gas 
prices as if to say we've got to deal with that, then the other. We're 
going to deal with each of those items.
  But today, this day, we have housing bills that are on this floor, 
and we owe it to the respect of the American people to give it the 
integrity, to give this issue the respect and the seriousness that they 
demand of this House, and let us stop playing games.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).
  Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman for yielding and, Madam Speaker, 
I rise to speak in opposition to the rule.
  I was very disappointed that my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle couldn't resist the temptation to shut out all the Republican 
amendments during the debate on the rule. Like Chairman Frank did in 
the committee, calling up Republican amendments, they could have 
allowed at least one Republican amendment to be offered to this bill.
  Speaker Pelosi has said that the Democrats are advancing a New 
Direction for America. However, I would argue that denying House 
Republicans from offering any amendments to this bill is the wrong 
direction.
  Our voices have been silenced. It's a sad day when people who 
represent about half the population of the United States don't have the 
opportunity to bring solutions to the table during debate on this 
important issue. I hope that this wasn't a calculated maneuver for 
political gain.
  Congress is yet to send a single bill to the President that might 
begin to address the turbulence in the housing market, and I know that 
this is important. Ranking Member Bachus and I had planned to offer an 
amendment that contains cost-effective reforms that can start helping 
homeowners and the economy now.
  According to the Congressional Budget Office, our substitute 
amendment would decrease the deficit by $25 million over 10 years. 
Instead of outbidding each other on how much taxpayer funding should be 
spent on bailouts, House and Senate leaders should have chosen to move 
the good, commonsense, bipartisan ideas that are right in front of them 
in our amendment, and many have been passed before.
  The amendment represents the very best elements of housing reforms 
that Congress has been debating over the last several years and none of 
the bad ones. It includes FHA reform which alone could help an 
additional 250,000 homeowners refinance through the FHA Secure program.
  Our amendment would strengthen the national oversight of the GSEs, 
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as reform these entities.
  These reforms would infuse much needed liquidity into the flailing 
housing market.
  It would add funding for housing counseling; enhance appraisal 
standards; require mortgage originator registration; provide resources 
to crack down on mortgage fraud; enhance disclosure; and provide 
liability protection for lenders that help struggling homeowners to 
refinance and eventually repay their loans.
  It also provides returning veterans with foreclosure protection and 
temporarily raises loan limits on mortgages backed by the Department of 
Veterans Affairs.
  Notably absent from our amendment is a high price tag. That's because 
it doesn't reward speculators, fraudsters, or those who engaged in 
inappropriate or recklessly irresponsible behavior. Several components 
of our amendment, including FHA and GSE reform, already have passed in 
one or both Chambers.
  I understand that some--but not all--of our good provisions will be 
included in the Frank amendment. We need to break the logjam on these 
commonsense reforms. Counselors can help prevent foreclosures by 
guiding homeowners into a loan that best meets their budget and needs. 
And FHA and GSE reform will add much-needed liquidity to the market 
while providing more consumers with an alternative to bad, subprime 
loans.
  Most importantly for Chicago and other urban communities, our 
amendment addresses mortgage and appraisal fraud, which has skyrocketed 
in Chicago and devastated communities.
  I wish my colleagues could have had the opportunity to vote on our 
Republican commonsense, cost-effective substitute amendment. This could 
have been the bipartisan alternative to the bill we will vote on today, 
which is littered with controversial provisions.
  However, my colleagues from the other side of the aisle chose to shut 
out our clean alternative and shut out the voices of millions of 
Americans who want a cost-effective solution to jump-start the housing 
market and get our economy back on track.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to vote against the rule.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, at this time, I will continue to 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, if I could inquire of the time remaining 
for both sides, please.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 8 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Vermont has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Speaker.
  Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Dallas, Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
  Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I've heard some very eloquent comments from my friends on the other 
side of the aisle about the pain the American people are feeling at 
this time. They speak with some credibility. They helped cause it.
  After 18 months of being in control of the economic policies of our 
Nation, what do we have? We have gasoline approaching $4 a gallon, milk 
already over $4 a gallon, people struggling, struggling to put 
groceries on the table, and seemingly our friends on the other side of 
the aisle said that is unrelated to people trying to pay their 
mortgages and keep their home.
  The biggest enemy that we have to the American Dream of homeownership 
is a shrinking paycheck. What has been done by the Democrat majority to 
shrink the paycheck?
  Well, number one, they passed a budget that has the single largest 
tax increase in American history. Over a 3-year period, we will see an 
extra $3,000 tax burden put on a family of four while they're 
struggling to pay their mortgage payments.
  We were told that somehow under their watch gasoline prices would 
come down. Instead, they have gone up. We see food prices absolutely 
unaffordable, and yet they see no connection to the home mortgage 
challenge that we have today.
  Many of them have decried Wall Street bailouts, but what do they do? 
They bring a bailout bill to the floor, up to $300 billion of taxpayer 
exposure, and all a lender has to do is say, you know what, as long as 
he agrees to a 15 percent haircut, we will take his risk and put it on 
the taxpayers. When you're struggling to pay your own mortgage, you 
shouldn't have to bail out the speculators, those who engaged in 
mortgage fraud. You shouldn't have to bail out somebody else. There's a 
better way to do it, and it is not this humongous bailout bill.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, last night, I 
offered an amendment to the Rules Committee and it was turned down. It 
was not even allowed to be brought up today, and it will not be brought 
up on this bill.
  And what is this amendment that the majority feared so much, that 
they won't even have it discussed on the floor of the House? It would 
have simply increased the property tax deduction for homeowners.
  Now, look, all of us in Florida have received calls, letters, faxes 
from constituents asking for relief from their property taxes. Now we 
all know that ad valorem taxes are not a Federal issue. We don't 
control property taxes, but there's something that we can do

[[Page 8025]]

right now to help the American people and that is increasing this 
deduction for property taxes. We can do that right now.
  Is it that crazy? Well, no. On April 10 of 2008, 84 Senators from 
both sides of the aisle voted to do just this, to increase the 
deduction, to help people to be able to afford their mortgages. It 
would benefit everybody. It would benefit the economy, in particular 
all Americans who are struggling to pay their mortgages.
  You see, Madam Speaker, there is no good reason to not allow this 
commonsense amendment to be discussed, to be debated on the floor of 
the House. There's no good reason to not allow other commonsense 
amendments to be discussed. Why are people so scared, so afraid of just 
debating ideas on the floor of the House?
  Again, for that reason, Madam Speaker, I obviously will have to 
object to this rule.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I continue to reserve my time.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I would like to inquire of my colleague 
if he has any additional speakers. I have one additional speaker, then 
our close.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I have at least one, and some who have 
requested but who have not yet arrived on the floor.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).
  Mr. PENCE. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and, more 
to the point, in opposition to the housing omnibus package, $300 
billion bailout, corporate welfare in this country.
  It is extraordinary, after having endured the first three terms of my 
career in Congress and oftentimes being castigated for those aspects of 
the Republican agenda to try and promote business and try and encourage 
corporate investment in this country, how many times I and my 
colleagues were chastised for corporate welfare on the floor of this 
Congress, and yet we come here today with this extraordinary bailout 
for Wall Street, disguised as housing assistance for hurting Americans.
  Now, let me say, I have great sympathy for those affected by the 
current housing crisis. I'd like to see our housing markets and our 
neighborhoods stabilized, but a $300 billion taxpayer bailout to 
lenders and speculators who made poor decisions is not the answer, and 
it's not fair to millions upon millions of Americans who have sat down 
month after month at the kitchen table and figured out how to make 
those mortgage payments, who have taken on a second job and sometimes a 
third job to make the mortgage payment. And it's not fair to nearly 
one-third of the American public that rents.
  When my wife and I first got started out, I remember we rented our 
first place. We saved our pennies to be able to make that down payment, 
to get that FHA loan and to get our dream started. Now along comes 
Congress with this enormous handout, which, as the gentleman from Texas 
said, says to lenders, if you'll take a 15 percent haircut, a 15 
percent hit, we'll move your liability on to the taxpayers, on to 
taxpayers who have rented, who have saved, who have scrimped.
  They ought not to be required to pay this bailout for Americans. 
There are alternatives that we should support.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman and I thank him for 
his leadership.
  We will address the question of our differences when we vote and when 
I review the transcript, but I think it's important to note that my 
words spoke directly to conditions that we're in, that is, a recession 
that might move toward a depression.
  And I thank the gentleman from Georgia who mentioned from the Joint 
Economic Committee, Americans have much of their savings in their 
homes. Families in a majority of States will lose more than $2.6 
trillion. That sounds like a recession and a depression to me.
  A housing crisis affects the broader economy. We're going to be 
losing $166 billion in foreclosures. We have got to act.
  And so we may have a difference, but there is no lying or untruth 
when we talk about a recession and a depression, and I know my good 
friend from Texas did not intend to misrepresent that those of us who 
have a difference of opinion, while we're on this floor to help save 
the homes of millions of Americans and to help provide engine to the 
economic activity, are wrong.
  We're right and the documentation shows it, and it is not an untruth, 
and it certainly is not a lie.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I want to inquire of my colleague if he 
has any additional speakers or where he is in that process, as I am to 
close the next time I use my time.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. I thank my friend from Texas. We have no 
additional speakers at this time, and I will be the last speaker.

                          ____________________