[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 5]
[House]
[Page 6017]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              REGULAR ORDER SHOULD BE THE RULE OF THE DAY

  (Ms. KAPTUR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express the opinion that in the 
recent vote on H.R. 1106, which had to do with mortgage foreclosures 
and so-called enhancement of mortgage credit availability, it would be 
incumbent upon leadership of the institution to follow normal process 
and to allow the membership, if they wish to offer amendments before 
the Rules Committee, to be afforded that opportunity.
  The challenges we face in the mortgage market are enormous, and 
regular order should be the rule of the day here. You know, we wouldn't 
have all these difficulties in our country if we would be properly 
using the normal institutions to resolve loans, loan difficulties, the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Securities and Exchange 
Commission. When you don't use those, and you begin to try to tinker at 
the edges of a really large problem that the country faces, and the 
implosion of the mortgage market itself, you can make a lot of 
mistakes.
  Members deserve respect. We deserve due diligence by the respective 
subcommittee and committees, including the opportunity to amend and 
include ideas in the manager's amendment. If that does not happen, we 
don't serve the American people well.
  I think every Member here deserves that respect. And I would hope 
that, as next week begins, we will have the opportunity to perfect this 
legislation, if it can be perfected or, more properly, to meet with the 
Secretary of the Treasury and the economic leaders of the new 
administration to perhaps shape a different path forward.
  Well, here's another Housing bill, claiming to be a nostrum for what 
ails us with housing foreclosures.
  Last August, the same committee, with no hearings and no opportunity 
for amendment pushed through a landmark bill called Hope for 
Homeowners. It was supposed to help workouts, to bring assistance to 
counselors, to prevent foreclosures. To this date this program has 
worked out on 25 mortgages only. Twenty-Five--not 250, 2500, 25,000; 
just 25.
  We have seen more foreclosures, not enough workouts, no Wall Street 
firms or their hired gun servicers coming to the table. The money for 
the communities engaged in counseling arrived late, and people lost 
their homes. The next batch of money did not arrive to allow cities to 
buy homes, and now out of state individuals or companies own the homes 
and these new owners have no vested interest in the properties. They 
are looking at the profit they will receive. The communities lose. The 
people lose. Even those homeowners who are paying their mortgages, 
keeping up with their bills and being overall good economic citizens 
are paying because their neighbors fell on dire straits, property 
values are plummeting. The money that did reach communities sometimes 
only reached certain communities--others suffered. In northern Ohio, 
Cleveland got the majority of the money and Toledo suffers with little 
or no money available to help people. I myself attended an auction run 
by a company in Dallas, TX, that sold away my constituent's homes to 
far away people and the communities are struggling and some 
neighborhoods are even dying.
  Then, the last Administration shoved TARP at us. Crisis was coming or 
at hand and it was the only way to stop it. Those that voted for it 
thought that they were going to prevent more foreclosures--they wanted 
to help the people.
  They found out Hank Paulson took all the money for Wall Street banks 
that didn't do workouts, and are not doing workouts. But the last 
Congress held them up, saved them, and paid them taxpayer dollars. To 
what end?
  It's a new Congress and a new President. Foreclosures are still 
rampant. The economy is oscillating and the recession is deepening 
rather than stabilizing.
  Now we are told: we've got another idea we want to sell you.
  Let's go the bankruptcy route.
  Of course, this won't deal with the millions of pending subprime 
foreclosures and achieve workouts. It will only address people filing 
for bankruptcy and about 20% of them might have a home involved in that 
process. These people could be helped, but we are not helping all the 
other people who are not turning to the last, absolute last resort of 
bankruptcy.
  Do I understand this--no Wall Street big bank has been asked to go 
bankrupt and its assets distributed to more responsible community 
banks. But instead of bringing discipline to the banks, now we're going 
to ask the American people to file bankruptcy first. And, we're going 
to provide money to pay the fraudulent servicers.
  If you're not sure how to vote on this, think what happened before. 
Think about the solutions we were told would work. Look around your 
community. Are they working?
  I can tell you in my district they are not.
  Here are some questions that ought to be answered before we move 
forward:
  1. Does a family have to declare bankruptcy before qualifying for a 
``workout/refinancing''? Why do families have to do this but not the 
banks?
  2. What % of troubled loans would this plan rescue--less than 10%, . 
. . up to 90%?
  3. Are eligible loans only ``subprime'' ones, or any loan?
  4. In Title 1, why do lenders need financial incentives to modify 
loans? They've got TARP $.
  5. What % of appropriated funds for this program will go to lenders? 
Why? How @ servicers? They're not licensed or certified. Why let them 
qualify for anything? They've been awful.
  6. How will the government recoup its money? Is there a shared 
appreciation provision that reimburses government for its investment?
  7. What happens to credit union financed mortgages? They did no 
subprimes. Are their loans eligible for workouts? What happens when a 
reduction in principal wipes out their annual profits?

                          ____________________