Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2017

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, and I thank the chairman for the opportunity to address that.

Mr. Chair, I represent a wonderful area of east Tennessee. A lot of folks purchase manufactured homes. It is a great American industry. It is a booming industry. It is a good industry. But more important than that, that great industry is the great American Dream--that dream of home ownership.

Manufactured homes offer an opportunity to men and women, many times, to purchase their first home. These are not the most affluent people in America. These are people who are pursuing the American Dream--or part of it--of home ownership.

What this amendment seeks to do is unfortunate. That is why I oppose it. There is no more fervent opponent to the Dodd-Frank rule in this house than me, but it protects the Dodd-Frank provisions that were in the law.

This does not violate Dodd-Frank. This is more of an indication of how a bad law spews more bad law. And what this does is it hurts those precious consumers, those poor Americans who are trying desperately to get credit. What it does, Mr. Chairman, is create a situation where, if someone is a loan originator or a salesman, it makes them subject to the constrictions of Dodd-Frank. This was never intended on its worst day--and there are many worst days of Dodd-Frank--to do this.

I ask this House to reject the gentleman's amendment, uphold a great American industry--the manufactured home industry--but even more importantly, to uphold that special precious American Dream, that chance of home ownership.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman from Minnesota's amendment, and I thank the chairman for this time.

Perhaps the only thing the gentleman from Minnesota and I agree on is that this amendment is akin to his first amendment which I vigorously opposed and I asked the House to oppose.

Let me reiterate. The manufactured housing industry is a great American industry. The dream of owning a home is part of the American Dream. Manufactured housing offers an opportunity to those who are less affluent to get part of that American Dream, to buy a house.

Now, what has happened--and again, Dodd-Frank itself, a law which, if I was in this House, I would have voted against. I wasn't here then, but I have vigorously opposed since then--Dodd-Frank actually allows what this gentleman is trying to oppose with his amendment.

So as bad as this law is, and as bad as the law that has come from this very bad law is, and this amendment is indicative of that, I want to talk about what happens when we do this.

This is a miscalculation in a formula by those proponents of the rules of Dodd-Frank, and what it does, it scares away lenders. It scares away those who want to give credit because it opens them up to liability.

Therefore, what does it do? It squeezes the poor American consumer and deprives them of the opportunity to get credit; therefore, it deprives them of the opportunity to get a home; therefore, it deprives them of a part of the American Dream.

If the gentleman would listen to me, I have seen this. Who will profit? Those who are vultures, who actually have capital, who have cash, who are liquid.

When these mobile homes now will not sell, there will be a glut on the market, and what will happen? They will swoop in, and those people who want to see their precious home, their first home, appreciate in value, now it will depreciate in value, and they will be harmed.

This is a perfect example of government overreach. Dodd-Frank is a bad law, and this is an attempt to try to construe Dodd-Frank with CFPB rules that are detrimental to the American consumer.

So do not let it hurt the American Dream. Do not let it hurt this great American industry. I respectfully urge a ``no'' vote on this gentleman's amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source