Fha Refinance Program Termination Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. First of all, the gentleman from Alabama was arguing the merits of the legislation. These are findings that pertain to the results that would occur from the language in the bill.
The bill is eliminating the existing funds or leftover funds for FHA refinance. The amendment clearly lays out the impacted persons connected to the elimination. Therefore, this is germane because it relates to the language of the amendment and the intent of the amendment.
Twelve million people left behind, thousands of homeowners in different States, and the fact that there is no other solution to these homeowners except FHA refinance, it is a germane amendment. The findings are simply laying out the impact. We do that in all of our bills to put findings on what the impact of legislation would be.
I ask the Chairman to consider the gentlelady's amendment being germane. The findings are germane, and it is doing simply that of listing the elements of the impact of this legislation.
I ask for a waiver of the point of order.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I am very sorry that Congresswoman Maloney's amendment was subject to a point of order. I would like to simply add that you need to put faces on what this legislation is doing. It is a simple act. It guts and eliminates all remaining funding. It does say that if you are in the midst of the program you might continue.
But everyone knows how solid FHA is. Whenever you hear FHA, you know that there is a framework that really provides for protection for the Federal Government and a fiscally responsible program that provides the Federal Government with protection for those who are able to utilize it.
But even traveling through airports, Mr. Chairman, I had a man with a family who indicated that in the midst of the holiday season, even though he had been told by the banking institution that his mortgage was intact, they would allow him to continue to pay, he was keeping up but having difficulty looking for modification, a few days into the new year, January 6, he was foreclosed on, and a few days later, or at least on that day foreclosed with a sign or a notice on his door, ``Vacate in 3 days.'' These are the faces of individuals who probably would have fared better under FHA.
At the same time, a law enforcement, a police officer came to me and said the very same thing, naming an institution that I had never heard of, had no national standing, some fly-by-night. Here is a law enforcement officer, a local police officer putting his life on the line every day, and he needed to sell his home. He had managed to find a buyer. He had communicated that to the bank. But lo and behold, the lowlife thing to do was what this financial institution did. And I would call it not a bank, but probably a mortgage entity. They took the house right from underneath a man that goes out every day and projects himself into the community and could lay his life on the line.
I am against H.R. 830 and H.R. 836. It doesn't make sense when we've got hundreds of thousands of individuals who are in need of this program. I will venture to say that if a program needs fixing, have we ever heard of fix it, don't end it? Mend it, don't end it? Of course it is always important to do due diligence and have oversight over these programs. But I would think that the Financial Services Committee, under our past chairman and now the ranking member, working with the chairman now, could come up with the genius to make FHA work better if that is the case.
But the nonsensical plan of eliminating it, not helping the underwater mortgagees, the individuals who have these mortgages, with homes that are distressed, with mortgages that are worth more than the homes--we know there are many communities like this, and my colleague mentioned some, but let me cite three States again because it's so enormous, and we have heard so much from them: Florida, 2 million; California, 2 million; Nevada, 390,000. They are still in distress.
Everyone knows that the housing market has a lot to do with this economy. And even without the help of my good friends on the other side of the aisle, we still saw the unemployment go down and 192,000 jobs created. But I can tell you that this does nothing to create jobs. It simply puts Americans out on the street. It devastates families. And who knows, with the lack of sales of homes and remodification or modification of these, it puts people out of work, not in work.
So I argue vigorously, a little too late on the gentlelady's amendment, but I want to thank her for her astuteness, carefully defining what impact this bill would have. And it's unfortunate that the good work of FHA that requires documentation, a current job, a decent salary, all that is needed is now thrown to the wolves with no other plan. So we go home, and constituents will ask us about modification or the viability of FHA, which has been in place for a long period of time. All we have to do is give them our empty hands and our blank face, saying obviously greater minds than you, who knew this was a good program, decided to eliminate it with no substitute in place.
So Mr. Chairman, let me conclude by simply saying to the hundreds of thousands of borrowers, have faith, because this is only the first step. We know this is wrongheaded, the wrong direction. Thank goodness for the Founding Fathers that gave us the House and the Senate and a President. I can be assured that this legislation, I hope, is destined for a route of no return.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source