Emergency Mortgage Relief Program Termination Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. First of all, I commend the gentleman from Texas for his good amendment. I think it is interesting that we keep talking about the country, and certainly that is important and the taxpayers are important. The other flaw in this program is that it encourages these people to get further in debt. And quite honestly, the level of debt they have is their primary problem. It is the same mentality that has kind of gotten our country in the jam it is in where we will have to have a vote here in a few weeks about raising the debt ceiling. It is the reason a lot of individuals and companies and governments around the world are overleveraged.

So what we are saying is the way to fix someone's problem that has too much debt is for them to take on more debt. It is absurd to think that is good for these borrowers.

I would like to yield to my good friend from Texas (Mr. Canseco).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Well, as the ranking member knows, it has been billed as a loan program, but what we're saying is that it is, in fact, a grant program.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I have a question for the gentleman: Do you think this is a loan program or a grant program? Which do you think it is?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Does the gentleman think that the language in the legislation as it is written now represents it as a loan or as a grant?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

I offer this on behalf of my good friend from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen). It is a good amendment. It would add military service members and veterans who have service-related injuries, as well as survivors and dependents of such individuals, to be included in the study in this bill.

These families often face new hardships. They will likely need modifications to their houses to help them get around, especially if the service members are now disabled. There may be significant changes in their ability to move around and in the skills they are able to perform. This will ultimately have a significant impact on their livelihoods.

It is my hope that we can gain a better understanding of how we can best provide for the families of those who have served our country and who have paid the ultimate price.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I think the bill says that it's a loan, so as soon as that individual takes an advance in this program, it becomes the liability of that individual. Now, there are certain ways in this bill, either from forfeiture or through some of the provisions, where that indebtedness is forgiven; but I will tell you that the proper accounting is that the day that the individual payment is made on his behalf it becomes the liability of that individual.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I want to read a portion of this amendment filed by the gentlewoman from California. It says, ``The Emergency Mortgage Relief Program, which would have provided unemployed homeowners with low interest rate loans to assist them in paying their mortgage, has been terminated. If you are unemployed and concerned about not being able to pay your mortgage, please contact your Member of Congress.''

You see, that's what is so confusing about the arguments by my colleagues on the other side. They can't decide if this is a loan or a grant--one time it's a loan, one time it's a grant--but, in fact, the program says it's a loan. In fact, HUD, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the title of their rule is Emergency Homeowners Loan Program.

The other reason I rise in opposition to this is that we're terminating a program that has had zero customers. So it seems ambiguous here to have the Federal Government go through a process here where we're going to notify homeowners of a program that never was instituted, never was used, that it does not exist anymore. That seems a little wasteful and I think in many ways could be misleading. Obviously, when you look at the way that the program is structured, it becomes a grant program. And so we're misrepresenting that in the sense that, well, it says it's a loan, but it's really not a loan. It's a grant.

And so I think this is something that is one of the things that the American taxpayers are really kind of tired of is the government out there misrepresenting or creating confusion to homeowners that may be seeking assistance. So I would just say that at this particular time this is not necessary and that we should not put a confusing piece of information out there on the Web site.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman, and I think he makes a great point. In fact, it is a program that has not had an application, has not been promulgated. And so there is a reason why we feel like this is not necessary, and I encourage my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source