Spencer Bachus

Mr. BACHUS

Mr. BACHUS. The chairman is correct. Section 107 was designed and implemented to give the Federal bank regulators flexibility in implementing the national registry. And it is the intention of the committee, of the entire committee, that, as they do this implementation, that they give proper consideration to its impact on small financial institutions, smaller impact, and that they try to minimize that impact.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Barrett).

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the bill.

Mr. BACHUS. I yield 15 seconds to the chairman of the committee.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer) to speak in opposition to the bill.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Feeney).

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), who rises in opposition to the bill.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce).

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry) to speak in opposition to the bill.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, at this time I recognize the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) for 3 minutes.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller) to speak in support of the bill.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam) to speak in opposition to the bill.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation. I believe that it does, in fact, address abusive practices which, unfortunately, are in our mortgage lending market today. I believe it brings some needed oversight to the mortgage industry. The legislation that we are considering today is the product, and everyone acknowledges this, industry acknowledges it, consumer groups, Members on both sides, the membership has engaged for over 2 years in an attempt to come together to span political differences, philosophical differences, and to address the very serious problem in the housing finance market. I want to commend the gentleman from Massachusetts. He has allowed us to fully express our opinions. I believe that this long dialogue which we have had has resulted in consensus legislation which, though not perfect, I believe will achieve two very important, very necessary goals. One is to implement reforms that will offer consumers needed protection against predatory lending practices; and two, I believe, and I sincerely believe, that this legislation will preserve working Americans' access to consumer credit. I believe that the Members most closely involved in the negotiations which led to the manager's amendment sincerely believe we have achieved these goals. We need not let the perfect be an enemy to the good. Members from both sides will address provisions of this bill which they believe do not satisfy the goal I have described above. I believe the fact that this legislation fully satisfies neither side is an indication that we are in about the right place in achieving a nonpolitical, legislative remedy to address this issue of such great impact to our economy and our families, both now and moving forward. In closing, let me say it has always been my view that when faced with serious issues like this one impacting millions of families across America, that Congress has both the privilege and the responsibility of rising above partisanship and acting in the public's interest. With this legislation today, I believe we have done just that. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bipartisan manager's amendment. It makes both technical and substantive changes in the legislation, and I think significant contributions. For example, the amendment incorporates language authored by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller). His amendment clarifies the bill's anti-steering provisions to ensure that consumers retain the ability to finance points and fees in connection with a mortgage transaction. It also corrects certain problems in the provisions dealing with renters and foreclosed properties that Mr. Marchant from Texas raised during the markup. And it addresses some of those problems. The amendment also includes provisions drafted by the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) that will give consumers regular updates on the term of their mortgages and advance notice of any impending interest rate adjustments. Now, these are important improvements in the bill. And I again thank Chairman Frank and the other members who contributed to the manager's amendment, and urge support for the manager's amendment. I would yield the remaining time that I have to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell).

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I recognize the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) for 3 minutes to speak in opposition to the bill.

Mr. BACHUS

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman from Ohio obviously points out a significant problem with foreclosures in Cleveland. It is actually a heart-breaking experience that the people of Cleveland are going through when one out of every five or six houses are undergoing foreclosures. You hear some pretty devastating figures. I know, I used to be an attorney for the FOP, Fraternal Order of Police, in Birmingham; and there is absolutely nothing more problematic in a community than a vacant house from a crime standpoint as well as from a property value standpoint. The notice she requires, I think some of that is addressed by Mr. Green and Mr. McHenry, but it is at an earlier time. I would say this, I personally am not going to ask for a roll call on this. Going forward, I think parts of this amendment are very good. I think stating what the new interest rate will be, giving somebody a notice. The Federal Reserve said some folks sort of, you know, this is something that they don't always see or focus on. But explaining what the new interest rate is going to be and how it is going to be determined, that could be somewhat problematic, but it could be worked in a range as long as the regulators are given some discretion. Offering the borrower the best estimate of what the new monthly payment will be could also, as long as there was some range or discretion in there. The last two things I think are very good, offering alternatives that the consumer could pursue. That might be very valuable, as would providing information on HUD-approved house counseling. I think that would be very valuable. I personally am not going to ask for a roll call on this. Other Members might. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Florida because, as you know, on this side, as with this whole body, we come with different perspectives.

Mr. BACHUS. I want to compliment the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) for offering this amendment. I know it clarifies the role of the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the approval process for State license mortgage practitioners and originators. I compliment the gentleman. I know that the Conference has worked with the industry in crafting this amendment. I urge support for it.

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. BACHUS. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I compliment the author, Mr. Green, for this amendment. I would anticipate and hope that with the passage of this amendment that mortgage originators would receive instructions on these subjects. So I very much am in support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BACHUS

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, many of us are sympathetic to the insurance rate increases coastal catastrophe-prone areas have experienced recently, but there is no consensus that H.R. 3355 would offer any long-term help. Instead of granting long-term relief for middle-income coastal homeowners confronted with rising insurance costs, this bill would stick taxpayers wiith the tab of bailing out insolvent State insurance companies. In the past few years since some of the largest hurricanes on record tore through the gulf coast and coastal Florida, affected States have tried to protect their local markets, to limit rates increases, force coverage, or restrict market freedom. Competition is reduced and homeowners are left with fewer choices--State efforts to secure more coverage for their constituents have ironically resulted in less affordability. The Florida members on the minority side of the Financial Services Committee--Ginny Brown-Waite, Tom Feeney, and Adam Putnam--have been very attentive to the needs of their constituents and have constantly kept us updated on the problems there. We commend them for their service. Of the two primary titles, the first does nothing that States can't already do under current law. The second is nothing more creative then giving cheap federally-subsidized loans to State insurance companies that are driving out the private market. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that over the next 5 years, implementing this bill would cost $75 million. But even this number grossly underestimates the true cost for American taxpayers. CBO apparently finds little value in Title II of this bill, finding that the federally subsidized loans would be made ``very rarely,'' as CBO does not expect any states would even bother applying for a loan following a disaster. In essence, they agreed this provision is of little value. However, taxpayers could potentially be on the hook for tens of billions of dollars, stuck with an enormous cost of capital for the loan's duration, and subject to the inevitable pressure to forgive the loans on the taxpayers' dime. This is the old two step ``ask for'' by people borrowing from government-- ask for the money now and then ask for debt forgiveness later. Because private insurers don't want to provide underpriced, risky coastal insurance, Florida created Citizens Property Insurance Corporation in 2002. While Citizens was supposed to be an insurer of last resort, it is now Florida's largest insurer with over 1.3 million policyholders and total exposure of more than $434 billion, yet only enough funding to pay approximately $9.4 billion in claims. This undercapitalization means that if a major hurricane hits Florida, Citizens could be bankrupt by hundreds of billions of dollars. To bring down the cost of insurance even more, Florida created a state reinsurance fund to sell cheap reinsurance to private companies to encourage them to write business in the state. This fund is chronically undercapitalized and has driven out the global reinsurance market, recouping losses through taxpayer assessments. According to a Georgetown University report released last summer, the Florida cat fund offers $32 billion in coverage despite having only $1 billion in hand [or, according to the Florida Cat Fund staff, around $28 billion in liabilities and $2.2 billion in non-debt cash assets]. Mr. Chairman, the federally-headed consortium, while novel, likely offers nothing but an implicit federal backing for any issued securities, much like a GSE. According to the President's Statement of Administration Policy for this bill, ``there is no need for a federal role because states are currently free to associate to address catastrophe risk.'' It is also questionable whether such securitization represents any significant advantages over the sophisticated private reinsurance markets. According to the Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Institute, ``the mere creation of the consortium would likely skew insurance premiums and encourage unwise development.'' Masking the true cost of insurance puts homeowners in harm's way while subsidizing state cat funds and developers. Perhaps most troubling are the provisions of the bill that would mandate cheap Treasury loans to state catastrophe programs. Today, Florida is the only state with a reinsurance fund that would qualify for these loans, but there is no doubt this bill would spur the creation of other state programs based on the Florida ``model.'' One property and casualty insurance trade association stated that that these loans would ``impede private markets and would send the wrong signals to states.'' H.R. 3355 even allows an interim period where other state-run insurers--such as the bankrupt Citizens in Florida-- could receive these loans. We should question the wisdom of bankrolling state insurance companies like Citizens. Congress should also consider whether a Federal loan to an insolvent state catastrophe fund would be like the Federal Government's ongoing ``loan'' to the National Flood Insurance Program, which is currently carrying $18 billion in debt to the U.S. Treasury that is unlikely to ever be repaid. Republicans will offer a number of important amendments today to steer this debate towards fiscal responsibility, taxpayer protection, and free market competition. We will also consider an amendment by Congressman Shays to replace the text of this bill with a bipartisan, blue-ribbon commission to report to Congress specific proposals to improve the affordability and availability of natural catastrophe insurance. We need to look more closely at the various solutions proposed by members on both sides of the aisle that could help homeowners access more coverage through the private market. Mr. Chairman, we have an obligation to be thoughtful and deliberate when confronting this complex issue affecting millions of homeowners. The problem has many root causes, namely overregulation, overbuilding, and overreaching by state insurance entities. This bill, nor any one proposal, is the silver bullet. Congress should craft meaningful bipartisan reforms that address market dysfunction and the growing threat excessive coastal development poses. The Nation's homeowners and taxpayers deserve better than a scramble to rush a partisan bill through Congress. If the amendments are not accepted, we should vote it down but keep working.

Mr. BACHUS

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of CJ's Home Protection Act of 2007. Congressman Ellsworth said a picture is worth a thousand words, and he held up a picture of CJ Martin. When the Congressman brought CJ's mother, Kathryn Martin, to my office, he brought that picture with him. It brought back memories to me of another picture, of not a little boy but of a little girl, and I have that picture with me today. This is a picture of Whitney Crowder. Now, unlike CJ, I am happy to say that today she is an eighth grader in a Tuscaloosa city school. She is doing well, but she has had a lot to overcome. Just like CJ, she and her family lived in manufactured housing. Let me tell you, manufactured housing in the South has replaced a lot of substandard housing. It provides affordable housing for a lot of Alabamians. As many as one out of five Alabamians lives in a manufactured house. It is affordable. It is clean, and it provides a very good home. Whitney was living in one of these manufactured houses. An alert went out that said a tornado was 30 miles off. She had approximately 20 minutes; but the TV wasn't on. She didn't have a weather alert radio. And although the TV stations were able to track that storm and to tell within a quarter mile where it was going and when it would arrive there, she and her grandmother and the rest of her family didn't have the TV on. Some people say why don't you require these in cars. Why just manufactured housing? Well, in fact studies show when people are in cars they have the radio on and more often than not they receive an alert. But as is the case in Alabama with this storm and another storm that took 32 lives a few years before that, people were asleep. I think the Martins were asleep. They had no idea that a killer tornado was bearing down on them, even though warnings were going out. As I said, although I am happy to say that Whitney survived the tornado, her brother Wesley, 16-month-old, and her father did not. They were killed. We have come to a time in our country where we really have no excuse not to do the few elementary things we can do to prevent the death or at least lessen the likelihood of the death of CJ Martin in Indiana or Wesley Crowder and his dad, Whitney's father, in Alabama. Technology today in an F-5 or F-4 storm gives 30 to 40 minutes' warning. With that warning you only need two things: You need shelter from the storm, you need a place to go, and you need to receive that warning. Now, in 2003 this Congress passed the Tornado Shelters Act, which allows communities to use community block grant money to build shelters, a shelter from the storm, a shelter that could exist for the Martins or the Crowder family, and a mobile community. I am happy to report in my district, the Sixth Congressional District of Alabama, we now have six of these shelters in or near manufactured housing communities. But people don't have to go to those. If they are in manufactured housing, they can go to a nearby building with a basement or interior room. Manufactured housing, a mobile home as some of us call them, they don't have basements and interior rooms. It is not wrong; it is just something they are not designed to have. But there are permanent structures nearby, whether it be a school, a tornado shelter that we authorized in 2003, or maybe even their parents' house. The Crowders had an aunt and uncle that lived only about 400 yards away in a site-built house with a basement. They would have been safe from that storm. The technology was there to warn them. The shelter was there to receive them, but there was no weather radio. Now, what's the cost of a radio? Some people have talked about the cost that you are imposing, although the manufactured housing industry as far as I know has said they support this bill. Well, Wal-Mart just came out with a weather radio for $12. So that's the cost if you buy them in bulk. You can put them in for $12 in a mobile home, manufactured housing. $12. What is the cost of not acting? For the Crowder family there are all sorts of costs. The greatest cost was the loss of two individuals, a little 16-month-old boy, Whitney's little brother, and her father. Also the cost to Whitney and her mother and the 12 other people injured by this storm. The cost was several million dollars in health care costs. Now, we are not here to save money; we are here to save lives. But this bill will not only save lives; it will save money. A killer tornado like this hit Oak Grove at night, and among the things it did was paralyze a man. That man is still paralyzed to this day and his cost of treatment is, as we all know, hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. One radio in that gentleman's manufactured housing home could have saved him a life of paralysis. But, instead, it took 30 lives and denied him mobility for the rest of his life. As the Congressman from Indiana said, this is not about Republicans or Democrats. There are certain things we ought to say, it is time to do this; and technology has reached that time. When 40 percent to 50 percent to sometimes as many as 60 percent of the deaths every year from these killer tornadoes are in mobile homes, manufactured housing, and families live in these houses, whether they be our grandparents, our parents, our children, our neighbors, our loved ones, or people we don't even know, you see the devastation here. There were site-built homes here. This is a manufactured house. Twenty-seven manufactured housing units in this area, a mobile home community, no longer existed. As the gentleman from Indiana said, looking at this picture really doesn't do it justice. People actually commented when they came upon this area which was about half a mile long and 400 yards wide, it looked like a garbage dump. You couldn't tell there had been a community there. It looked like there were a few junk cars because the cars were rolled over and over. We can rebuild these communities; but CJ, we can't bring him back. We can't bring Whitney's little brother and father back, but we can do our best for literally pennies to prevent some of these deaths. I think that is why 55 TV stations throughout this Nation have made this their cause. They visited us in Washington last year. They said, Look, we will get the warning out and there are shelters available. But please require the installation of a $12 radio so we can bridge that gap between warning and safe shelter. That is what we are here to do today. In this House where we sometimes are in conflict and at loggerheads, can't we this time come together in a united way in an effort that will cost almost nothing and which the manufactured housing industry said we are willing to do this, and require these radios. And not only when a tornado comes or when a devastating flood comes like came to Texas and people were asleep in a mobile home community and several of those homes were swept away. This will save lives. So I commend CJ Martin's mother. That's what America is about, someone saying I lost my son but I don't want it to happen again. It is about the Crowder family who wrote me a letter, a grandmother saying please push this bill. We will never go back and know whether CJ could have survived had this legislation been passed. We will never know whether Wesley Crowder and his father would survive, but we do know by talking to people throughout the United States that these radios have in many, many cases already saved lives and will save lives if we install them in manufactured housing. We have a shot at significantly reducing over half the deaths from tornados simply by taking the step together united, Republicans and Democrats, and passing this legislation. I commend Chairman Frank for expeditiously moving this legislation, and I commend the Member from Indiana for his thoughtfulness and his care and dedication to this issue.

Mr. BACHUS

Mr. BACHUS. Madam Speaker, today I rise to commend an individual from the District I represent, the Sixth Congressional District of Alabama, whose recent achievement in the field of music deserves the accolades and esteem of this body. On June 3, 2007, Dr. Drew Mays of Birmingham took top honors in the world renowned Van Cliburn Foundation International Piano Competition for Outstanding Amateurs in Forth Worth, Texas. His winning performance in the final round included Beethoven's Sonata in C major, Op. 53 ``Waldstein'' and Liszt's Mephisto Waltz No. 1. This event, whose prestigious sponsor has long been recognized internationally as a champion of musical excellence, gives its participants from around the world an opportunity to compete for top honors as amateur pianists. Created in 1999, the Van Cliburn Foundation's amateur competition is the most respected amateur piano competition in the United States, and was created to ``celebrate the amateur spirit.'' It is remarkable to note that as amateurs, competitors may not derive their principal source of income from public performances or piano instruction. Therefore, the level of artistic ability and expression is reached in tandem with balancing the pressures and concerns of daily life. This is an achievement indeed. In addition to being a master of the piano, Dr. Mays is an ophthalmologist in private practice, specializing in glaucoma. He also serves on the staff of Birmingham's VA Medical Center, and serves as residency program director for the Department of Ophthalmology at the University of Alabama in Birmingham. However, before his medical career began, Dr. Mays studied advanced music both at the Manhattan School of Music and at the Conservatory of Music in Hannover, Germany. In 1987, he earned a master's degree in music from the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, the same year he began to work on his medical degree. What is even more fascinating in my opinion is that Dr. Mays ended his musical career when he started medical school, starting a 15-year hiatus from playing the piano. Only in 2002 did Dr. Mays start to regularly play the instrument again, which culminated with his winning the Van Cliburn Foundation competition only 5 short years later. In closing, I must remark that Dr. Mays' achievements are a realization of his unwavering commitment to the art of musical performance. Not only is Dr. Mays now a world renowned pianist committed to sharing the gift of music, but he is also a respected physician committed to helping patients with the gift of sight. Our great Nation should congratulate him on his achievements as one of Alabama's finest, and be honored to call him one of our own.

Mr. BACHUS

Mr. BACHUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to myself because I would like to make one statement. Mr. Chairman, as I said at the start of this debate, the trust fund will be the largest expansion in Federal housing programs in decades. That is what we are debating. Also at this time I would like to introduce, and I asked back in July for HUD to produce the list of programs which today promote affordable housing. They sent me a list, and it has actually 34 programs which in some way assist low-income Americans with their housing needs. That is not my list; that is their list. But let's again focus on, we have all of these programs. Do we rehabilitate these programs or do we shift money from one program to another? And if we are shifting money from one program to another, I don't see how this is the largest expansion of Federal housing programs in decades, or as the gentlewoman from California said, the most significant new program in over 11 years. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.