Jeb Hensarling

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, first, in dealing with the amendment from the gentlewoman from Texas, I often don't have an opportunity to work with her. I am happy to work with her on this matter and to recognize that this report could, indeed, add value. I think anything that we can do to help with family economic empowerment in the areas that she has identified, such as in employment counseling and training and the coordination of these areas, can be very valuable. I appreciate the gentlewoman's amendment, and I am prepared to accept it. The same is true for the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo). I am sorry she missed her opportunity earlier, but I am glad she has her opportunity now. I am prepared to accept her amendment as well. I urge adoption. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, we all know on this House floor there is not enough we can ever do for our veterans, the brave men and women who served us in uniform. I think that the author of the amendment, in attempting to get HUD and the VA to work more closely together to address problems like veterans' homelessness, is an important thing to do. I hope it has some benefit. Mr. Chairman, again, I just want to accept the amendment and urge all Members to adopt it. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Vermont. I appreciate his amendment. I think that this helps equalize for a number of Section 8 users the ability to use manufactured housing to help equalize this with other housing options. So I think it is an important step forward. I thank the gentleman from Vermont for his leadership, and I recommend Members vote for it. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I listened very carefully to the gentlewoman's comments on the floor. I am prepared to accept the amendment. She makes some reasonable arguments. I urge its adoption. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentlewoman from Alabama for her amendment. It is a bipartisan amendment. She makes some good points. We are happy to accept it. As long as I am here, I would like to point out to the distinguished ranking member that anytime my side wins all the votes, I am not having a tough day. I am having a really good day. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the motion.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I find the motion to recommit to be most ironic. For the Members who were here for the debate on the underlying FORM Act yesterday, all we heard from the other side of the aisle is you cannot direct the Federal Reserve to do anything; you are imposing upon their independence. And yet we have a motion to recommit that does exactly what they argued against yesterday. That is irony number one, Mr. Speaker. The second irony about the motion to recommit is nothing has hurt seniors more than having 7 years straight of zero percent interest rates. It is seniors who know that when you are young you work for your money, and when you are old you expect your money to work for you. Their money is not working for them because we have had 7 years of artificially low interest rates. Real interest rates of zero. If we want to help our seniors, what we need is a monetary policy that is more predictable, that is more rules based, which is exactly what the FORM Act does. The American people want a healthier economy. They want a government that is transparent and accountable to them, and that includes the Federal Reserve. They cannot continue to cloak their prudential regulatory policies behind their monetary policies. We don't need our central bankers to become our central planners, but we need a monetary policy that works for seniors. For a healthier economy, for a government that is transparent and accountable to ``we, the people,'' we need to vote down the motion to recommit. Vote for the FORM Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for all of his work to make our Nation more secure. Mr. Speaker, I do rise in support today of the safety and security of the American people. As Members of Congress, we have no more sacred responsibility. Thus, I rise in support of the American SAFE Act. Now, I join all Americans and all the people of the world in standing with the people of Paris. We are so sobered as to what happened to their homeland, but we are also sobered by the challenge and the grave responsibility to thwart the same evil from coming to our homeland. The Director of the FBI testified before Congress just last month that a number of people who were of serious concern were able to slip through screenings of Iraqi refugees. That is what the Director of the FBI said. This disturbing information, Mr. Speaker, obviously raises very serious red flags about lapses in the security within our current refugee vetting system. Again, it is why I support and I encourage all Members to support the American SAFE Act of 2015. It would effectively hit the pause button on the refugee program, not the stop, but the pause button. It is simple legislation. It simply requires more rigid standards so that the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence would positively certify that each refugee from Iraq and Syria does not pose a security threat to us, to our homeland, to our families. Otherwise, they will not be permitted to set down on American soil. It is simple. It is common sense. It is needed. Mr. Speaker, our hearts also go out to the millions of refugees forced to flee their homes and save their lives. There is no other country in the world--no other country in the world--that has been more generous with their time and treasure to refugees than the United States of America. But today is not the day to share our territory, not until and unless these people can be properly vetted to ensure they don't threaten our families. Mr. Speaker, hopefully, the world has awakened that there is a very real threat that ISIS poses. It is not the JV team. They are not contained. What happened in Paris was not merely a setback. I urge my colleagues to take the responsibility to secure our homeland seriously. This will be the first of what I know will be many steps that this Chamber will take to address the growing threats that are posed to our families and our country. I thank the sponsor of the legislation for bringing it to the floor. I urge all my colleagues to adopt it.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 529, I call up the bill (H.R. 1210) to amend the Truth in Lending Act to provide a safe harbor from certain requirements related to qualified mortgages for residential mortgage loans held on an originating depository institution's portfolio, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I certainly salute the gentleman for his service to our country in uniform and for his service to our country in Congress. Although I applaud his service, I do not applaud what he is bringing before the House in this motion to recommit, because what his motion to recommit will do, regardless of what he says it will do, is hurt veterans. It will hurt their homeownership opportunities. I don't know if the gentleman was on the floor when I shared with the House correspondence from just two community financial institutions that were saying that they can't make mortgage loans anymore under this QM rule. We know for a fact that, when fully implemented, 20 percent of the people who qualified for mortgages just 5 years ago--after the financial crisis--would no longer qualify, many of them veterans. We know the Federal Reserve has said that, when the QM rule is fully functional, one-third of all Blacks and Hispanics, many of them veterans, will not be able to qualify for mortgages. Again, it is why so many in the industry are calling ``QM'' not ``qualified mortgage,'' Mr. Speaker, but ``quitting mortgages.'' We don't want banks and credit unions to be quitting on mortgages for our brave men and women in uniform. They deserve the same homeownership opportunities. Frankly, they deserve better homeownership opportunities than the rest of the population. I would urge that the House reject this motion to recommit because, at the end of the day, what is going to be best for our veterans--what is going to be best for the American people--is more competition in the mortgage market, not less, not taking away their financing opportunities, particularly those who are of low income and particularly our veterans. No. We want to have competitive, transparent, innovative markets. They need to be policed for force and fraud and deception. We want as many different financial institutions creating as many opportunities for homeownership for the American people and for our veterans as possible. I would urge the House to reject this motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the gentleman's motion.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's motion.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I find it fascinating that the ranking member says ``we have to protect the CFPB,'' the very same CFPB that the Federal Reserve's inspector general says, ``minorities underrepresented in upper pay bands''; the very same CFPB, ``minority applicants not hired in proportion to qualifications.'' She wants to protect the CFPB where ``minority employees receive lower performance ratings,'' wants to protect a qualified mortgage rule which the Federal Reserve says one- third of Blacks and Hispanics will no longer be able to qualify for mortgages. Yet the ranking member says we have to protect CFPB. No, we have to protect the American people from CFPB, the CFPB that is trying to take away their mortgages. I hear almost every week from some credit union or community bank, like the First Arkansas Bank and Trust, who wrote: ``Our bank has a long history of helping consumers, especially those who, for some reason, cannot qualify for secondary market financing at the time. Due to the fact that this type of financing is now overly burdened by the qualified mortgage standards, we have ceased this type of financing.'' This includes for mobile homes. That is low-income people, Mr. Speaker. We hear from the Reading Cooperative Bank, ``We have experienced a spike in loan declines to women,'' for their investigation identified that women attempting to buy the family home to settle their divorce and stabilize their family were being declined at a high rate due to the Dodd-Frank qualified mortgage rules and ability to pay. We hear this stuff all the time. We have to protect the consumer, and we protect the consumer by having competitive, transparent, innovative free markets that are vigorously policed for force and fraud and deception. It is not by having this vaunted CFPB. I am shocked that we have the ranking member again talking about discrimination, but, apparently, it is okay if the CFPB practices it. That is outrageous, Mr. Speaker. It is simply outrageous. The American people will not abide by it. We have to protect the American consumers in their opportunity for the American Dream of homeownership. That is why every single Member should vote for the legislation from the gentleman from Kentucky, which is so simple. It says, if you make the loan and you keep your books, it is a qualified mortgage, and you have your shot at the American Dream. I urge the adoption of the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials on the bill (H.R. 1737) to nullify certain guidance of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection and to provide requirements for guidance issued by the Bureau with respect to indirect auto lending.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the question of adopting a motion to recommit on H.R. 3189 may be subject to postponement as though under clause 8 of rule XX.

Mr. HENSARLING

Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to urge all Members of the House to adopt his amendment. With respect to full transcripts of the FOMC meetings, all this is doing is simply codifying a current practice. It is simply to make sure that there is a transparency, at least this level of transparency, that the Fed doesn't backslide. With respect to the dual mandate, the truth is the Fed has many mandates and they all ought to be examined. The Fed has been around for 100 years. It is time to poke under the hood. That is why we are having the Centennial Monetary Commission, and I think it is important that we take a good look to see if, at times, these are working at cross purposes. So I thank the gentleman from Iowa for his leadership. I urge all Members to adopt his amendment.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I want to--I guess to put it civilly-- gently oppose the amendment from the gentleman from Florida. I think the gentleman from Florida does make some good points. These Federal Reserve Districts, in some respects, are anachronistic. They were derived from our early 20th century history. I do believe that it is a subject that needs to be looked at. I am just not prepared to say today that the gentleman has necessarily gotten it right. There is probably something very humorous today about siting a Federal Reserve Bank in the same city as Disney World. I will refrain from making any such humorous references. But, again, I think the gentleman makes a good point. I would like this issue to go through regular order. I believe it is a matter that Chairman Huizenga and the Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee of our full committee will be taking a look at: Are these appropriate cities for the Federal Reserve Banks to be sited? So, again, I thank the gentleman for bringing the matter to the House's attention, I thank him for bringing it to my attention, but I am not prepared to say that San Francisco, L.A., or Orlando are necessarily the places that Federal Reserve Banks ought to end up, without going through regular order. So I want to look at the matter, but I would otherwise encourage Members at this time to reject the amendment of the gentleman from Florida. I would ask the House to reject the amendment at this time. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials on the bill, H.R. 3189, to amend the Federal Reserve Act to establish requirements for policy rules and blackout periods of the Federal Open Market Committee, to establish requirements for certain activities of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and to amend title 31, United States Code, to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited, and for other purposes.