Blaine Luetkemeyer

Mr. LUETKEMEYER

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett), a member of the Financial Services Committee and distinguished chairman of the Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) for her hard work in helping cosponsor this bill, Ranking Member Waters, as well as the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) for their support and kind words. I ask for support for H.R. 432. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill), who is a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of H.R. 432, the SBIC Advisers Relief Act. This legislation allows for commonsense changes that will ultimately allow for greater small business capital formation and job creation. The SBIC Advisers Relief Act streamlines the registration and reporting requirements for advisers to small business investment companies, or SBICs. These are advisers to investment funds that make long-term investments in United States small businesses and have to the tune of more than $63 billion since 1958. SBICs are heavily regulated and closely supervised by the U.S. Small Business Administration, and they have been for more than 55 years. The existing regulatory regime surrounding SBICs includes an in-depth examination of management, strong investment rules, numerous operation requirements, recordkeeping, examination and reporting mandates, and conflict of interest rules. These entities and the management of these entities are anything but unregulated. This robust regulatory framework has been well-recognized by Congress. The intent of Congress in including certain exemptions in Dodd-Frank was to reduce the regulatory burden on smaller funds and SBICs. However, the law has resulted in some unintended consequences that need to be addressed. The SBIC Advisers Relief Act does three things: One, it allows advisers that jointly advise SBICs and venture funds to be exempt from registration, combining two separate exemptions that exist: one for advisers of SBICs and a separate one for advisers of venture funds; Two, it excludes SBIC assets from the SEC's assets under management threshold calculation; and Three, it exempts from State regulation advisers of SBIC funds with less than $90 million in assets under management, leaving those entities to be regulated by the SBA, as they are today. Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that these changes are common sense. This legislation is not only broadly bipartisan, but it also includes changes suggested by the SEC. Most importantly, the bill is comprised of sensible provisions that prevent redundant regulatory mandates and allow for greater investment in America's small businesses. The Financial Services Committee has thoroughly examined this bipartisan legislation in both a legislative hearing and a markup. H.R. 432 passed the committee by a vote of 53-0 in May. Identical legislation passed the House last year by a voice vote. I want to thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) for her help on the bill. I urge support of H.R. 432, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 432) to amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to prevent duplicative regulation of advisers of small business investment companies.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of H.R. 1408, as amended. I want to thank the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter) for introducing the legislation. Mortgage servicing assets, or MSAs, also known as mortgage servicing rights, are contracts to service mortgage loans. Historically, these assets have been held by banks and credit unions that have existing or developing relationships with their customers. However, the Basel III negotiations dramatically changed the capital requirements for MSAs, forcing many financial institutions to sell off these assets. Many have been sold to hedge funds or other nonbanks with little to no experience in dealing directly with consumers. In recent years, a bipartisan group of five members of the Financial Services Committee sent letters to Federal banking regulators asking whether or not they have studied MSAs or MSA performance during the financial crisis before finalizing the Basel-generated capital requirements. The answer was pretty clear; the regulators had not. There was no consideration of MSAs, how the assets have performed historically, or the impact that higher capital would have on consumers. What is more disconcerting is MSAs exist only in the United States. These are a uniquely American product. Nowhere else in the world do MSAs exist; yet it was international regulators who decided how these assets should be treated. Last year, New York State superintendent of financial services Benjamin Lawsky addressed MSAs before a meeting of the Institute of International Bankers. Lawsky stated: We are finding we are creating giant nonbank servicers who, in a couple of instances . . . are not fully prepared to deal with this exponential rise in their portfolios, and they don't have the capacity to service the loans they are taking on. Lawsky went on to say: While, on the one hand, we were trying to get rid of a problem, we made a different problem worse. H.R. 1408 is a straightforward, bipartisan bill. The bill simply says that the U.S. banking regulators need to go back and study MSAs and the impact the new capital requirements will have on consumers. Given what we have seen in this space in the last year, I think it is not only appropriate but completely necessary that we take another look at MSAs. I want to, again, thank Mr. Perlmutter for his work on this legislation, and I ask that my colleagues support our effort to ensure that a more methodical approach is taken by the banking regulators. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1408) to require certain Federal banking agencies to conduct a study of the appropriate capital requirements for mortgage servicing assets for nonsystemic banking institutions, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I just want to reiterate my support and thanks for the hard work of the gentleman from Colorado. He has been a leader on this issue, and certainly it has been a pleasure to work with him. I urge passage of H.R. 1408, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill), who is a distinguished member of our Financial Services Committee.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER

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

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I encourage support for H.R. 2997. I think it is a great idea to, again, go into a public-private partnership and utilize that as an opportunity, again, at no cost to the taxpayers. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2997) to authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to carry out a demonstration program to enter into budget- neutral, performance-based contracts for energy and water conservation improvements for multifamily residential units.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross), a distinguished member of the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Today, I rise in support of H.R. 2997, the Private Investment in Housing Act of 2015. This bill, introduced by my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross), would authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to establish a demonstration program to make assisted multifamily properties more energy and water efficient at no cost to U.S. taxpayers. Currently, HUD spends in excess of $7 billion in annual energy and water costs for HUD-assisted properties. These properties are generally older, with inefficient energy and water usage. In most cases, owners of these older assisted properties lack the capital to modernize their buildings to perform energy and water efficiency. H.R. 2997 would create a demonstration for no more than 20,000 assisted units where HUD would enter into agreements with intermediaries--most likely, nonprofit entities--to produce energy and water efficiency in exchange for a share of the savings. This demonstration and the subsequent contract with the intermediary would allow these entities to raise capital from private investors and foundations. HUD would not provide upfront capital investments for any energy retrofits and there would be no risk to the Federal Government. Savings due to the retrofits, verified by an independent third party, would then result in HUD remitting a portion of the savings back to the intermediaries. If savings are not realized, the loss is absorbed by the private investors or foundations. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2997 is an example of the public-private partnership innovation needed to attract capital investment to our public- and assisted-housing stock. This demonstration, in addition to the Rental Assistance Demonstration program, is the beginning of bipartisan legislative initiatives to bring private sector resources and management to affordable housing for low- and very low-income families. As chairman of the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee of the Financial Services Committee, I am working with Members on both sides of the aisle to develop legislation similar to H.R. 2997, which would make the operations of HUD and its programs more efficient. Today's bill is a step in that direction. In addition to the sponsor, Representative Ross, I want to thank the ranking member of the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee, Mr. Cleaver, along with Representatives Himes of Connecticut and Delaney of Maryland, for their hard work on this legislation. I urge all Members to support H.R. 2997, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of H.R. 2482, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen), who has been an advocate on this issue for a long, long time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2482, the Preservation Enhancement and Savings Opportunity Act of 2015. As my colleague from Minnesota, a longtime advocate of this preservation bill, will explain shortly, this bill provides technical changes to the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990, or LIHPRHA, to allow property owners access to their profits while ensuring long-term preservation of affordable, multifamily housing properties. By correcting the inequities resulting from a fixed return on investment, we are providing for continued preservation of an important asset and facilitating future recapitalization to maximize the remaining useful life of the LIHPRHA properties without any cost to the Federal Government. HUD recognized the need to address this issue in the administration's fiscal year 2015 and fiscal year 2016 budget requests. Administratively, HUD has removed the limitation on distributions in similar circumstances where it had the authority to do so but has determined it lacks such authority with the LIHPRHA portfolio. This bill ensures the continued viability of the properties through continued adherence to the use agreement. This includes compliance with physical need requirements and requirement to provide for any identified capital needs. I would like to reemphasize that this provision does not result in a cost to the Federal Government and ensures long-term preservation. I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for his hard work on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2482) to amend the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, we just want to reiterate our support for H.R. 1047. We feel it corrects some problems that have arisen inadvertently. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. LUETKEMEYER. I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.