Randy Neugebauer

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to introduce the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) who is also on the Committee on Financial Services, and I yield 2 minutes to her.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, it's my honor now to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Drake), who has an extensive amount of experience in the housing industry and brings great expertise to this process.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to introduce another distinguished member of the Financial Services Committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), and I yield to him 3 minutes.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, it is now my honor to introduce another member of the Financial Services Committee, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry), for 3 minutes.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, now it is my honor to recognize for 3 minutes the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), who is also a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina, a member of the House Financial Services Committee, Mr. Barrett.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I've spent nearly three decades in the housing business. And over those three decades the housing market has gone up and the housing market has had its soft moments, and one of the soft moments we're experiencing today. I liken it to the fact that the housing market has a cold. And when you go to the doctor and you talk to the doctor about a cold, what does he usually tell you? He says, you know, you're going to have to let it run its course. And quite honestly, over the years as these housing downturns have happened, that exactly what we've had to do is let these markets run their course. And what we do know is that when they run their course, that they come back a lot stronger. We have just come off an unprecedented run in housing where the rise in home ownership has risen to record levels. And how did we do that? Well, we did it with the marketplace. One of the things about this bill that bothers me is that we leave people with the understanding that if their house goes down, the government will come in and make up the difference. We can't do that. People buy stocks, people buy bonds, people buy other assets. They go up, they go down. But it's not the role of the Federal Government to create a profit opportunity for people. One of the things that we know is that, as the ranking member, I think, pointed out, is that we have 110 million people that are already meeting their own housing needs. Some of them are having problems, yes, they are, and we're sorry about that. We know about 51 million people in America have mortgages. And a lot of those folks are taking second jobs and doing things to make sure that they meet their rental payments and meet their housing payments. And you look at the fact that 94, 95 percent of those people are making those payments, not only are they making them in full, but they're making them on time. What we can't let the Federal Government be is the piggy bank when things don't go exactly the way we planned. I would like to go back over my 30 years in the real estate business and wish the Federal Government could have been my piggy bank when I bought property that didn't go in the right direction. Some of it went down, some of it went up. But what I do know is that it is important that the Federal Government not get into the business of trying to manipulate markets. Markets are very efficient. In fact, they're a lot more powerful than the Federal Government. I know everybody here feels like they may be a powerful person and part of a powerful government, but quite honestly, these free markets are much more powerful than the Federal Government and they're much more efficient and they're much better able to deliver a housing market that the American people can sustain and count on. And so that's one of the reasons that I rise in opposition to this bill today is, as I look across America--and I wish you could have been at a town hall meeting with me the other day where people weren't asking about mortgages, Mr. Speaker, they were asking when is this Congress going to finally do something about getting a comprehensive energy strategy for America? When are we going to open up the ability to drill in these other areas? And when are we going to be able to come up with more nuclear power plants? Mr. Speaker, the American people don't want to make their neighbor's payment when they're having a hard time making their own.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, at this time it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Feeney).

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I yield so much time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, Mr. Bachus.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I claim time in opposition.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I yield the gentlewoman an additional minute.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, the distinguished ranking member of the Financial Services Committee mentioned that this is a shell. Maybe it's a shell game. I'm not sure. But for energy bill being the underlying bill, I think the American people wish we were on the floor today discussing an energy future for America. It's now my distinct pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Housing Subcommittee, Mrs. Biggert from Illinois.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, for nearly 35 years prior to coming to the United States Congress, I was involved in the housing business in one form or the other. I've built housing for sale, I've built housing for rent. And one of the things that you learn very quickly and housing and how to make sure that the American people have safe, affordable housing, whether it's to own that housing or to rent that housing is you have jobs and opportunity because when people, the American people have jobs and opportunity, they don't have trouble making their payments or making their rental payments. And so I would think that the 110 million people that are paying their rent or making their house payments today are wondering why this Congress is not down on the floor today debating an energy policy that lowers the cost of gasoline, that lowers the cost of electricity so that American families can have more money, so that they can have more money to pay on their rent or pay on their mortgage payment. But more importantly, they will wonder why we're not down on this floor talking about how we have a tax code in this country that promotes jobs and opportunity that allows small businesses to thrive and to create jobs. Small businesses are our number-one job creators. You know what? When people have jobs, they're able to make their mortgage payments. When people have jobs, they're able to make their rental payments. So it's frustrating to me and others to see we have a process today, as other Members have pointed out, that lock us out of the process. We swore in two new Members of Congress in the last 24 hours. Unfortunately, neither one of those gentlemen will be able to participate in this debate because they've been locked out of thoughtful consideration of this bill. Madam Speaker, we need to be down on this floor doing policy that will impact the American people. Fifty-one million Americans have a mortgage in this country, 94 percent of them are making their mortgage payments. The 110 million people that are scraping and making sure that they are a step up and make their payments, are wondering why we're down on the floor asking them to make the payments for those who can't.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, before I came to Congress, I had an opportunity to serve my constituents in a different way. I was a home builder, a land developer, and even a mortgage lender. I know firsthand some of the problems that the real estate industry and the housing industry is facing today. Ninety-four percent of the American homeowners are paying their mortgage payments on time and in full. Are some people having a hard time making these mortgage payments? Of course they are. Can the government help? Yes, in some cases. But I urge my colleagues to be very careful here. We do not need for the Federal Government to be the piggy bank for folks that made poor decisions or to bail out the lenders that made loans to people that really didn't have the capacity to pay it back. It is not fair to penalize those folks that made good decisions and played by the rules by taking their tax money and rewarding those who didn't. For many of my constituents, they are having a hard time just making their own mortgage payment. What we shouldn't be doing is taking their tax money to pay their neighbor's payment. Madam Speaker, I encourage folks to be very cautious about these bail-out programs.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Because we let American agriculture infrastructure fall to the wayside. Our producers are competing on an unlevel playing field. I wish the playing field was level. If the playing field was level, we wouldn't need any of these programs, because American producers can compete with anybody in the world on a level playing field. Unfortunately, the WTO discussions that we have been involved in have not yielded much fruit. Many countries that our producers are competing with all across the world are competing against other countries that provide subsidies at a much greater level than we are providing under this underlying bill. So while I appreciate the gentleman from Arizona's concern about being fiscally responsible, I understand that he would like to see some reforms. I am here tonight to tell him that there are a lot of reforms in this bill. But at the same time, it is important to have a balanced bill to make sure that we have a strong agricultural economy in this country from this point forward so that when Americans wake up every morning, they are not going to worry about who is going to feed or clothe them.

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I thank the chairman. My friend from Arizona and I agree many times on many issues, but this is one on which I must disagree. There has been a lot of discussion about reform in the farm bill. I think before I go down and list some of the reform that is being considered in this current farm bill, I think we have to step back and look at what has transpired with the 2002 farm bill. The 2002 farm bill actually cost $25 billion less than what it was originally projected to cost. Let me repeat that. This is a Federal program that actually came in $25 billion less than what it was budgeted. I would ask my friend from Arizona; name me another mandatory program in the last 5 years that has come in under what was originally projected. Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office projection for what farm policy will cost has imposed for the baseline going forward a $60 billion reduction over what was originally planned in 2002. The reason that that reduction is in place and the reason that this bill came in $25 billion less than what it was projected is because it was working the way it was supposed to. And it was designed when commodity prices were low for there to be a safety net so that we could preserve that farm infrastructure. When the commodity prices are high, then the safety net was not available because there was no need for that safety bill. So when you look at the reform, $60 billion sounds like a lot of reform to me. Now I don't know about out in Arizona, but $60 billion in Texas is a lot of money. Additionally, one of the things, and I think the chairman alluded to this, is that both in the House and the Senate bill, the three-entity rule has been eliminated bringing some transparency; in other words, being able to boil it down, who is actually farming, and making sure that the farm safety net is actually available to those people that are involved, actively engaged in farming. The other thing that is going on here is that with the elimination of that three-entity rule, it is estimated that some 50 percent reduction will be affected, some of the operations that are currently under this bill. So that is a fairly good reduction when you look at 50 percent for some of those operations. Compared to the House and the Senate version, quite honestly, a $10,000 reduction has been on the table over the original House version. As the chairman mentioned, these discussions are still under way and we don't know what that final number is going to be. The other thing, and the chairman also alluded to this, because there has been a lot of discussion about are these payments going to millionaire farmers. And so one of the things that we have taken is steps to materially reduce the adjusted gross income figure, some 70 percent reduction. Now I think the point that the chairman was trying to make, and it is a very important point, 30, 40, years ago farmers across America could farm a small piece of land and make a good living. Today, in a global economy where they are competing with producers all over the world, what they are faced with is, how do they get to a size that makes sense with today's cost of production and with today's cost of tractors and all the equipment necessary. And the days of a small farm being able to support a family are gone. So today, many farmers in my district, for example, are farming 3,000 and 4,000 and 5,000 acres, and this is still a family farm. This is not a company that has a lot of employees; this is a family farm. And so when you look at those numbers, it takes a lot of money, it takes a lot of capital and investment for them to produce this many acres. Farmers are taking a big risk today. Yes, the commodity prices are up, and that is a good thing for farmers and producers. The bad news for them, though, is that their costs are up as well. Looking across fuel and fertilizer and all of those, in just the last few years production costs for commodities is up almost 25 percent. One of the things that, as we look at this farm bill, I think we have to step back and look at it and I think sometimes I get kind of amused. As we talk about this farm bill, only about 12 percent, Mr. Speaker, 12 percent of this farm bill actually has anything to do with production of agriculture. A good portion of this farm bill has to do with food stamps and nutrition programs and conservation programs. While those may be worthy, I am not here to debate those, when we look at the production of the agriculture part, the part that actually allows American agriculture to produce food and fiber for Americans, we are talking about 12 percent of this bill having anything to do with that. So when you step back, why is that important to America? Why should America be concerned about having a good, strong agricultural industry in this country? Well, I will tell you why, Mr. Speaker. Right now, we are watching with amazement as we look at people, Americans across America having to pay $3.50 a gallon for gasoline. We have seen tremendous increases. This country today is energy dependent. That means that we wake up every morning looking for some other country to furnish the energy that it takes to run our country's economy. It is, quite honestly, a security risk to our country as well as an economic security risk to our country. And so how did we get in that situation is because we let America's infrastructure for producing energy fall to the wayside. We did not make it a priority. My greatest fear here today is that, as we move forward, if we begin to undermine American agriculture, who will then feed and clothe Americans in the future? Do the American people want to wake up every morning and wonder where we are going to get our next meal? What country is going to feed us?

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, on Wednesday, April 9, 2008, I was unexpectedly absent from rollcall votes 164, 165, and 166. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall vote 164, H. Res. 1084, ordering the previous question on H.R. 2016, to establish the National Landscape Conservation System, and for other purposes. On rollcall 165, on agreeing to H. Res. 1084, the Rule for H.R. 2016, to establish the National Landscape Conservation System, and for other purposes, I would have voted ``nay.'' On rollcall 166, H. Res. 1077, calling on the Government of the People's Republic of China to end its crackdown in Tibet and to enter into a substantive dialogue with His Holiness the Dalai Lama to find a negotiated solution that respects the distinctive language, culture, religious identity, and fundamental freedom of all Tibetans, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. NEUGEBAUER

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Madam Speaker, as the city of Lubbock turns 100 years old, I could not be more proud to be part of a wonderful community that has grown to embrace all that is good in America. The traditional values upon which this country was founded still flourish and are taught to the next generation here. The history of Lubbock is a story of men and women that came to this region with a dream. They came with a determination that would be tested over and over again. That ``can-do'' spirit turned this remote area of the High Plains of Texas into one of the most productive agricultural regions in the world. My grandfather came to Lubbock in 1909 to be part of this new community. Over the past 100 years, many visionary citizens stepped forward to build and strengthen this growing and developing town. Now today, because of their efforts, Lubbock is not only an important agricultural area, but it is also a city of world-class educational and medical facilities and the regional distribution center for the entire South Plains and part of New Mexico. As we celebrate the past, let us look forward with great anticipation toward the future. Lubbock is not just a city celebrating 100 years. it's home to me. I am proud to call Lubbock home and am honored to represent each its residents in the United States Congress.