Middle Class Borrower Protection Act of 2023

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3564, the so- called Middle Class Borrowers Protection Act of 2023. The reason for my position is because this legislation does the exact opposite of what it purports.

The reality is this: The Financial Services Committee held a subcommittee hearing on this legislation on May 17, titled: ``Undermining Housing Affordability With Politics.''

My uncle used to say: ``I would kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.'' It is called irony, but that irony did not match the irony of the hearing on housing issues that had been hyper-politicized.

In my remarks, I mentioned that stations like FOX News have been providing a narrative of FHFA changes that almost all the experts in the field, and all that I have personally talked to, will tell you is untrue, but the complexity of housing finance lends itself to a lack of understanding.

Referring to FHFA pricing changes, which were largely required due to changes in GSE capital requirements and had not been addressed in many years as a socialist scheme, is simply wrong and is transparently political.

The committee then marked up legislation in a partisan way, and what was most surprising to me was the number of industry groups who have expressed issues with the politicization of FHFA loan-level price adjustment changes.

The FHFA in this process has been willing to provide information to Congress and much more information than would have been received by private entities before conservatorship.

I was pleased when FHFA listened to the concerns of Congress and outside organizations in rescinding a debt-to-income-based loan-level price adjustment that would have led to several problems. The bill we are debating today affirms that decision.

However, the bill we are debating today, if we look at what the CBO has said about the bill, is potentially expensive and not in the best interest of the American people. Given the politics of the issue, the American public should have no confidence that the end result would be any less politicized.

For example, requiring notice and comment process in all pricing matters and adjustments would reduce the GSE's ability to quickly respond to changing market conditions, thereby undermining safety and soundness objectives in times of market issues.

This would require the agency to delay implementation of pricing changes for an extended period. There are several alternatives that could be required that would complement the annual guarantee fee report FHFA is already required to publish.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Chair, I missed something because I didn't know that the Biden administration was involved in this debate or had any involvement at all with this discussion.

At the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. If House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to the bill.

My amendment would make the $3.2 billion surplus this bill generates available for Federal programs to assist homeless individuals and families. Instead of making housing more expensive for our constituents, we should be ensuring that every single American is able to live with dignity and comfort.

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the text of the amendment.

At the end, add the following new section: SEC. 8. USE OF EXCESS AMOUNTS.

Any amount of budget authority resulting from the enactment of section 7 (relating to enterprise guarantee fees) in excess of the amount necessary to offset mandatory spending increases under the other provisions of this Act so as to comply with clause 10.(a)(1) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives of the 118th Congress are hereby made available for assistance under Federal programs to assist homeless individuals and families.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Chair, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit and opposing this sham bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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

The yeas and nays were ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source