The Hamp Termination Act of 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 839, the HAMP Termination Act. The foreclosure crisis facing our nation is far from over. Families across the nation who face the threat of losing their homes need help they can count on and hope for a better future. Unfortunately, the Home Affordable Modification Program, better known as HAMP, has failed to deliver on both counts.

According to The New York Times, in 2010 Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac took over a foreclosed home approximately every 90 seconds. By the end of December, they owned 234,582 homes. They spend 10 million dollars in just one month to have the lawn of each home mowed twice!

To try and help those who are suffering most, both the Bush and Obama Administrations created programs to help families who are at risk of losing their homes. One of these programs was the Home Affordable Modification Program which we will end with the enactment of the bill before us today.

In the face of such a large crisis it is our responsibility to terminate programs that falsely raised the hopes of so many, but were poorly designed and help only a very few. While the administration has allocated $75 billion for HAMP, it failed to perform under any honest observation.

When the Administration announced the program they estimated it would help between three and four million homeowners. As of December 2010, only 521,630 HAMP modifications have been made permanent. I am concerned that for every one of these success stories there are so many more that have been kicked out of the program, since nearly 800,000 modifications have been canceled since the start of the program. Temporary modifications offer little help to homeowners who do not receive permanent ones, and they end up losing their homes anyway. In addition, the Treasury Department reports that about 20 percent of the borrowers who had their modifications made permanent are now 60 days or more behind on their mortgages.

Why would a program that was designed to help so many homeowners fall so short? Perhaps it's because the program was not designed to help homeowners facing foreclosure. On June 22, 2010, Secretary Geithner testified before the TARP Oversight Panel regarding HAMP and stated "This program was not designed to prevent foreclosures."

Programs that were not designed to help families keep their homes deserve termination. Programs that kick many more qualifying families out of the program than are assisted by the program deserve termination. Programs that have such a high redefault rate among the families that are helped by the program are fundamentally flawed and deserve termination.

I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill to terminate a program that has fallen so short of its laudable goals.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source