There seems to be some confusion on what the underlying bill does and what the amendments are trying to accomplish. In fact, in certain cases, it's quite evident that some of my colleagues don't understand the bill. This bill authorizes $8 billion to go towards the FHA refinance plan. It has already disbursed $50 million. Now we're hearing these claims of 10 million and 11 million homeowners. There are probably closer to 12 million homeowners that are underwater than 11. I think the numbers are understated. So let's assume 12 million. This Federal program that we've disbursed $50 million to, how many American families have had their mortgages refinanced? Forty-two. Now, who refinanced those? Who paid for that? Was it the lenders who loaned the money? No. Was it the borrowers who borrowed the money? No. It was these children, because it was taxpayer money. Now you say they're not taxpayers. No, but they're going to have to pay this back because we're spending $8 billion more every day than we're taking in in revenue. It was announced earlier this week--I think the American people, and I don't blame them, don't want to really put their arms around this-- but we just announced a deficit for the month of February, 28 days, that was more than the deficit 4 years ago for the entire year. We're hemorrhaging red ink. Are we better off than our parents? Most of us are. Are these children going to be better off than we are? Not if we don't start cutting spending.
On the recordMarch 10, 2011
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Bachus discusses the implications of a bill authorizing funds for the FHA refinance plan and its impact on taxpayers.
Share
More from Spencer Bachus
Jun 17, 2014
When you give us assurances that you are not going to use this information, like personally identifiable information, all we really have to go on is that in the Federal Register, your agency has asked permission to collect all this…
Dec 1, 2014
I thank the gentleman from Virginia. They actually called for us to have this procedure. And that part of Dodd-Frank--I have sometimes said ``the good, the bad, and the ugly''-- that was a good part. We needed to structure bankruptcy where…
Apr 28, 2014
So this is to not create any kind of double taxation or deprive any particular state of the ability to collect income tax.





