David Schweikert: “I am pleased that we're actually accepting this amendment, because if we get an honest study from it, it could be some…”

“I am pleased that we're actually accepting this amendment, because if we get an honest study from it, it could be some very interesting numbers. But I hope it's an honest study that also looks from top to bottom. Such as in the Neighborhood Stabilization Program in the previous $6 billion that has been spent, what crowding out has it done? What first-time homebuyers, what investors, found themselves competing with government? It would be interesting to know. Also, we keep hearing the numbers of saying, well, with our government money we created this many jobs. How many jobs were being created if they were private investors or first-time homebuyers or other families that were acquiring the same sort of properties and fixing them up? If we're going to get like for like, it will be fascinating. Then we also have to deal with the reality of it as we saw in the previous amendment. In that amendment, it was claiming there were about 1,061,000, we'll call them vacant units in the country. Okay. If we start doing the math with the remaining billion dollars of additional money, how much impact does that have? And will the study also step up and say, with the $6 billion that's out there that's supposed to be acting like a revolving fund, 5 years from the beginning of this program, which was what, last summer? How is that money being used? How much velocity is it really getting?…”