John Sarbanes: “I have no problem with the purpose in terms of the program that the Senator from Pennsylvania wishes to implement, but I…”

“I have no problem with the purpose in terms of the program that the Senator from Pennsylvania wishes to implement, but I think this is a classic example of why we should not legislate on appropriations bills. This cap was increased last year from 150,000 to 250,000 reverse mortgages for senior citizens. Yet, there have been some reports of some concerns that there is a certain amount of fee gouging taking place with respect to senior citizens. This amendment would remove the cap altogether. It seems to me that there ought to be an effort to look into and address some of these concerns rather than just further increasing the program. This is an important program for senior citizens, and we are hopeful it is working. We have been testing it out. We had an original cap of 150,000. Subsequently, this was raised to 250,000. The amendment also, of course, increases the loan limits. So there are some very substantive changes being made by this proposal with respect to this program. It seems to me it calls for the invoking of rule XVI and an opportunity to examine the substance of the program in a more careful way. That is the basis of raising the rule XVI point of order. I think this fits classically into the rationale for that ruling being part of the rules of the Senate.”