David Price: “It is news to most of us, I expect, that consumer protections is incompatible with consumer choice. We offer protections…”

“It is news to most of us, I expect, that consumer protections is incompatible with consumer choice. We offer protections of all sorts. In the case of housing, it is against predatory practices. As the houses are sold, it is against shoddy construction, it is against a race to the bottom in terms of quality that individual buyers may not be able to perceive. That compatibility of basic consumer protections and consumer choice is presented every day in our marketplace, and I certainly don't see why it should be absent here, although, as I said earlier, some of these rules may be up for scrutiny. It is just not that we are prepared to do it here tonight. I would also point out that the only type of housing that moves across State lines is manufactured housing, so that probably provides an additional argument as to why we should be particularly diligent in dismantling Federal protections. I urge rejection of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment No. 56 Offered by Mr. Smith of Missouri The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 56 printed in part B of House Report 115-295.”