Can I make a parliamentary inquiry as to why that is the case? It is our amendment. The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Florida is manager in opposition to the amendment. Under clause 3(c) of rule XVII, the manager in opposition has the right to close.
Share
More from Melvin Watt
Senator, that is just not true now. What we did not do was principal reduction, but there are millions and millions of people that we have provided relief for whose homes were in jeopardy.
The real problem was that I think because there was this competition to make money for the private sector, there developed a race to the bottom.
I am wondering, if you think this is redundant and extraneous rather than contrary to the intent, why wouldn't we just accept the amendment and keep going?
What we learned, first and foremost, is that having one foot in the public sector and one foot in the private sector does not work because when you have a foot in the public sector, taxpayers take the risk, and a foot in the private…
Other voices in this conversation
