And somebody could have pointed to that section and said: See, nothing can take away my right to sue. This good faith exception takes away my right to sue. Even though they acted in good faith, that denies me a right. So it was conflicting language. Mr. McGOVERN. I disagree with your analysis, but we should have a debate on the amendment. What is wrong with bringing this amendment up and debating it? That was the question.
Share
More from Steve Stivers
I would like to close by thanking the gentleman from California for a bipartisan bill. I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin, Sean Duffy, from our side, the lead Republican on this bill. This is a bill that will get more appraisers in the…
I claim time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes. There was no objection.
I think that speaks to the fact that as policymakers, we have been very reluctant to do targeted relief to specific industries.
Again, I rise in support of H.R. 3620. I want to commend the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) for his incredible work on rural housing. As a congressman from a rural district, over 50 percent of my district is rural. This is going to…
Other voices in this conversation
