On the recordMarch 15, 1994
There are numerous programs where the Government assists in creating a financing market. We are doing it. For example, is the opposition to this initiative suggesting--and I would think they would have to be to be consistent philosophically--that we reevaluate Fannie Mae; that we reevaluate Freddie Mac or Sallie Mae? To take it a step further, Mr. President, we use the Tax Code to promote financing all the time, and we know that a tax benefit has the exact same economic effect as a direct subsidy--not even a loan in this case, but a direct subsidy. We use that for certain purposes. The Government has been doing it in many areas. For example, if we follow the logic of the opposition, we might have to eliminate mortgage revenue bonds, municipal bonds, industrial development bonds, and the low-income housing tax credit. If we are not going to be for one, and we are going to be consistent in philosophy, then we should not be doing all these others we have been doing all these years. Furthermore, unlike any other program, under this program, the Government can 'share in the up side.' Not very elegant language, I would agree, but it means that if the CTIP, which is this program we are debating, does well, the Government can benefit, bringing dollars into the Treasury and reducing the Federal deficit.
Source
govinfo.gov




