resolution is adopted without objection a motion to reconsider is laid on the table for what purpose german from florida writes the speaker us then to the desk of the direction of the house republican conference at the end of the desk a privilege resolution and ask for to meeting consideration in the house of purple report the resolution passed resolution seven twenty two three songs at the following the members be and are here by elected to the following standing committees and they first to house resolution seven twenty and rule eighteen the chair declares the house and the committee of the whole house on the state of unite the union for consideration of h r twenty eight ninety five the chair appoint gentleman from pennsylvania mr holden to preside over the committe whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h r twenty eight ninety five which a clerk report by title a bill to establish the national fordable housing tracts signed in the treasury of the united states provide for the construction we have allocation in preservation a decent state and affordable housing for low income families pursuant to the rules of billet considered read the first time the gentleman from massachusetts mr frank the gentleman from alabama mr vikas each will affordable housing following a people and also from the leading business groups that understand the need for a an increase in housing supply fell from the knowing about the coalition and all the homeless groups over to the now a national association of homebuilders joan california thank you very much and mrs bacon members of the chair of the financial services committee chairman frank who just spoke is absolutely correct this is a very exciting day and a day that so many housing advocates and working people and poor people have been waiting for they get a chance to see their government responding to one of the most critical needs and our society i rise in support of h r twenty eight ninety five the a portable housing trust fund act of two thousand and seven and i think fairly thank chairman frank for his unrelenting efforts to get the federal government back in the and production business i am so proud to be a part of this committee and to be a co chair of this bill and to work with chairman frank on not only producing housing under this national a portable housing trust fund but for all the other work that has been coming out of this committee under his leadership the nature of this bill could not be more urgent mr chairman last week you joined me when i chaired or hearing about housing and community opportunity subcommittee that demonstrated that when affordable housing is not produce homelessness sales the stark bottom line better emerge from the hearing focused narrowly on reauthorizing the mckinney there to homeless assistance personal challenges that require faucheux services or other supports every homeless individual and family shares one common need housing they can afford and there simply is not enough of it for example there are nine million rent households who earn less than thirty percent of area median income but only six point two million units affordable to them this leaves an absolute deficit of two point eight affordable rental housing units for our poorest families this kind of math leads inevitably to widespread homelessness but i want to emphasize that the national housing trust fund addresses the affordable housing crisis as it affects every level of society right now housing costs are outstripping wages for more households than ever before in recent memory according to the harvard university study on the state of the nation's housing in two thousand and seven seventeen million renters and homeowners are paying more than half their incomes and housing costs working is simply no longer a guarantee of been able to afford housing in los angeles for example it takes an hourly wage of over twenty two dollars an hour to poorly moderately priced two bedroom apartment when the many minimum wage in california is only seven dollars and thirty cents an hour put another way a two parent family with both parents working full time at minimum wage jobs puts that bammer less than two thirds of the way to being able to afford decent housing finally as a recent center for housing policy study paycheck to paycheck dramatically shows many of our nation's the central workers cannot afford to live in are near the communities where they work in high cost communities like los angeles where the median income home price is five hundred and twenty three thousand dollars they encumber needed to afford a home is far higher than that earned by teachers police firefighters nurses and other key occupations studded the national affordable housing trust fund addresses this poll range of housing prices providing relief to overburden renters and homeowners while targeting pons where the need is greatest and i want to emphasize h r twenty eight ninety five does so at no additional cost to taxpayers it is a trust fund in the truest sense a dedicated source of revenue separate and apart from the annual appropriations process reply to the need for the federal government to make a long overdue commitment to affordable housing production we have clearly demonstrated that the plan will be drawn from monies from the affordable housing plan proposed as part of the g s t reform bill h r fourteen twenty seven from peril house and administration savings and other existing revenue streams i'm prepared to debate with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle whether such revenue should be diverted to uses other than addressing the housing needs of america's working families and poorest disable individuals i do not think there is any better use for them particularly since both g s c and epi che revenues derived from housing activities that the federal government and government sponsored enterprises engage in at significant profit to both i my dad and conclusion mr chairman it's been seventeen years since am so proud of this legislation and i'm so thankful chairman frank for your leadership and i'm so proud and pleased to have the opportunity at this time in my career not only to work on the committee with new program the national affordable housing trust fund program i think it's important to distinguish between what we are disagree on and what we agree on the first thing that we agree on is that chairman frank and the members of the majority have a sincere commitment to meeting the housing can needs of low income americans to make housing more fordable for low income americans we share that need what we're what we debated in committee what we debated on the floor of this house on two previous occasions and now is how we meet those needs now what this legislation does is it creates a new national affordable housing trust fund this is a new federal program in fact chairman frank you said this is the largest expansion of a housing program i think in the last thirty years now it's a multi billion dollar pro we say that this is not the way to do it that is what we are if we are to address the unmet needs of low income americans to affordable housing this is not the way to go why do we say that because presently there are over thirty federal programs addressing affordable housing for low income americans additionally the in addition to those thirty something programs at hud we have  and we have the g s t fannie mae and freddie mac what this legislation proposes to do is not reform any of those programs what it proposes to do is take money a and from the g s t fannie and freddie and transfer this that money into a new program so we end up with all the programs we presently have which it ought to be obvious to everyone apparently are not working you're talking about over thirty five the majority of the thirty five billion dollars and when i say not working let me say this the chairman they're not meeting the needs or we would need to create a new program but what we're saying is if there's something wrong with the existing program is there something wrong with the thirty five billion they were presently committing under the hood program if f h a or the g s e's are not doing their job walk come along and create another program and then if f h a and the g s seas are doing their job what take money from f h a in the in the g s t particularly because at the same time we are saying to those programs we want you to play a larger role in the mortgage crisis the sub prime mortgage crisis in america but at the same time we're taking money from those programs so that's what we're debating we're debating whether or not with all these programs with a large federal row in creating low income affordable housing why it's necessary to create another large program and as bad as chairman frank says the largest he actually says this is a one of the most significant expansion of federal programs for low income americans at this time mr chairman i'd like to yield three minutes to the lady from illinois gentlewoman from illinois recognized for three minutes i i think the gentleman mr chairman i rise do oppose the creation of the national housing net trust fund while i share chairman frank goal of increasing the amount of available housing affordable housing i do not think that r twenty eight ninety five is the right way to do it and i'll make three quick points to explain why first let's look at how the trust fund is financed thanks to self defeating provisions in both the g s t reform and the f h a we are zation bills low and middle income americans including the elderly are going to pay for it how will it work well it's estimated that fannie mae and freddie mac two entities that purchaser securitize almost eighty percent of americans families mortgages will be taxed at more than three billion dollars over a five year period to pay for the trust fund where will they get the money well as publicly traded companies accountable to their shareholders fannie mae and freddie mac will inevitably pass along these new assessments to their customers america's low and middle income homeowners who will be footing the bill it's not a good plan it amounts to a mortgage tax on these hardworking low and middle income americans seeking to secure maintain or are refinance their home mortgage in short it's robbing peter to house paul what's worse the congressional budget office has estimated that the f h a trust fund provision could include a three hundred seventy million dollars surplus in two thousand and eight in a two point one billion dollars surplus over the two thousand and eight to two two thousand and twelve period and where does this come from well the majority of f h a surplus would come from reverse mortgage premiums that are paid for by our seniors suggesting that they have been overcharged i've supported ideas in giving this surplus back to our seniors in the form of reduce premiums which the financial  services committee rejected i would agree with the chairman that the funds for this trust fund should not be used for other purposes that have nothing to do with with housing but here with the f h a funds  fact i think that the money should stay in f h a period and second why are we recruit creating yet another federal housing program when we have so many housing programs already in existence over one hundred and the national low income housing coalition cites that nearly six hundred housing trust funds have been created in the cities counties and states in this country generating more than one point six billion dollars per year to support house housing needs and third to the extent that the state programs fall short in some way i must point to the existing federally administered program designed to serve the housing needs of low income americans the home investment partnership program this  has the personnel systems and regulatory oversight in place to accomplish the same objective object objective as the national housing trust fund instead of creating a federal barrier here accuracy let's improve on the home loan that this would duplicate now i know of one program which helps build family affordable housing that's what this does i would deal to the general would he name some of the other programs the question is what where one of the thirty programs that help fordable family housing construction and i'll yield c d b g all those programs under her designate money to all the states to many i take back my time i'm sorry i think the gentleman doesn't have thirty don't have three i asked him to know what a gentleman please abide by the rules the masters control time he made a statement i'm using my time he is equal time i don't think there are thirty programs i don't think they can come up with a home program i agree and there are reasons why this must be in addition home program community development block grant are not supposed to be primary construction program mayors and city council members and others all over the country will be appalled to be told that the supposed to put c d b gate primarily in housing construction they aren't it's for a whole variety of programs people know that we do have programs to build housing for the elderly and for the disabled but there is simply not a bridge for housing construction now secondly the general bama said well why don't we fix these programs of course the republican party was in control of both houses of congress and the department of housing development for six years apparently they didn't do anything he then said why don't we fix f h a and g s t well i was surprised by that mr chairman the gentleman notes that this house has in fact passed bills that do make reforms in both the  and we do have local housing trust funds it is the local housing trust funds that want this bill that general milroy mention the low income housing coalition they are the major driver behind this bill because they understand it's important we want to supplement the fund what's the problem with the one program that builds a four about housing the home program there was not enough money it competes with other appropriated funds and by the way the argument that somehow we are being unfair to the elderly in this bill unlike what happened during the republican rule we limit the fees that can be charged to the elderly under the home equity mortgage program we do that they didn't we limit what the f h a can cure for mortgage insurance i went be ordered hard to raise the fees so they would make even more of a profit we said you can't do that we have a other why some additional activity we've limited the failure increases and we've taken some of the money from the addition i kitty not from fee increases the fact is that the republican party has opposed any funding for affordable housing construction they inherited the home program they have been very good to in the appropriations process this says that we need to get back in the business in a major way of helping build affordable housing there is no thirty programs that build fordable housing for low income people that is not what c b d is intended to do it is not what she big largely does most  this chair on the fact is that americans are in a crisis and terms of affordable housing today there is no real affordable housing and this is the most programatic lee rational and fiscally responsible way to address that crisis i strongly support this to frank's bill and i appreciate m r following this opportunity for the congress itself  show that we really can make a positive difference and people's lives now within the built the needs to i would appreciate some clarification because within the bill at least seventy five percent the funds are set aside for families who incomes are no more than thirty percent of the area median income and other at least ten percent is for people whose incomes is more than fifty percent of the area median income that only leaves about fifteen percent of the trust fund flex vailable to be flexible used by localities now i represent the washington suburbs where housing is extraordinarily high not dissimilar from the boston suburbs that the chairman represents and many of these families and governments are concerned that there will not be the opportunity to address the crisis that what used to be middle class families are addressing and housing that there are more than fifty thousand families just within the beltway in northern virginia who are paying almost forty percent of their income for housing but whose area is a little or at about one hundred percent of the area median income in fact fannie mae and freddie mac in the bill we passed which we did do to move forms in we did say did they should in their secondary mortgage activity be supportive of people at eighty percent a median that we've give below that in general which is why they would no overlap between fannie mae freddie mac and this program but secondly to the gentleman's argument what we want to do here is give it much flexibility if we can to the local communities that's why yes we are not creating a federal bureaucracy here the federal government will marjory here be passing this money through to those state and local housing trust funds who can focus on the needs in their own community and they would have the ability with the fifteen percent to add to the gentleman to spend it where they think best so they thought it was needed for them always think of people they could do that but if in the gentleman's area they felt yes this needs to go to people who are sixty percent a median and ultimately when we get the fund up to eighty percent a median they would have the ability to do that so that fifteen percent is within the three minutes to the gentleman from texas down to texas recognized for three minutes i thank the gentleman for yielding and i rise today in favor of greater housing opportunities for working families i also rise today against adding yet another new federal government housing program on top of the roughly eighty plus programs that hud already administers which i hold the list in my hand and since it's called ostensibly these programs have something to do with either affordable housing or urban development the chairman what we have in front of us again is another classic liberal let's take money away from working families send it to washington and then somehow to throw a little bit of it back at the people throw money at the problem and i might add is the chairman brought out is a beneficial feature of this that the money goes to the states last i looked at all but four or five are running a surplus unfortunately there is still a deficit in the nation's capital now i appreciate the chairman's commitment to affordable l z i believe i agree with him there is a need for greater affordable housing he is very sincere in his passion and i respect that but i note that he and other members on that side of the aisle unfortunately constantly vote against affordable housing the greatest determinant and how affordable your housing is is a paycheck it's a paycheck mr chairman and almost all the democrats voted against the economic growth and tax relief act of one the jobs and growth reconciliation act of zero three which created eight point two million jobs and helped lead to one of the largest rates of home ownership in the entire history of our nation the next biggest determinant in the affordability of housing is once you have that paycheck how much of it does uncle sam take what is your tax bite and yet we know mr chairman that in the budget passed by the democrat majority it contains the single largest tax increase in history we're talking about an average of three thousand dollars per year on every american family when it's imposed and i hear from some of these families i hear from people like the stevens family in muskeg who wrote to me dear congressman i wanted to let you know that i'm a single mom that does not receive any type of child support in an increase of this amount talking about the taxes would break me i would be at risk losing my home with this type of tax increase so much for making housing more affordable also many of our friends across on the other side of the aisle do not support increased opportunities for trade and i want to put on the tariffs on the canadian lumber the mexican concrete which leads to homes being less affordable and then finally there's the regulatory burden and mr chairman they almost all supported davis baking davis bacon provisions which increases the cost of public housing by artificially raising wages at almost every juncture the democrat majority he is voting against affordable housing and those are the facts and so it really comes down to a choice do we want more opportunity housing or do we want more government housing we should support opportunity of melbourne reserved about the time to make one state and then reserve the balance of my time gentle smile them mr chairman as i said at the start of this debate the trust fund will be the largest expansion in federal housing programs in decades that's what we're debating and also at this time would like to introduce and i ask back and you laugh are heard to produce the list of programs which you today promote affordable housing they sent me a list and it is actually thirty four programs which in some way assist low income americans with their housing ne s that's not my list that's their list but let's again focus on we have all these programs do we rehabilitate that programs or do we shift money from one program to another and if we're shifting money for one program or another  which gives people money to pay their rent on a year by year basis and does not encourage the construction of any housing there was a difference between that and a program to help people build affordable housing the gentleman are poor with housing yet build shelters for the homeless as probably one of two of the programs it gives section eight vouchers the home program is the only one of that list that helps build  affordable housing helps build it so the gentlemens western he doesn't want to read and understand why he mentioned community development block grant no one familiar with committee development background thinks it's primarily value construction that's not what it does there are programs that help build housing for the disabled and the elderly but other than the home program there aren't programs that help build affordable housing for any mae and freddie mac are now aimed at helping people at one hundred percent a median above we say that should be dropped eighty percent of median not one hundred but it doesn't help people in the lower income categories there are no such programs and so that's the answer to what the gentleman said he keeps talking about well we should fix the programs of course for six years with a republican president dollars and make them available and again i will wait this list of programs that help the construction of affordable rental housing i think i will wait a very long time the only other point i would make is this is that i do regret we have limited time i was sorry that the ways and means committee didn't yield time to the down from texas mr handling since he talked about trade and taxes none of which have entered this bill so maybe ways and means owes us a few minutes and when that bill comes up later maybe i'll come talk about housing to offset the general in texas talking about speaker and never before in the history of this country the united states of america have we had as great a need for affordable housing as we need right now we've just come out  perhaps the most devastating storm a natural disaster in the history of our country and the greatest need in that area not just in the gulf area but rippling throughout this country as a result of that i and mrs speaker one and seven households now spend more than fifty percent of their income on housing and on any given night in america across the width and breadth of this country nearly one million of our people are homeless including men women and children and nowhere is it targeted then to the elderly and the low income so what are we doing with this house affordable housing trust fund we're responding to the hue and the cry of the american people for we need to make sure that we have affordable housing now yes we have the home program and there may become an amendment on here to strike what we're doing and make it a part of home program and the home program is done some good things but it does not do the most important things that this country needs are now building and constructing new homes the home program doesn't target that nor does the home program target those in most basic need the lower income and the disabled now let me just explain for my remaining time because i want to show precisely and explain how this truss fun is funded this isn't very important we've had a lot of things  today this is how it is funded it's funded with monies from the proposed g s t affordable housing fun h r fourteen twenty seven which mr speaker we passed it also funds it from the federal a savings that result from the enactment of the expanding of the american home ownership program and it does not go or cost any money it's pay as you go and does not add to the federal deficit the estimated numbers from these funding sources would result in an initial allocation of eight hundred million to one billion to the state and local communities for affordable housing funds with a sixty forty match with the states and the local government furthermore not only will these monies be used for construction the monies will be used for rehabilitation they will be very diverse in uses acquisition preservation and parading assistance these monies will also be used for both rental housing and for down payments and costs for closing assistance for first time homebuyers george's recognize for one additional minute thank you very much very very important considerations so we're going to hear a lot from the other side and i respect my my my friends on the republican side but it is us on the democratic side mr speaker that are clearly responding to the needs of the american people here we're creating yes and we're expanding why because the problem has expanded as i said in the outset one million people every night homeless we've been ratcheted from one end of this country to the other for displaced people from katrina and god knows what else is going to happen with the global warming and the global climate change and there could be more no this is a great program it's a program that is needed the timing is right and the american people are expecting us to respond and the best way to respond to the american people is to establish this  with the principle that he's using to achieve it by expanding and creating a new government program the home program the gentleman before me just spoke of provides a very similar application of of funds two billion dollars a year to help with run all systems and affordable housing rather than fixing this program and improving it they are creating a whole nother program and as i said i disagree with the principle on the size and scope of government the government's there's a common thread running through the agenda of this new democrat majority and that common thread is that there's a massive expansion of government if government is not needed you'll add a little government intervention and if  there's already too much government intervention they'll just expand it even more the bill we're debating falls squarely into the second category the bill so far as i can tell is all about more government control of this process rather than using the marketplace to improve the affordability of homes they're creating another government program which redistributes money and fact a tax on every mortgage in this country and then redistribute it to those through a government program it makes no sense to create another duplicative program as my colleague from alabama said there are already over thirty affordable housing programs within the government most of those programs do not in fact build houses but they give rental assistance they give assistance so people can buy their first time to give assistance in and number of different categories but the federal government doesn't build homes we allow the private sector to do that which is what i think is most important but what is especially true in light of the fact th is bill we're debating today creates a new program that is nearly identical to one already existing home program which as i said earlier is a two billion dollar a year program let's fix that program let's look at marketplace based incentives how much time remains with him jim of massachusetts has nine minutes remaining and a gentleman from alabama sixteen and one half minutes remaining against massachusetts are you myself one minute just to say that  the assertion that this is ignoring the private market would be more persuasive to me if it were not for the fact that every organization that is engaged in the private market building of housing disagrees the national association of realtors and the national association of home builders need it which known for its socialist tendencies have written letters in support of this bill exactly as it has been presented they who fully understand the market boilerplate rhetoric to describe it understand the importance of interactivity between some public sector participation in the market and this creates no new government bureaucracy this funds existing state this is an historic occasion with historic opportunities this is sturrock occasion provides the historic opportunity to not only canst and historic vote but to also be on the right side of history on july second one thousand nine hundred sixty four the house made history when it passed the civil rights act of one nine hundred sixty four which among other things outlawed discrimination in public accommodations hundred sixty five this house again made history with the passage of the voting rights act of one nine hundred sixty five benefiting millions of minority voters three hundred twenty eight were on the right side of history they voted right when they voted to protect voting rights on april tenth of one nine hundred sixty eight this house again made history when it passed the fair housing act prohibiting discrimination in housing two hundred fifty one on the right side of history they voted for equality of housing opportunities for all today we must cast another his sturrock vote a vote for a national affordable housing trust fund for the first time in history in the history of the united states of america we will have a fund dedicated to making the american dream of a place to call home a reality and yes there are other housing program some say thirty some say more than thirty every one of them is needed every one of them even under a republican controlled house republican controlled senate republican controlled administration the programs were not eliminated every one of them is needed there is a need for this affordable housing trust fund as well and i say to you my friends whether we will make history today with our vote is not the question the question is what side of history will we be on will we be on the side of those who need this affordable yield myself such time as i my concern gentleman's reckoning and mr chairman and i i want to be clear about something we hear from the majority this is a historic moment and i will say the majority i believe  is i believe that that it is very significant i don't believe that what we're debating here is insignificant at all in fact the chairman and i want to yield the chairman fifteen seconds to respond but i believe the chairman him self has said my recollection and that distrust van would be the largest expansion of federal housing program and decades and i'll yield to the chairman when i said that before he shook his head and i don't know if he was shaking his you'll fifteen second yeah it's been decades i thought the gentleman said thirty years i would not claim that it was the largest in thirty years but it certainly has been the largest since the republicans took power twelve years ago since they try to kill them all a press statement you said this was this trust fund would be the largest expansion of federal housing in decades and that was sad june the twenty eighth and as you knowledge and what we're doing here is we're taking money to fund this large expansion of federal housing we're not taking it from the thirty suggesting programs that specifically address low income housing elderly disabled age senior citizens we're not taking we're taking it from f h a and from the g s t which actually that money presently today promotes mortgages affordable mortgage for all americans so we're taking from low income middle income americans we're taking from programs which promote affordable housing from them and we're transferring it to other americans and in doing it we're not reforming those they're eighty some programs a gentleman had said how many programs eightieth are there eighty housing programs thirty four which specifically addressed low income americans at this time i'd like to  minutes from the gentle lady from west virginia gentleman from west virginia is recognized for three minutes thank you mr speaker and i would like to thank the ranking member for yielding me time even though we happen to disagree on this issue and i'd also like to thank the chairman for his dedication to affordable housing i rise today support of the creation of the affordable housing trust fun many states and communities across the nation have already created state housing trust funds my home out of west virginia is one of those and what we've seen in the creation of that west virginia housing trust fund is the flexibility and the ability to target certain funds to certain projects and it becomes a very workable and a very adaptable program the creation of a national trust fund will continue the good work of providing low incomes low income folks with rental assistance new construction preservation of existing units homeownership assistance and many other important programs this trust from will provide state local housing authorities with the funding and flexibility to best address the unique housing needs of their communities certainly the needs of communities in my home state of west virginia are drastically different than those in the larger urban areas for instance in west virginia we have a real we have a high homeownership but we also have a definite question about the quality of the housing that people are living in and the rehabilitation of those homes is extremely important we also have an aging population where the different needs in different housing situations change and i think i don't think we're addressing those needs and i think this federal housing trust fund could help us with that so today i have i applaud this bill i applaud the flexibility and adaptability in it and i'm very much in favor of the the ability that this trust fund members to oppose a program that actually creates or has a purpose creating affordable housing and you'll see that by the two members are speaking but mr chairman again i will say that the majority of our members believe that if you have eighty some programs and they're not working you have a program the home investment partnership program which actually this program actually put doesn't adopt regulations they're simply adopt the regulations on the distribution of that program so they almost mirror each other if those programs aren't working why not take money from f h a which is one of the most successful affordable housing programs in this america want to take money away from middle and low income americans to create yet another program in fact if you think about that you're creating two  programs with all the federal employees that go in those programs and you're putting money in one program and then you're taking it out of that program you're putting in another program that in itself involves a cost of the taxpayers in fact you know when you take from one federal program and put it on another as opposed to appropriate money to me that's the worst of all worlds from an efficiency standpoint at this time i yield the gentleman in connecticut three minutes thank the gentleman from connecticut recognized for three minutes i have pre shared my ranking member who i think is just an outstanding member of this congress for yielding me this time and i do rise in support of this legislation of which i'm an original co sponsor and i'm grateful to the ranking member for his understanding about these issues and to chairman frank and chair chairman walters outstanding work in bringing this bill to the floor i know there are some on my side obviously who oppose her and come to with reinject in the federal government into the construction of new housing i think it's long overdue here is where i come from on this issue we have an undeniable and pressing need for additional high quality affordable housing not just in connecticut but around the country we simply wish the problem away there are steps that can be taken to a local level such as requiring affordable units to be included in the construction of new housing but without the federal government's assistance i'm concerned we will have a progress perpetual problem of families struggling with rent payments th consume fifty sixty or seventy percent of their monthly income low income families who are committed such a high percentage of their income to median rent are suffocating there's less money food less money for new clothes for the kids and less for taking care of oneself harvard study reported the number of american households paying more than half their incomes on housing increased to seventeen million in two thousand and five eight point two million renters and five million homeowners have severed severe cost burdens and on any given night we can find three quarters of a million americans homeless mr chairman in these great united states i believe we can do better this legislation address the problem in a creative way the government sponsored enterprises fann significant special treatment under federal law by not having to pay state and local taxes and were able to borrow money at a lower rate because of an implicit government backing will be required to contribute funds in amounts equal to a percentage of their average mortgage portfolio in addition expected savings from passage of lesser station to modernize the federal housing administration will be applied to these funds these funds will be distributed by a formula that states and localities that will subsequently make funds available under a competitive selection process to qualify recipients for the construction rehabilitation and prevent preservation of affordable housing including both rental housing and home ownership the results will be directly and quickly realized in our communities capital grants and loans for new rehabilitated housing land acquisition homeowner assistance and interest rate by downs will be available the fund targets very low income individuals but also individuals locality but also allows localities to address in the of working class families the fund will be adequately flexible but subject to many responsible use restrictions to ensure taxpayers dollars are well spent i have further comment but i'll put that in the record thank speaker i want to commend the chairman of the committee mr frank first tireless efforts on behalf of affordable housing and say that i'm astounded to hear my colleagues on the other side the moan the fact that there's too much effort being made to provide affordable housing in this country i don't know where they're living i don't know who they represent they're certainly not living anywhere that i've been and i quite frankly let me finish get workers because there aren't enough affordable housing spots for those workers to be able to live so they can actually work in the businesses that they are needed so i don't know where my republican friends think that they are somehow on the side of the free market when the free market isn't going to even work if the workers that they need can't even afford the housing that they need in order to live where they need to work this housing trust fund isn't a basic concept i think it's a fantastic idea it's one that i support wholeheartedly i just would say that this notion that government is bad that that it's funny because it reminds me the story of the elderly woman jumping up at  senior townhall meeting say ing get your government hands off my medicare medicare by the way is a government program in case everyone hasn't forgotten and when the most successful program that there ever been but you would know that by the way republicans talk three percent overhead on their medicare you never hear that when they talk about socialization and and government programs finally i just say there's a story about the englishman and the german and the year career for a gentleman to get up and say that we republicans today have said we don't care about low income americans and we don't we think too much money is being spent on these programs no one has said that i don't know where he is getting that i wish he would talk about the merits of the program as opposed to slamming a republicans going into medicaid medicare and those but i didn't do that but i will tell you that that that last those last remarks did not represent what anyone on this side is saying that i yield the gentleman from  moaning and wondering who people like i represent well folks that i represent have a very high expectation of this congress and the expectation is that it's a congress that is going to live up to and match mr speaker the rhetoric of the campaign of two thousand and six and the campaign of two thousand and six to recall was a campaign that seemed to focus on living within our means i didn't here is one speaker on the other side of the aisle i didn't hear th and cry of the american people to come up with a new program i heard the hue and cry of people within my district to live within the means of government i mean for mr speaker that right now the budget of the how department of housing and urban development is on the order of thirty five billion dollars and when i go back to the sixth district of illinois they're not be moaning they're not astounded they have an expectation that we're going to live within our means that within thirty five billion dollars not five billion not ten not fifteen not twenty not twenty five not thirty but thirty five billion dollars that the taxpayers have been trusted to us that somehow that's not enough and that the only way that this problem can get solved is by going to create another fund another fund that somehow isn't going to have new federal employees somehow i going to be cut out of whole cloth and counterintuitively from my point of view is going to create a higher cost of housing borrowing on the very people that we're trying to help well the district what i represent has the expectation that we'll do the right thing that we don't get caught up in the demagoguery and soundbites and so forth but that will look clearly at the bills that are what we're talking about here today is creating what the chairman of the committee said back in june was a large the expansion of federal housing program in decades and how the chairman proposes and i don't question his motivation because i know that his motivation is helping low income americans and there is a need for low income affordable housing and has disputed my representation that there are thirty some odd programs that address low income affordable housing but at this time for the record i would like to introduce the response to my inquiry to the department of to hud they supplied me with a list of thirty four programs i had without objection i'd like to offer that for the record if you look over the limit there should be covered under generally  you look over those programs and you found hope six which i think all the members would agree supplies low income housing for all for american  we've got section eight we've got programs to to rehabilitate nursing home to to build intermediate care facilities to establish boarding and caring home own an support of housing persons for disabilities persons with age disaster assistance or disaster are homes for those caught in disasters as gentleman from illinois said thirty five billion dollars going into those programs but abalos programs this program if you look at where the money's going to be distributed it actually says that if hud does not write regulations that will basically take the home investment program and it will be distributed to the same agencies for purposes of low income housing which is the exact purpose of the home program so we are if the home program isn't working why wouldn't  over fifty percent of americans today are struggling to make their housing major most of those most of those low and middle come americans are homeowners and they're struggling with making their mortgage payments you open the newspaper you found that foreclosures are at a historic hot yet what is proposed to us today what is proposed is that we take money from  fed and freddie which are both used one is f h a as is we all know is affordable mortgage for low income middle income americans  s and who has to pay that tax as a tax on their mortgage business that ultimately is going to be paid by by low income borrowers the proposal alone to take f h a received it's going to maine fewer low income americans will have access to affordable ha f h a mortgage or in the long run you can't create something from nothing you can't create a program funded from a from an established program which supplies americans with of low income mortgages or suppliers liquidity the mortgage market you can't take money from those programs without affecting those programs they're always called you can't as a chairman said have the largest expansion of federal housing program and decades take it from f h a and the g s t switch to supply mortgage liquidity you can't take that kind of money without affecting those programs with all these programs including the home program which as i said mirrors the proposal before today t which also have a mission to loan money for mortgages for multifamily unit if those aren't working why wouldn't we fix those existing programs and even if we conclude that we need a new program a national housing trust fund why in the world why in the world would we go to f h a and the g s t and i asked them to fund those programs at the very time when we're having a mortgage sub prime mortgage crisis in this country and we have all asked we have directed f h a and the g s t to address this problem and now we're taking money away from them and ultimately from low and middle housing trust fund at the moment that we have a sub prime crisis has no validity it's purely tactical because exactly the same arguments were being made before the subprime crisis there's an ideological objection to the getting the federal government  affordable housing the gentleman finally named some of the programs building intermediate nursing home facilities helping with people with aids my question m b p did and ultimately unanswered was where were the programs that help build affordable family housing it is not an annual section eight voucher program which doesn't help build housing it's not intermediate nursing home facilities it's not help for people with aids it's none of those programs hope six yes totally and completely false betraying a total misunderstanding of the bill in fact it is the bill that we passed on like the bill that passed under the republicans that prohibits the f h a from raising mortgage insurance premiums on people and giving that money to the treasury that was the republican approach we kept those fees here's where the f h a money comes from we take the limit that the republicans are now deceased and for years on the number of home equity mortgages the f h a can insure we all so on like the republicans limit the amount that the elderly can be charged for the first time under those by the servicers and we are told by c b r that as we increase the volume of f h a home equity mortgages at a lower price for the elderly than existed under the republican rule we will generate money now if we didn't pass this bill there's administrating would take that money put into the treasury so go help fund the war in iraq it could go help fund highway projects agricultural subsidies that's the choice do we having created an additional revenue stream for the f h a well limiting fees let it go to the treasury for agricultural subsidies in the war in iraq or do we put it into affordable housing with the g s t until we talked about helping build affordable low income housing my republican friends are very critical idiocies on the whole the stock holders who are getting too much money and too much return for too little or nothing in this bill will increase the amount that people have to pay in the mortgages any iota what it says is that out of the profits of fannie mae and freddie mac we're going to make them divert some of this for these public purposes so in direct contradiction to what the gentleman says there are not thirty four programs that help build affordable housing there is one now there will be two and i hope the bill passes gemma's time  expired all sign for general debate has expired pursuant to the rule that the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five minute rule and shall be considered read no amendment to the committee amendment is in order except those printed in in house report one ten three six nine each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report by a member designated in the report shall be considered read shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and up on it of the amendment shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question is now on now in order to consider amendment number one printed in the house before one ten three sixty nine for what purpose the gentleman from massachusetts rise to offer that amendment jim the court with designate the amendment and then number one printed in house report number one three sixty nine offered by mr frank of massachusetts pursuit the house resolution seven twenty the gentleman from mass of massachusetts mr frank and a member oppose each will control five minutes the chair recognizes the gentleman from astros as chairman i don't believe any of these  controversial first thing we do we had in the committee and the top you know of a amount a minimum amount that would go to each state remember this is largely a distribution to the states it's not an existing federal this would not be administered the federal level it would be sent to the states and some of the smaller states to raise the question in small communities that they might be excluded indeed while this is not exactly what the general thought of mr belloc as it wanted to offer which i thought was probably reasonable it comes close to it touches on the same area so this would make sure that no state would go without and at least one community in every state would get some funding next the we had a  sense requiring a mixed thinking requirement in elderly projects we didn't think that was reasonable and we take it out we have a covered cage in involving the number of units that go to people who are below fifty percent and we say that applies to all units and finally in response to concerns in the house we have language it could be better worded it was somewhat hastily at the last minute and i hope it will be improved as we go forward which seeks to say that no one who was in the country illegally should chairman frank i applaud you for your willingness to modify the trust fund proposal as it is move through this chamber to reflect the realities of the housing market while simultaneously keeping your eye on the prize a significant increase in the production of affordable housing and by the very poorest americans this amendment continues to maintain such a balance that we share some simple math with my colleagues the monthly s s i payment in california's eight hundred thirty six dollars as a  establish the federal government considers a portable rent to be thirty percent of that income or two hundred fifty dollars per month nobody can operate housing anywhere in california much less in high cost areas like los angeles for two hundred  fifty dollars per unit monthly it doesn't matter whether you are nonprofit or poor proper whether you have significant debt service on loans for the capital or someone who has handed you a brand new building for free as the green eye shade types in the real estate business say it just doesn't pencil out this need to address the operating cost shot ball and projects targeted to the lowest income folks especially those at s s i income levels envelope is not news to those of us who have been fighting for a national affordable housing trust ponder over half a decade nor to be clear does it suggest that there is any shortage of need for plain old low cost bricks and sticks capital grants which will comprise the vast majority of funding under h r twenty eight ninety five even if this amendment is adopted what has become clear though is that the state or local housing agencies need some flexibility with the trust fund dollars to address the operating shortfall issue operating subsidy or rental assistance indeed it requires this much even the pole ten percent of the trust fund in a given year should states and localities choose to use the maximum permitted proper eight account will not come close to providing the total amount of operating subsidy needed to achieve the trust fund targeting goals so grantees like my own california housing finance agency a los angeles city housing department well i have no choice but to leverage trust bonds with section eight mckinney bento subsidies and state a local rental assistance programs but this flexibility will ensure that some projects can move forward that otherwise could not in the current environment where section eight for example has been under attack since the moment the trust bond movie began that is the essence of the trust fund bill that you have championed chairman frank recognizing and overcoming the obstacles to affordable housing production by the poorest people in this country this amendment is consistent with that goal and i urge my colleagues to support that and i thank you very much mr chairman and i yield back the balance of my time gentleman from massachusetts reserve the balance of this time gentleman build housing although i believe this does help some of our very low income families we would hope that they would not have to use any of that allocation for that this does this amendment does give them the flexibility to do that twenty eight ninety five and i commend chairman frank in subcommittee chairwoman waters and the full committee for their work on this legislation and particularly of the work of ranking members baucus and bigger as well as those that have complimented the purpose of my amendment is to include flood and disaster specific insurance counseling in the homeownership counseling criteria for beneficiaries of the trust fund i know that we are all concerned about the current instability in the housing market and increasing foreclosure rates all around this country and especially in places like where i live one of every fifty households in my congressional district have file for foreclosure already this year all of us know that that's unacceptable this chairman the unfortunate truth is that many of these foreclosures have come from a lack of financial literacy and limited understanding of all the costs associated with owning a home in many regions of our nation more prone to disasters or appropriate insurance is one of many added calls of homeownership that can push people to the age and when you're on the stand in your home or returning to your home after a disaster disaster rests on having the right insurance i don't even need to point out all to the members the tragedies of withheld insurance from many of the victims in the hurricane katrina knowledge of the specifics in disaster and flood insurance policies will encourage further financial empowerment and homeownership stability among our nation's most vulnerable paul populations all with all your permission as chairman i would ask  everybody has the propre counseling is a is a good strategy because in many cases what we found is people lose their assets or lose opportunities because they did not take advantage of some of the things that are available to them and so i thank the is a gentleman a designee of the gentleman from washington i am his designee corker report printed in house report number one can't act three sixty nine offered by mr frank of massachusetts pursuit house resolution seven twenty  committee and argued that it would be very useful to have in the bill the language of this amendment which says that you will take into account in making the grant the extent to which the money would reduce for five minutes so certainly i think any time that we're going to invest in investing in federal dollars in any housing in the future we need to make sure that the houses are his energy efficient as they possibly can and as i understand the gentleman would be about making sure that in consideration for granting funds for that that the construction the design and all of the phases of creating housing in this country would take into account making sure that the utility cost  gentleman from massachusetts mr chairman the gentleman california representing a high cost area in murren county especially in california confronts a problem that many others confront but she has it in a particular way the district with without objection the gentle woman from california will control the remainder of mr frank's time thank you mr chairman mr chairman the amendment i offer today simply says that the organizations receiving grant money from the trust fund may give consideration to first responders public safety officers teachers other public employees whose incomes have kept them from living in the communities that they serve mr chairman i represent a district where the median income is higher than some others and so is the price of housing sometimes public service employees actually require that teleworkers live within a certain distance from their job and is simply unfair that when home prices put affordable housing out of reach for these workers then they cannot participate in that career demand that would not only affect high cost areas but would then if at every single county or city in our country where public service employees have trouble finding housing if these employees meet the income requirements of the bill grantees would be able to give consideration to them and reserve the balance of my time gentleman from massachusetts mr frank and a member opposed each will control five minutes the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts mature men we have in our committee been working hard to try to incorporate all environmental energy saving measures measures that would gentleman morgan's recognize for two minutes thank you i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy and i appreciate his leadership in guiding the committee to deal with issues of affordable housing the crisis that plagues our country dealing with the mortgage crisis but if we're serious about providing affordable housing for families then we need to be serious about building that housing in a sustainable fashion energy costs are creasing much faster than family incomes green homes are often thirty percent more energy efficient that can cut utility costs by hundreds of dollars a year from the outset and an amount that's going to compound over time we need to do well by our environment but we also need to save families hard earned money there's also strong evidence that green homes are also healthier homes more than four million american children have asthma and it's estimated that more than forty percent of diagnosed as much is due to residential exposure green homes use building practices and materials that minimize moisture that provide proper ventilation that prevent infestation and avoid toxic materials i had the opportunity last night in portland oregon to be part of a celebration for our oregon's architectural foundation and these folks are zero ing in on practices that make a difference and add value many of the advantages of growing of going green need to have are based on people just having the fundamental information there's a great deal of misinformation this amendment would provide a green housing clearinghouse that will provide fundamental information for people who are involved with the industry it requires grantees to self certify how many of the total units they build information on how many afford well housing units are in fact green and i think it's going to be an important step low cost high impact that's going to promote the housing  this arena to be of the highest quality in most sustainable practices i strongly urge adoption of the amendment thank you some of the expired what purpose of general tax rise rassi time in opposition although i'm not opposed to the a ment that opposition without objection the gentleman is recognized five minutes well i thank the chairman and i would just say is in is i think we want to make sure that any new housing is done mostly energy efficient and also  a green criteria one of things i would encourage and i would hope the chairman would work with me and is in the final version of this bill i would hope that once we conference that the national association of homebuilders has been involved in green building for number of years  and has set up a lot of the information in so you know one of the things that you now have talked about is that we want to try to make this money go as far as we possibly can and avoid as much duplications as we can and so before we go off and asked the federal government built i would generous that's the right and that same issue as he knows is a rising in the context of our work on hope six we want to do the green buildings and we want to do them in a way that will be sensible and reasonable and let's be very clear there aren't enough one force of people in the world to make this work if there isn't a willingness on the part of those involved to do it if people think it's too rigid or good for example it's just not going to work as well i think we have a wide willingness now on the part of the homebuilders others to be participating in this and yes we will make this a very make explicit that if people have gotten a grant and now come back for another one they be very explicit about what they have done with it it is i think a very useful kind of oversight that's built into the program it may seem obvious but we program is always welcome and i thank the gentleman for offering this we need to make sure that as we are passing out these monies and we want them to go as far as they can we want to go to people that can actually deliver what they said in their grant proposals and then their question their report number one ten dash three sixty nine offered by mr knockabout our of texas pursuant to house resolution seven twenty the gentleman from texas mr new buyer and a member of those days will control ten minutes chair recognizes the gentleman from texas designee on but since i am here all act in my own behalf mr chairman one of the things we've heard a lot today about is that there is a need for making sure that we are taking care of our most needy s americans when it comes to their housing needs what we've also learned though is that there are a lot of programs out there seventy some problem housing programs thirty some odd days that may be address some form of housing for our low income citizens and one of the things that i think the american people are kind of concerned about is they keep hearing that government solution to all of the problems is if we're not doing a good job with the programs we have let's add another program and you know i think they're getting kind of tired of that and so one of the things that my amendment does is it existing program and incorporates many of the good ideas and may i say mr chairman there are some good ideas that have come in this particular piece of legislation updating it and what i'm talking about is the home program the home program currently does a lot of the functions in fact when you look at the home program in this bill many of those overlap and yet we're now going to separate into two different funds an affordable housing fun and home program and stead of using the combine resources of those two programs to to help further the housing situation we're going to have to different and when we talk about the fact that we're already spending over twenty eight billion dollars for  affordable housing low income housing and then we're going to take money out of one's pocket and put it over into an area separate from that where quite honestly congress will not have the opportunity to really sit down and assess high where are the  american people where are the people that are recipients of low income money the people that are benefiting from these housing where we're getting the best bang for our bucks but instead we're separating those programs i don't think it that is good policy the other issue is here is that meenie communities in almost every state in the union and i think like three hundred fifty or sixty maybe and that's a large number i don't have in front of me communities are already participating in the home program they already have some familiarity with that program and so now we're going to take a ramp up time of having to learn a new program to write the rules for it to do all of the things that it takes to get a new program off the ground going to have to form a new branch of of government within the department of housing to be able to ramp up and have the employees that it needs to do this another inefficiency  adding additional programs to something that maybe we're not satisfied with and i would agree there are probably some things that need to happen in the home program that would make it more relevant today but quite honestly adding a new program i do not think in the best interest of the american people it's not a good wise use of their taxpayers dollars and i believe we can create a more efficient delivery system using an existing program but what my amendment also does is says look  go in and analyze what's going on what work with the various housing partnerships list determine what are some of the things that we need to do to the home program let's make those changes and then let's make the whole program to a better program incorporating many of the good ideas even we've seen some amendments here i would have hoped was chairman we had seven amendments from the democratic side on fortunately and i appreciate the rules committee making man in order but i think we have some other good ideas from some of my colleagues  on my side of the aisle that we could have incorporated into this legislation so that's the reason i'm down on the floor today offering this amendment and encouraging my colleagues on both sides of the aisle if you're really serious about two or three things let's talk about those things one are you interested in making sure that we have the most efficient delivery system to our low income families to make sure that they have housing if you're interested in that secondly or if you're using want to do that in a way that's a good steward of the american taxpayers dollars that's another reason to vote for this amendment and thirdly if you believe that we ought to be able to prioritize our spending and not separate into different fund separate an aside from what we're already do for make sure that we get the money out to these families that need our assistance and help and with that i reserve my time for the purpose of the gentleman from massachusetts russ i rise in opposition mr chairman they don't  appreciate not just that but the gentleman from texas who has been a very constructive member the committee we have some differences that's why we have different parties but we have a great deal of agreement and the gentleman's expertise in the homebuilding field has been very helpful as our committee is going forward and  here is a perhaps a philosophical difference between us the main difference here is that the gentleman's amendment recognizing as he does from his own experience the value of additional housing construction would do away with our two funding sources now we chose to go in addition to the home program which is the one program where there is a parallel for a couple of reasons first of all the home program is of course subject and you appropriations and that's appropriate for most government work but we did want to have in the government a program for housing construction that had a little bit more assurance for people then i knew appropriation appropriations get caught up in  the bush issues she are issues the trust fund will be outside of the kind of deadlock that we have had the past may we hope not but may have in the future if you try to build housing the notion that you're funding may be slowed down because it's been a fight over some unrelated issue that i grew the debate about the iraq war funding could slow you down we want to avoid that so we keep the home program but we have an additional program and again it's for the construction of affordable housing and i any other program except home and we want to give it some assurance to operate the trust fund the way they are and this is to some extent modeled after the highway trust fund is a trust fund it will still be subject to work by the appropriate way but it will be bogged down with the rest of the government gets bogged down and that's important when you're doing construction when you have an ongoing situation secondly we do have two additional funding sources now there's some debate about that i do want to stress in the f h a bill which is already voted on by the house we say in the first place that if any question arises about the sovereignty of the fund the f h a fined should appear to be in trouble not a penny can go into the four housing fund that year only after the hud secretary certified that the money won't be needed to hold down premiums exactly how much we hope will be two hundred million a year but it only goes to the housing trust fund if it would otherwise have gone to the treasury there was zero chance the way this bill was written for it to force that kind of an increase that by the way is why c b o gives us a flat score on they said you know we give all these advantages to fannie mae and freddie mac a line of credit some people think the government one that used to be government members on the board although we will not have that of our bill passes and here they are they're making all these profits and they're not doing enough amend that to some extent by increasing the housing goals they have by dropping the credit they get from one hundred percent to eighty percent of median but we also say you know what you've been doing pretty well you're making a lot of money and  shelves are doing well so without in any way impinging on your mortgage functioning we are going to take some of the profit you made and put it in reform housing trust fund by the way i find all the people who have said that we should basically reduce the portfolio of fannie and freddie and make them securitized more which they believe would do more damage her ability to function anything else that now they become very concerned when we talk about housing costs and i should be credit that does not describe down in texas who has been very much want to stand very well how best to help fannie and freddie and i think we put through a bill that will enhance their ability to function better regulate them so in other words we have eight or nine hundred million dollars we hope in the first year and we hope it will go up and this is the main difference between us that doesn't come from appropriated funds that i believe we have written so we will not interfere with the to fannie and freddie or f h a as ability to function and we do not create a new bureaucracy redistributed to the state and local housing funds indeed many of the amendments that we've adopted here you are in agreement by both sides and some that we adopted in committee i was looking over in committee we adopted a number of members more from the republican side than the democratic side because i don't have to worry about other people tell me where we are and that we have in every one of these amendments increase the flexibility for the local housing trust funds so with that i hope that the substitute is defeated and we will continue to improve this bil think that the existing federally administered program designed to serve the housing needs of low income americans the home investment partnership program is a program that are already in place that has the personnel systems the regulatory oversight in place to accomplish the same objective as the national housing trust fund and instead of creating a new federal bureaucracy to address low income housing availability i think we should focus our efforts on improving the home program a nd mr know the bower's amendment creates a pilot program and i think we could call it home light within the home program and so instead of an reinventing the wheel and establishing another federal trust fund in a brand new participating they understand the jurisdictions the home program will be looking at and so there's no learning curve for implementation revitalizing the home program  will make it will be more efficient by having less start up costs administrative costs and the funds will be just distributed to the projects sooner and not later to the local and federal levels and the same time the i think the national trust fund would be administered by exactly the same people who will be administering the program in the state and at the local level so it will be able to allow them to operate under one program instead of two separate programs with a little different objectives but not much so they'll be doing the same thing twice that  and having to work with two different iraq receipts to establish a affordable housing post program so i would i think that there might be some changes to the home program to line it more closely to some of the things that are there have  been spoken about in the trust fund program but i think that this would be a good compromise and would still have the trust program that will provide the affordable funding but do it through hud a program close by saying that fifty states five hundred eighty five local communities are already using the home program as a model for building and developing the low income housing in their communities it just makes sense that we take an existing program like the revisions that that i have really made there's some good ideas that have come through this legislation let's incorporate those ideas into the whole program let's take an existing vehicle  let's ask the united states congress to prioritize where they think that the most we're getting the most bang for our bucks as we deliver low income housing programs for the american people and for the people that need them so badly and let's do it right in we're out way to do it is to take this existing program and fold in to it many of the good ideas that have come from that with that urge my colleagues to support this amendment and you'll back the balance of my time questions on the amendment eighteen further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas will be postponed pursuant to qualify six of rule eighteen for savings will not resume on those amendments printed in house report one ten dash three sixty nine on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order a member number one but mr frank of massachusetts mehmet number eight mr naugle buyer of texas the first electronic vote will be conducted as the fifteen minute vote remaining electronic votes will be conducted a five minute votes the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on a member number one printed in house report one ten dash three sixty nine by the gentleman from massachusetts mr frank on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the eyes prevailed by voice vote the clerk will read designate the a moment and then the number one printed in hausa court number one ten dash three sixty nine offered by mr frank of massachusetts recorded vote has been requested those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered members will record their votes by electronic device this