October 2, 2008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H10653 

securities. And that is the central flaw 

of the policies that we’re pursuing. And 

millions of Americans who are in danger of losing their homes are not going 

to be helped. 

I want to conclude by thanking Mr. 

CANNON for his service to the United 

States Congress. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Utah has 31⁄2 minutes left. 

The gentleman from Michigan has 1 

minute remaining. 

Mr. CANNON. Mr. KUCINICH, if you 

would like to continue, we don’t disagree, and I think by having a further 

colloquy, I think we actually can come 

to an understanding. 

As I understand your concern, the 

Secretary does not have the ability—or 

it would be difficult for him to buy up 

all the fractionated interests in any 

given mortgage, and therefore, he is incapable, in his current position—unless 

he does something remarkable and 

spends more money than we intend him 

to spend, he can’t provide relief on individual mortgages. 

What I’m suggesting the Secretary 

has the authority to do is to put money 

into private funds that can then go to 

the servicing agent of a nonperforming 

loan, where the person is in an anti-deficiency State, or otherwise can walk 

away from that loan without recourse 

to the bank. At that point, the servicing agent has the ability to sell a 

mortgage, or a package of mortgages. 

In that event, what I suggest is that if 

the Secretary will pump some significant resources into the private sector 

to buy mortgages from servicing 

agents, and from banks and others, in a 

market where we are having deterioration of prices, that would tend, dramatically, to solve the problem. It goes 

a long way toward, I think, the gentleman’s concerns. 

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. If 

the gentleman would yield, as we both 

know, because we were on the same 

conference call with one of the foremost authorities in the United States 

on this subject, the expectation is, in 

the natural course of events, that 

about 20 percent of the acquisition of 

securities would result in owning all of 

the rights in order to do a negotiation. 

So when you look at the entire package, it’s not what we want, but it’s not 

nothing either. I mean, if you could actually renegotiate 20 percent of the 

reset, it would have a market impact. 

What you’re suggesting, I think, makes 

sense. And I think, also, that the bill 

that’s coming back would allow the 

Secretary to actually do what you have 

suggested because there is that discretion in the measure. 

If we did what you’ve suggested, if 

the experts are correct that we will 

have 20 percent of all ownership to renegotiate as provided for in the bill, 

we’re still going to need an additional 

tool which we’re not going to get in 

this bill, but to do a narrow carve-out 

for the subprime markets to be able 

to—for judicial intervention for those 

areas that we cannot get the rights for. 

I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

Mr. CANNON. Reclaiming my time, 

let me just say the gentlelady is absolutely accurate in her portrayal of the 

problem. Let me just clarify one thing, 

because a lot of people listening to us 

today don’t understand what a reset is. 

You have mortgages that are at a 

fixed rate which will then pop up to a 

market rate in the future. It is that 

pop up that is a problem. If you have a 

mortgagee who is behind in his payments, he may be able to stay in the 

mortgage when it goes up, but he may 

not be able to afford it. If he’s behind, 

he can’t refinance. He’s stuck in a 

world where he can’t get out of that 

mortgage, and the market will drive 

him. And the bank that wants him to 

renegotiate can’t do it because of the 

fractionated ownership of that mortgage. 

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. If 

the gentleman would yield. 

If I may, I’m glad you did that explanation. And for people listening who 

don’t have a subprime, it’s going to affect them as well. Because if you have 

a prime mortgage but every neighbor 

in your entire neighborhood has had 

their property values collapse, your 

property value is also going to collapse. So this is everybody. 

Mr. CANNON. Reclaiming my time, I 

thank the gentlelady because she has 

made exactly the point. What we’re 

trying to do here is avoid the collapsing values of houses. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

15 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio. 

Mr. KUCINICH. And that’s all I need. 

When you look at the difference in 

the debate here, hear these words, ‘‘we 

may save the world ‘‘or ‘‘we shall save 

the world’’; ‘‘we may save people’s 

homes’’ or ‘‘we shall save their 

homes.’’ I want a bill that says ‘‘we 

shall save their homes.’’ And that’s not 

what the bill is that we’re being sent 

by the Senate. 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

the balance of my time to the gentleman from Indianapolis, Indiana, Mr. 

ANDRE CARSON. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 45 seconds. 

Mr. CARSON. Mr. Speaker, I come to 

the floor today in support to H.R. 7221 

in honor of my late grandmother, Congresswoman Julia Carson. 

My grandmother was a huge proponent of increasing homeless assistance to displaced families. Last year, 

she introduced the Homeless Emergency and Rapid Transition to Housing 

Act. She introduced this bill for children and families in need of assistance. 

This bill sought to implement more effective strategies for preventing homelessness and increasing emergency assistance for families in need. 

This bill before us today reflects a 

compromise between my grandmother’s legislation and the Senate 

legislation. While I wish we could have 

gone farther in expanding the definition of homeless, this bill will provide 

critical assistance to families and children neglected by current law. 

I urge support of this bill and commend Congresswoman WATERS, Congresswoman MOORE, Congressman 

DAVIS, Congresswoman BIGGERT, Congressman CONYERS and their staffs for 

their hard work on this legislation. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

question is on the motion offered by 

the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 

CONYERS) that the House suspend the 

rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 3197. 

The question was taken. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the 

opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being 

in the affirmative, the ayes have it. 

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, on that I 

demand the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 

Chair’s prior announcement, further 

proceedings on this motion will be 

postponed. 

f 

NATIONAL CRIME VICTIM LAW 

INSTITUTE REAUTHORIZATION 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I move 

to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 3641) to authorize funding 

for the National Crime Victim Law Institute to provide support for victims 

of crime under Crime Victims Legal 

Assistance Programs as a part of the 

Victims of Crime Act of 1984. 

The Clerk read the title of the Senate 

bill. 

The text of the Senate bill is as follows: 

S. 3641 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION. 

Section 103(b) of the Justice for All Act of 

2004 (Public Law 108–405; 118 Stat. 2264) is 

amended in paragraphs (1) through (5) by 

striking ‘‘2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009’’ each place 

it appears and inserting ‘‘2010, 2011, 2012, and 

2013’’. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 

Michigan (Mr. CONYERS) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. CANNON) each 

will control 20 minutes. 

The Chair recognizes the gentleman 

from Michigan. 

GENERAL LEAVE

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask 

unanimous consent that all Members 

may have 5 legislative days to revise 

and extend their remarks and include 

extraneous material. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan? 

There was no objection. 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

myself such time as I may consume. 

I would like to remind our Members 

that the measure before us reauthorizes funding for the National Crime 

Victims Law Institute, which supports 

critical crime victims’ legal assistance 

programs that help crime victims enforce their legal rights in a number of 

vital respects. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HOUSE
H10654 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE October 2, 2008 

b 1315 

Many of these programs provide financial assistance directly to crime 

victims. Others help victims receive 

proper notification of case developments, and still other assistance may 

come in the form of providing staff for 

victims’ rights organizations and legal 

assistance to victims. Some of these 

victims are elderly, some are poor, and 

some are people that just can’t afford 

any legal costs at all. 

Violent crime victims may be emotionally and physically traumatized 

and therefore unable to assert their 

rights effectively, and victims of identity theft may be financially devastated as a result of loss of savings or 

destroyed credit. 

So I am very pleased to bring this 

measure to the floor, and I urge support for it. 

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of 

my time. 

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

myself such time as I may consume. 

I rise in support of S. 3641, a bill to 

authorize funding for the National 

Crime Victim Law Institute to provide 

support for victims of crime under 

Crime Victims Legal Assistance Programs as part of the Victims of Crime 

Act of 1984. 

In 2007, over 1.4 million Americans 

were victims of violent crime and nearly 10 million were victims of property 

crime. All too often, many of these victims are not given a voice in criminal 

proceedings. Many crime victim organizations around the country such as 

the National Crime Victim Law Institute work tirelessly every day to ensure that the interests and needs of 

crime victims are represented throughout the trial process. 

The National Crime Victim Law Institute, housed at the Lewis and Clark 

Law School, was founded in 1997 as a 

resource for crime victims and crime 

victim lawyers to further the enforcement of crime victims’ rights in criminal and civil proceedings. 

The institute is a national network 

of pro bono legal clinics that represent 

victims of crime in State, Federal, and 

tribal courts as they assert and seek 

enforcement of their rights. Since 2004 

the institute has successfully launched 

and provided ongoing assistance to 

these legal clinics. This network of 

clinics has provided legal counsel to 

over 1,000 crime victims in criminal 

cases, thereby ensuring victims’ rights 

and voices are honored. 

The institute ensures the success of 

the clinics through regular legal research and expert consultation on the 

clinics’ cases and through rigorous 

training in victim law for each clinic 

and its partners. 

S. 3641 ensures that the valuable 

work of the institute will continue and 

that crime victims will be given justice 

by the courts and made whole again by 

their offenders. 

I urge my colleagues to support this 

legislation. 

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance 

of my time. 

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 

back the balance of my time. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

question is on the motion offered by 

the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 

CONYERS) that the House suspend the 

rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 3641. 

The question was taken. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the 

opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being 

in the affirmative, the ayes have it. 

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, on that I 

demand the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 

Chair’s prior announcement, further 

proceedings on this motion will be 

postponed. 

f 

HOMELESS EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE AND RAPID TRANSITION 

TO HOUSING ACT OF 2008 

Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 

pass the bill (H.R. 7221) to amend the 

McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance 

Act to reauthorize the Act, and for 

other purposes, as amended. 

The Clerk read the title of the bill. 

The text of the bill is as follows: 

H.R. 7221 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as 

the ‘‘Homeless Emergency Assistance and 

Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2008’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Findings and purposes. 

Sec. 3. Definition of homelessness. 

Sec. 4. United States Interagency Council on 

Homelessness. 

TITLE I—HOUSING ASSISTANCE 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Sec. 101. Definitions. 

Sec. 102. Community homeless assistance 

planning boards. 

Sec. 103. General provisions. 

Sec. 104. Protection of personally identifying information by victim 

service providers. 

Sec. 105. Authorization of appropriations. 

TITLE II—EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS 

GRANTS PROGRAM 

Sec. 201. Grant assistance. 

Sec. 202. Eligible activities. 

Sec. 203. Participation in Homeless Management Information System. 

TITLE III—CONTINUUM OF CARE 

PROGRAM 

Sec. 301. Continuum of care. 

Sec. 302. Eligible activities. 

Sec. 303. High performing communities. 

Sec. 304. Program requirements. 

Sec. 305. Selection criteria, allocation 

amounts, and funding. 

Sec. 306. Research. 

TITLE IV—RURAL HOUSING STABILITY 

ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

Sec. 401. Rural housing stability assistance. 

Sec. 402. GAO study of homelessness and 

homeless assistance in rural 

areas. 

TITLE V—REPEALS AND CONFORMING 

AMENDMENTS 

Sec. 501. Repeals. 

Sec. 502. Conforming amendments. 

Sec. 503. Effective date. 

Sec. 504. Regulations. 

Sec. 505. Amendment to table of contents. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. 

(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds that— 

(1) a lack of affordable housing and limited 

scale of housing assistance programs are the 

primary causes of homelessness; and 

(2) homelessness affects all types of communities in the United States, including 

rural, urban, and suburban areas. 

(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this Act 

are— 

(1) to consolidate the separate homeless assistance programs carried out under title IV 

of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance 

Act (consisting of the supportive housing 

program and related innovative programs, 

the safe havens program, the section 8 assistance program for single-room occupancy 

dwellings, and the shelter plus care program) 

into a single program with specific eligible 

activities; 

(2) to codify in Federal law the continuum 

of care planning process as a required and integral local function necessary to generate 

the local strategies for ending homelessness; 

and 

(3) to establish a Federal goal of ensuring 

that individuals and families who become 

homeless return to permanent housing within 30 days. 

SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF HOMELESSNESS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 103 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 

U.S.C. 11302) is amended— 

(1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) 

as subsections (c) and (d); and 

(2) by striking subsection (a) and inserting 

the following: 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of this Act, 

the terms ‘homeless’, ‘homeless individual’, 

and ‘homeless person’ means— 

‘‘(1) an individual or family who lacks a 

fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; 

‘‘(2) an individual or family with a primary 

nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used 

as a regular sleeping accommodation for 

human beings, including a car, park, abandoned building, bus or train station, airport, 

or camping ground; 

‘‘(3) an individual or family living in a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designated to provide temporary living 

arrangements (including hotels and motels 

paid for by Federal, State, or local government programs for low-income individuals or 

by charitable organizations, congregate shelters, and transitional housing); 

‘‘(4) an individual who resided in a shelter 

or place not meant for human habitation and 

who is exiting an institution where he or she 

temporarily resided; 

‘‘(5) an individual or family who— 

‘‘(A) will imminently lose their housing, 

including housing they own, rent, or live in 

without paying rent, are sharing with others, 

and rooms in hotels or motels not paid for by 

Federal, State, or local government programs for low-income individuals or by charitable organizations, as evidenced by— 

‘‘(i) a court order resulting from an eviction action that notifies the individual or 

family that they must leave within 14 days; 

‘‘(ii) the individual or family having a primary nighttime residence that is a room in 

a hotel or motel and where they lack the resources necessary to reside there for more 

than 14 days; or 

‘‘(iii) credible evidence indicating that the 

owner or renter of the housing will not allow 

the individual or family to stay for more 

than 14 days, and any oral statement from an 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HOUSE