with almost $12 trillion in outstanding mortgage debt, housing finance is critical to the u.s. economy. as the conservator, fhfa's goal is to preserve the fannie and freddie. as the regulator, our mission is to ensure that the enterprise provides liquidity, stability, and forgeability to the market a sound manner. that is a statutory responsibility as it is the public purpose that congress gave the enterprises. the enterprises own or guarantee 56% of the single-family mortgages in the country for a total of $5.4 trillion. given that massive exposure, the best way to preserve the assets and fulfill the mission is to stabilize the mortgage market and strengthen the safety and soundness. working with the federal reserve and the bush and the obama administrations and other regulators, that is our top priority since the conservatorship began and will continue to be so. supporting mortgage modifications and refinancings for homeowners into safer mortgages are an important element of stabilizing the housing market and thereby the u.s. economy. the form in which fannie mae and freddie

if there were no credit default swaps we would still have this housing finance crisis. it would just be harder to manage because it would be harder to move the risks from one place to another. so, it doesn't seem to me that there's a clear case to make that a lack of regulation of credit default swaps contributed to the problem. if they had been outlawed we would still have this problem today. >> i have two things i want to say about that. one is actually, i think the credit default swaps did exacerbate the problem for three reasons. firstly, that they made people confident about lending more than it would have in the past because people thought they could somehow shift the risk and the cats blending in lending and the volume of lending expanded quite dramatically. secondly, because the option of writing credit default contracts was there provided another mechanism for investors to basically place more that some housing market, sub-prime market. in 2005, as i described in the book, when they started to run out of sub-prime loans, simply they were pumping out supremacist

the fifth and final principle is that the housing finance should be subject to the supervision that seeks to contain the riskiness of individual institutions and the systemic risks associated with housing finance. the latter type are supervision which would include countercyclical and policies and the tendency to generate lending booms and busts. with those principles in mind, there is really three basic structures for the future of fannie mae and freddie mac. one is a government agency, and another is a hopefully much improved gse, and the third is a fully privatized firm. the first option would be the equivalent of nationalizing the enterprises which i am opposed to, because i believe that the government insurance programs are particularly high risk and rife are moral hazards. the second alternative would be to keep the enterprises as gses building upon hira and they could be a public utility or a cooperative structure, and they could continue with the treasury net worth protection or insurance for catastrophic risk, but extreme care has to be taken to prevent the inherent conflict alwa

the problem we have is a housing finance problem, it's not a credit to default swap problem. if there were no credit defaults swaps we would still have the housing finance crisis but would be harder to move the risks one place to another. succumb it doesn't seem to me that there is a clear case to make that a lack of regulation of credit diesels was contribute if they had been outlawed we would still have this problem today. >> i have two things i want to say to that. one is actually i think credit-default swaps did exacerbate the problem three reasons. first, that they made people confident about lending more when they would have in the past because people felt they could shift the risk they kept lending in the lending and the volume of lending expanded quite dramatically. second, because the option of writing credit default contracts was there it provided another mechanism for investors to basically place more banks on the housing supply market in 2005 as i described in the book when they actually started to run out of the subprimal loans and were pumping out as fast as the

the problem we have is a housing finance problem, it's not a credit to fall this what problem. if there were no credit defaults swabs would still have this housing a finance crisis and it would just be harder to manage because it would be harder to move the risks from one place to another. so it doesn't seem to me that there is a clear case to make that a lack of regulation of credit to all the swaps could tibbets to the problem and they have been outlawed we would still have this problem today. >> well, i have two things i want to say about that. one is actually i think that credit defaults swabs did exacerbate the problem for three reasons -- firstly, that the main people confident about lending more than they would have in the past. because people thought they could shift the risk and capt. lending and lending in the volume of lending expanded quite dramatically. secondly, because the option of writing credit defaults contracts was there and provides another mechanism for investors to basically place my bets on the housing market. in 2005 as i describe in the book when i act

capital impact has played a significant role in providing housing finance. in fact, n.c.b. has participated in more than 600 loans in my district alone. most of these loans are for housing, including affordable housing, as well as loans for community facilities and loans to nonprofit organizations like the council of new york cooperatives and condominiums. together these groups are able to provide assisted living, affordable housing and services to the frail and elderly. presently, n.c.b. capital impact is working with five community-based organizations to help finance 17 projects that will create 558 housing units. despite their good work in serving low income communities and disadvantaged populations, n.c.b. capital impact is not eligible for assistance authorized under the community development banking and financial institutions act of 1994. which is administered by the cdfi fund. the fund has ruled it cannot certify n.c.b. capital impact as a cdfi because of the corporate structure of its parent, n.c.b. in short, n.c.b. capital impact is shut off from critical sources o

housing finance regulatory reform act of 2008. this is supposed to be about energy. why are we further bogging it down with trying to solve problems for fannie mae and freddie mac? page 115, the term energy efficient mortgage means a mortgage loan under which the income of the borrower for purposes of qualification for such loan is considered to be increased by not less than $1 for each dollar of savings projected to be realized by the borrower as a result of cost-effective energy saving designs. i'm sure that will create a lot of jobs. then we get to page 141. the cranston-gonzalez national affordable housing be act as amended. why are we amending the cranston-gonzalez national affordable housing act? i thought we were doing an energy bill here. page 142, use of building materials and methods that are healthier for residents of the housing, including the use of building materials that are free of added known carcinogen that is are classified as group one known carcinogens by the international agency for research on cancer. outlin

finance, and the national credit administration, among others. let's talk about the expanded role in this regulatory scheme. who are the winners and losers? guest: the office of supervision will certainly be a loser. they will probably be merged with the o.c.c. were just disbanded altogether. the winners -- the fdic will certainly -- sheila bair, the current head of it has taken a very large role and has many supporters. there will likely be given the power to wind down these non- banking institutions such as aig and there are a couple of others that might be eliminated or else emerged. the consumer powers' would be taken from the sec -- that will not happen. it is not politically possible right now. both agencies went from being on the brink to work more in concert with each other now. host: here is michigan, good morning. caller: the caller who suggested we just let everything fall apart and go back to the gold standard, that is not only naive, but little in sen. he did mention phil gramm -- how much of the collapse has to do with his getting r

and finance committee to produce numbers on various ideas for commonality but it is the check-in and the eight numbers language without the numbers makes the question obvious that what does it cost? if i cannot answer the question then the indictment is you put up the language without the numbers so we try to accommodate both and is simultaneously recognizes by the rules of 24 hours which is a normal process that is difficult to do so i want to accommodate that senator burr has raised to give adequate time for people to respond so you can have amendments ready if you are not happy with the cbo numbers provided. >> mr. chairman and may add to my comment even with the 12:00 accommodation, i can i get here the airline schedules i have no effect and i would be cut out. i understand we can't all make it but let me make this clear, if the legislation is not released to us today over the weekend rican actually read it i am not sure having the cbo con man and brief us on how they scored a product that we have yet to look at and disseminate the informatiinformati on is valuable to those of us

, the finance committee and others to produce numbers on various ideas that we might find commonality with, but it's a chicken egg argument in a sense. you can't get cbo numbers unless you have language. it makes the question one that people raise and that is the obvious one. if i can't answer that question then obviously -- you put on language and you can't run the numbers. we're trying to accommodate that and simultaneously recognize that despite the committee rules of 24 hours or so in a normal process of the bill, that's very difficult to do, so i want to accommodate members as senator byrd has raised to give adequate time next week for people to respond, john, to whatever the product is we put out so you can have amendments ready if you're not happy with the product that we put out with the cbo numbers that have been provided. >> let me just add with the comment, even with the 12:00 accommodation, i can't get here. the airline schedule, i have no effect over, and i've been cut out. i understand we can't all make it, but let me just make this plea. if the legislation is not releas

they have said it doesn't belong as part of this committee by the house or finance committee that they don't think is a major issue to be dealt with at this point but i think with the concern among physicians and other health-care providers of medical not practice you'll hear more about this in the months to come. >> host: let's go to our democratic line, joy from san clementi. >> caller: good morning. i hear the gas talk a lot about health care companies and i am frankly with bernie sanders on the way he feels about health care and that is a single payer. when the iraq war is all said and done and that will be about a $3 trillion debacle and we are screaming and yelling now about a $1.6 trillion health care coverage to cover everyone and i just find that just so hypocritical, it's not even funny. i think the republicans unwilling, you know, they want compromise to get this bill pass and everything and i think that we have compromised by taking single pair off the table. >> host: let's go to an e-mail we receive from a your rights, the federal government is restricted by the tenth amen

and but congress senator baucus and senator kennedy our committee chairman of the finance and house committee really want to get something done and we have had not have that combination and on the house side there are many powerful and smart people committed to healthcare reform henry waxman is among one of the leaders that is a unique combination of talent that want to get something done and they understand the problems and what is doable and i think we have a chance to really have a difference and put ourselves on the right course to changing our system so we can get full coverage of americans at a reasonable cost and with high quality for the first time. thank you very much [applause] >> thank you very much ekekiel emanuel for your comments this evening i am the editorial page editor from the san princess go conoco will not only have a full house but an active house with quite a few questions so let's get right to them. first of all, probably have the questions we receive are in one way or another related to the criticism of the single payer system. so let's start with one asking you to el

the house more specifically access to affordable housing and the need for mortgage finance. my constituents are aware that despite the urgent need for more house building,xvñ conservative generally campaign against it. as well as -- as well as opposing the system to fix theship could i ask my right >> we are investing more in affordable housing and we are helping more homeowners through homeownership. we havei%q secured commitments m the major banks that they willt invest 70 billion extra in housing. of course, that would not be possible if we were to> david cameron. >> thank you. thank you, mr. speaker. he had a bit more than gist of it. i think he had a prepared answer to it as well. [laughter] >> i join the prime minister in paying attribute to major shaun bunchel who was killed in afghanistan and also very much agree with the prime minister about expressing our heartfelt sympathy to the families of jason swindlehouse and jason crestwell and the hostage situation. capital expenditure will grow until the year of the olym

houses as well. they're able to finance their work through mortgage payments from homeowners and others. in my state of california, habitat for humanity worked tirelessly to provide housing for needy californians. thousands have a police station to live because of the generosity of these donors. i urge my colleague to join me in voting yes on this resolution. i reserve the balance or my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. cleaver: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. cleaver: i would like to yield to my colleague and friend from georgia, mr. stanford bishop, seven minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia for seven minutes. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, it often takes loss to remind ourselves of our unwavering appreciation and unfaltering gratitude for those few extraordinary people who despite their ability to enjoy tremendous success and reward for themselves, ins

and because businesses could not renew lines of credit and others could not get money to buy houses, start businesses, could not get financing for a startup the whole economy froze up and things began to go into default. there are tremendous loans and companies that had gone out on a limb on the collateral debt obligations and a fancy instruments, they went under. lehman brothers one of the oldest and venerable banking house is in the world declared bankruptcy. and others became wards of the state. and at aig they were so afraid of the collateral debt obligations because not only were is there $50 trillion of collateral debt obligations but there was also so-called derivatives. a derivative is a bad. you can bet if you want to the fly will crawl up or down a window pane. [laughter] that is a derivative. the fly is the derivative. you can bet that oil prices will go up or go down. cold. sweet. 10. you can write contracts on anything then you can get complex contracts were you look at the ratio of the basket of currencies to another basket of currencies and you bet on that ratio so it

committee, the house and sometime hopefully late this fall to a consensus bill but i remember a young boy who i met was about seven years old and who told me that his mother got very sick, she was working. she was working at a fast food restaurant but didn't have health insurance. she got sick, tried to get a dodgers apartment and because she did not have insurance was delayed getting to a doctor, was not able to get the kind of care she needed. why? she was working, a single mom, mother of this little boy who didn't get her health care and get into a doctor late because she did have health insurance and she died. this young boy told me, i don't have a mom because my country did it work for me and my mom didn't have health care coverage -- what a tragedy. i will remember that little boy. he was passionate to maim. as far as it was for him to understand the system vienna said his country failed him. that should not be happening today, that is what we're trying to do with this bill here and other hard decisions ahead of us? yes are there a pile of amendments, yes. to fight is is two the

eligible sustainable elements for the housing that is subject to the mortgage. so now we're not going to guarantee the mortgage but we're going to guarantee the improvements to the property as well. page 180, and i would direct all of your attention if you have a copy of this to section 3 of that page. the full faith in credit of the united states is pledged to the payment of all guarantees issued under this section with respect to principal and interest. oh, no, oh, no, no, no, it's here. it's right here. the full faith in credit of the united states is pledged to the payment of all guarantees issued under this section with respect to principal and interest. the term green portion means with respect to an eligible mortgage, the portion of the mortgage principal referred to in subsection 2 that is attributable as determined in accordance with the regulations issued by the secretary. so, we have a new government program and we're going to guarantee this with the full faith in credit of the united states. and on page 184, on april 1 or a later date established by

of this house want to do the same thing to our nation? mr. speaker, this is deadly serious stuff. this house has just made the biggest economic mistake since the days of herbert hoover. two things are certain if this measure becomes law. first, our planet is going to continue to warm and cool as it has been doing for billions of years. and secondly, this house will have just delivered a staggering blow to our nation's economy wen our economy has been the most vulnerable. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: mr. schiff of california. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. conaway: i ask to speak out of order for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. conaway: today is a bad day for america. we just witnessed the passing of a bill that will have dramatic impact on our lives for years to come should it ever see the president's signature. 33:09, the dem cat majority landed on the internet a amendment to the already bloated bill. the bragging of the thousands and thousands of work and hear

the house will be in order. members will take their seats. members and staff in the rear of the chamber will vacate the oor. or take seats. the gentleman from georgia. mr. price: whereas the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 included $575 billion of new spending and $212 billion of revenue reductions for a total deficit impact of $787 billion. whereas the borrowing necessary to finance the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 will cost an additional $300 billion. whereas on february 26, 2009, the president unveiled his budget blueprint for fiscal year 2010. whereas the president's budget for f.y. 2010 proposes the 11 highest annual deficits in united states history. whereas the president's budget for f.y. 102010 proposes toin crease the national debt to $23.1 trillion by fiscal year 2019, more than doubling it from its current levels. whereas on march 11, 2009, the president sign into public law h.r. 1105, the omnibus appropriations act of 2009. whereas the omnibus appropriations act of 2009 constitutes nine of the 12 a

and the senate finance bill, you can find that in the chart in the "washington post." and you can also see the coverage of the markup of the bill that was going through senate health education labor and pensions committee. that's been going on for this past week and will go on next week. and you'll be able to see coverage of that on c-span. you can get the exact details on our web site. back to the phones. stewart on our line for independents. caller: how are you doing today? i'm that retired chief master sergeant from the air force that a e-mails you every day. i spent 30-some years in the air force, and when you had the last guest on, i kind of squirmed. i'm not religious but i also remember the sodm and ga morea story. but aside from that, i roomed with a homo sexual that i had no clue was and i saw some things that went on. what people don't understand, military people work real close knit and we believe in comradry and that's not the kind we were groying up with. so for you all to sit there and bless all this about homo sexuality, it's really discouraging over her

in the house, there is a guy named jim cooper. he was infamous during the debate on bill clinton's plan. as one of the first democrats to come out and highlight problems in the plan. he has already begun making noise about how he wants to build -- how he wants the bill to be bipartisan and has certain requirements he wants for the government-run plan will create. it's not clear yet whether they will follow those guidelines are not. >> these hearings will begin this week and next week and then what? >> the house hearings is this week all week long in all three committees. i don't know how we will keep track of that. then congress will leave and go home for a week. then we will see if interest groups are running ads in trying to persuade people. if they come back after the fourth of july and in the house, have promised the speaker stood next to them at the white house and said they will pass this by july 31, despite all this, they will talk about how they peace bill together and how do they pay for it. the house being the house, whe

the speakers include senate finance committee chairman max baucus and white house budget director peter orszag. from the brookings institution this is about an hour. >> [inaudible conversations] >> good morning everyone, i would like to welcome new to this brookings institute this morning, im mark mcclellan, director of the engelberg center for health care reform at brookings and on behalf of bob and the hamilton project we would like to welcome you to today's events on one of the key issues of health care reform. implementing comparative effectiveness research here and we're delighted to have such distinguished participants to discuss this issue and that, of course, includes all of you here, in the overflow room and i know we have a lot of participants, as well. comparative effectiveness research has vaulted to the front lines of the health care reform debate and as you'll hear from some of our upcoming speakers it could even be a game changer come a key part of bending the health care cost curve and comparative americaness research is moving toward. the american recovery and reinvestm

the sizement retrofitting of the city's principle and only emergency community gathering and housing facility in the event of a natural disaster. it's the enry -- emery unified high school gymnasium. they've used these funds to finance 15% of the initial costs for phase one of the project for seismic planning and development which in total would cost about $4 million. the balance of the funding will come from redevelopment funds directly from the city of emeryville and also an anticipated local bond of between $40 million and $75 million, that would also direct some funds to the project. the remainder of the necessary capital, which is expected to finish this project, will will come from state, local and federal sources, including school facilities funding, competitive state bond programs and federal development or infrastructure grants. several years ago an evaluation of the emery secondary school gymnasium was connected based on fema's criteria for structurally sound facilities and came to the following conclusion, without seismic strengthening of the buildings, they could experien

in order to finance that gap, we piled on credit card debt. we had home mortgage loans we couldn't afford, all to try to finance this gap. it's unsustainable. it's a house of cards and we're dealing with the consequence now already some coloradans are seeing cutbacks on the benefits of their coverages and some businesses are no longer able to afford coverage for their workers. faced with the unchecked increases, health coverage is a luxury some families an small businesses can afford. many people are cutting back on other essentials, visiting the doctor less frequently even when they know they need care. we must meet this economic challenge head on. the first goal is fixing health care, but we can't forget the second goal. it's just as important. fiscal responsibility. a more efficient health care system can save taxpayers money in the long run. a study from the white house council of economic advisers shows that smart reform will slow the rapid rise in health care cost by 1.5% or more. slowing health care cost by 1.5% will have a significant

of the finance committee. but further in the story, senate aides and drug company lobbyists say the $80 billion reflected total projected savings to the health care system and included unspecified future concessions, besides the drug discounts and the coverage gap. some reflects savings to the government, some reflects savings to older americans, but all the savings from closing the so-called bill mudhole would go to beneficiaries, and not to the government. flint, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. host: we will be in your town next week. what is the situation like? caller: i would like to talk about the banks. we have a citizens bank -- standard and poor's lowered the credit rating. they just received money to back them up. i was there yesterday and all they could offer you of 1.5% side on cds -- 1.5% on cds. demand had been there -- a man had been there, since 2002, with a $5 million bonus and i can't understand, people living off their investments, get 1.5% on their investments. and this man to

items such as $7.5 billion in the green bonds for the clean energy deployment administration, a new financing agency. so, before congress goes on its recess next week for the fourth of july it looks they're planning to tackle in the house the climate change legislation. the next call is from west virginia on the democrats' line. george, how do you feel about a public option in health care? caller: i absolutely feel we should have a public option and did we should entirely convert the system to single-payer. i have no sympathy is for these insurance companies who have squandered billions and billions of dollars in profits at the expense of the health and well- being of the american people. we have to compete every day with nations around the world who provide their citizens with free, tax-based health care. their businesses are not burdened with this cost. our country, small business, it is thrown on to them. i am a paraplegic with a wife and two children, a pre-existing condition. i cannot get affordable care for myself. it is ridiculous. then, to try to ensure my wife and two children it is

finances, a citizen's guide." this will be given to people across the country. i hope every one of my colleagues and everybody in america gets a chance to read this little booklet. this was sent to us by our colleagues, frank wolf, republican of virginia, and jim cooper, democrat of tennessee. i just want to read to you a little bit about the situation that america faces. americans right now i don't think are aware of the fiscal problems that we are facing. as of 2008, in the fall of 2008, we had $12.2 trillion in explicit liabilities, that's public held debt, military and civilian pensions, and retiree health benefits, and other things related to that. we had $1.3 trillion in debt for federal insurance and loan guarantees and leases and so forth. and we had a $42.9 trillion debt for medicare hospital insurance, medicare outpatient services, medicare prescription drugs, and social security. that's a total of $56.4 trillion in debt that we have right now today. and that amounts to, my colleagues, $184,000 debt for

the senate finance committee has delayed consideration until aft afterthe july 4 recess. we hope they will all focus on a bipartisan. >> but broadly [inaudible] does that mean you will have [inaudible] >> we don't know what a public option looks like. nobody has explained. there are probably 18 different types of public options that you could look at. that is fine but not all republicans are saying that. what i'm saying is that you have to look at what the option is and how you define it. and that is not an endorsement of a public option. it is just that we don't have any specifics on anything. so, how do you make a comment on it? medicare is a public option. that is what we are doing today. but so is some of the ideas that jim and i came up with and mike in the healthy americans act. >> some of you [inaudible] >> again, the key of this press conference is bipartisanship. we are not here to slow down the process. we are here to hit the right target. so many press stories have just assumed that reconciliation applies. but it applies to a category of pills that the senate i

and i understand the white house supports that as well. are you willing to make the trade-offs needed specifically in order to bring the cost down, forget about the pay force but to bring the cost down you're going to turn back the benefit package, turn back the number of people who qualify for the number of the subsidies, that's how would you bring the costs down. is that a trade-off that you are willing to make? >> i think we continue to watch what is going on as the finance committee works through this process. i would mention that the president has put a think last count of $950 billion on the table, as you're shaking your head, it's actually 950 -- >> that's not relevant to my question. my question is and how you pay for it, the you need to pay for it. >> but you did talk about a force and if you are going to talk about trimming the cost down to petroleum and i'm willing to tell you 950 billion is put on the table i think 950 billion, the trillion is a relevant part of the conversation to have. the president believes it's a relevant p

bill costing $1.60 trillion and i am hearing estimates of a house bill of $3 trillion, it brings into the question this whole notion that we are going to be bringing down health-care costs. if you are looking to spend that kind of money, clearly money that we don't have common the main concern i think that most americans have about the notion of a government health care plan is that they won't have the ability to choose their doctor, they won't have the ability for their doctor to prescribe a certain procedure because it will all be dictated by washington. long term, the consequences are pretty evident that there will be tens of millions of people coming off of the plans that they have now that they like and having to go on to a government plan, which is exactly the opposite of what the president begins every one of his statements about, that is, if you like what you have from you can keep it. it is not the case if you create a government plan. host: let me follow-up, because that seems to be the line of questioning as from republicans as they talk to christine romer and others. why i

he has taken over the finance. he wants to take over health care which is 20% of our economy. the next thing, he has taken over our energy. he is a controlled socialist. people need to wake up, shake yourself alive. su what used to be america with the socialist and the white house who is taking control. he is a bully and a coward. we see how he reacted to what happened in india. in iran. he had the same response when russia invaded georgia. it took him four days to come out with some comment that made any sense at all. he is a bully and a coward. host: let's take a look at some of the headlines and leading papers. today "in the new york times" they're talking about the u.s. pullout and concerns about fallujah. they are also writing about president obama's approach to dealing with what is happening in iran. obama condemns the iron fist against protests. they also have a piece about senator baucus concerning the health care bill. the senator is taking a leading role in a moderate position. the montana democrat is now considered to be an important player as a centrist in the heal

time, and all of our colleagues on the "help" and finance committees. we discussed our reform and reported on the progress each committee made in the past several weeks. in the coming weeks we'll hear a lot about the details of health care reform legislation and those details are very important. but even more important are the hundreds of millions of american families in each of our states, all over the country, who have experienced real anguish, coverage, lost or denied, hospital stays extended due to complications or errors, prescription drug bills rising and rising with no end in sight, even losing everything because a loved one fell ill. a few months ago i launched a page on my website for rhode islands to share their experiences with our broken health care system. and hundreds of people have written in from all over the state. anita is a social worker and mental health professional in providence. she shares what she described as the sad and rude awakening she experienced after opening her own practice last. as a provider, like all providers, she ta

of good deal is out there and what kind of financing is available. the other thing that people are asking right now is it time to finance? there are rules in the book ride on the money is the formula is when it is inappropriate to refinance and when is inappropriate to hold what you have got? people ask me these questions on television and they keep asking them sit-down and worked out the equation if i will live in this house five more years and it cost me so much money to refinance its if i have a savings and interest of so much, what will be left? many times is nothing the other is it is a lot and it is a good deal. a person has to determine their own situation in regard to real-estate. i strongly recommended against buying real-estate three or four years ago. i knew it was overpriced come overvalued and lo and behold the prices have dropped 40 or 50%. people who jump in four or five years ago said this is a great investment have lost half of their money and furthermore they cannot get out. we have nobody that will buy them that is a very unpleasan

i have been in finance sales management, the whole 9 yards, closing, everything to the third is the housing industry. i will tell you, when they talk about community reinvestment act, fannie and freddie and all this good stuff, i went to the real estate and saw the difference, the qualifications and requirements for loans. if you did not have a big financial score that exceeded 640 points, you did not qualify for a loan for a car. just automatically. in the housing industry, if you had a number of 530, you could buy a house. now, the problem, what i saw, with people being set up for failure. it was obviously the community reinvestment act, locking in a voting block for a particular party. i watched barney frank' and bill clinton pass it. i got out of the business because i could no longer stand. i knew that these people were being set up for failure. there was no way that there -- there was no way that these people could make the payments. host: let's go to the next call, republican line. caller: just listening to congressman gutierrez there, his opening comments to me was the most disgusti

concerned, work on the authorization should continue through dialogue through the administration, the house and the senate and we should have a meaningful conversation about where we should be standing up in the next 18 months to come to an agreement on the finances. we have a multiyear bill. the economy being where it is. the administration is not comfortable talking about administrations at this time. that is why the increase is meant for 2010 they are strongly of the view that they should not be of any remark. that is the proposal on the longer-term bill and the residence everybody age to promote it. >> that does not indicate the economically affected area. making sure that is the state giving priorities to those areas that are distressed? offer the governors are simfully am owe indicating fund $for political purposes. what we are seeking to do is to have as many of those projects in the economically distressed areas. an overlay on where are those projects. our division administrators are using that process. we have seen in a number of states. i referred earlier to michigan. it is giving

this is unsustainable host: can you explain the white house view on a single payer system and whether you think that congress, in particular max baucus on the senate finance committee, will take up this issue? guest: the president has said he wants to build health reform on our existing employer based system. the system has worked very well in this country. this is the kind of reform that says to you with the person as -- with insurance, you can keep what you have if you like. but we want to build on the current system. folks who want a single payer plan really want the same thing that we are seeking in health reform. they want more affordable options. they want to make it possible for people who cannot get any health care to get affordable health care. we have the same goals, adjusted for ways of achieving them. host: will health care benefits be a taxable benefit for americans? guest: that is certainly under discussion in one of the committees. the president has said all along that he is skeptical of any plan that would tax the health care benefits that you get from your work becaus

bill when it left the house. it did had -- it did add something from the imf, for which our friends on the other side of i'll complain, but i point out, in 1999, the last time we voted on this, the majority party then were our friends of the other side of style, and the -- added imf funding to the transportation bill, and 162 republicans voted for it. i find it interesting that today with the new president, they declined to provide the support. we also added something else. under the gi bill education proposal that congress passed last year, it had one remaining gaps which needed to be filled. that legislation said that if you serve your country in the military to sufficient length of time, you could and obtain education benefits, and if you did not use them yourself, you could convert them to the use of your spouse or your children. this bill closes the gap because the one thing the bill did not do was to enable a combat veteran who was killed in combat to make the same transfer of educational benefits to a spou

that idea put to a lot more credibility on the house, and it is a huge sticking point. the conference committee, if it does get that far, will be a knock down/drag out fight, i think. host: next call, silver spring, maryland, a physician. richard, on our republican like. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would just like to takmake a point. i did hear president obama's speech to the ama, and the past president of the ama at the news conference. there are a couple of things i would like to point out. as physicians, we often are faced with -- somebody made a point earlier -- undocumented workers are the most demanding. in other words, even patients who have no insurance, when they walk into the emergency room, they are the most demanding patients because, why? they know there are people sitting there waiting to help the mall. it so happens that these patients come waiting to help them all. if they do not -- waiting to help them out. they say my attorney told me that i should get these tests done. so, constantly, there are these advertisements going on over and over a

i applaud the members of the finance committee and the health education labor and pensions committee here in the senate as well as our counterparts in the house for this sincere dedication, thoroughness and commitment to crafting legislation that truly transformed the health care system in this country. it is clear this is not an easy tack. and it is one that requires true compromise from everyone across the ideological spectrum but it is a task that must be done. our country and the health of its citizens and the economy cannot afford to maintain the status quo. as a member of these committees gather to discuss and markup legislation, i encourage them to include a viable public option and a menu of insurance options from which americans may choose. it would be a, i stress, a purely voluntary option. if you like your current plan, keep it. but a public health insurance option is critical to ensure the greatest amount of choice possible for consumers. there are too many americans that do not have real choices when it comes to health insurance, especially those who live in rural areas.

. >> [unintelligible] >> i think the finance committee is making progress. there are other committees on capitol hill that are getting comprehensive health-care reform to the floor and botin both thee and house. >> there is a lot of inaccurate information out there. >> i think you still see some that oppose taking strong action. one, they say this will hurt jobs, not produce jobs. as you saw in the president's statement today and as you have seen in the investments we have made in cleaning -- -- in clean energy to the recovery act, creating a marketplace for clean energy will create jobs. we are going to have to figure in this country -- those jobs are going to be created. there were a number of windmill's producing energy in a clean way in germany. the question is, are we going to produce those jobs that create those blades and build those turbines or are we going to import them from somewhere else? secondly, i think many opponents have used inaccurate information or make up numbers on how much a piece of legislation like this would cost the amped -- the av

one-quarter of the united states senate is represented i had the finance committee and about half the senate working on this not to mention the other body and white house that tried to pull together to make sense. the easiest thing for me to do at this point would be to throw my hands up in frustration and say this isn't going to work and quit. no different than any other conference that preceded. we can't solve this. we can't figure out how to do it so let's go on to something else and maybe future congress will come up with an answer, but i don't think any of us ought to be indicted at history because we walked away from a situation we haven't come up with an answer how to pay for this in a way that this deficit neutral that allows access to americans excluded from coverage and quality system that will allow people to get good health care in the future. that is the daunting challenges that face us. we've done a good job in my view and i want to thank my colleagues on prevention, quality, workforce issues and i realize not ephriam and and has been agreed to and we haven't reached a c

and so this bill provides the financing to do that. and, yes, it added some other items that were not in the bill when it left the house. it did add funding for the i.m.f. about which our friends on the other side of the aisle roundly complained. but i would point out in 1999 the last time i believe that we voted on this the majority party then, our friends on the other side of the aisle, added i.m.f. funding to the transportation bill. and 162 republicans voted for it. i find it interesting that today with a new president they decline to provide that support. we also added something else. under the g.i. bill education proposal that the congress passed last year, it had one remaining gap which needed to be filled. that legislation said that if you serve your country in the military, a sufficient length of time, you could then obtain education benefits. and if you did not use them yourself you could convert them to the use of your spouse or your children. this bill closes a gap because the one thing that that bill did not do last year w

i hope that our democratic colleagues on the house side like mr. waxman, mr. rangel, speaker pelosi, and leader hoyer, will listen to our leader, john boehner. the republican task force has worked diligently over the last three months trying to come up with alternatives so that we can work together for the good of thank you for joining us. >> @ noon, the u.s. house devils in four legislative business. on the agenda, a bill that provides federal rebates for purchases of fuel-efficient vehicles. we spoke yesterday with the capital and reporter for the view of today's debate. >> joining us on the telephone is just aoshj. cash for clunkers, how would it work? >> it would offer americans up to $4.5000 to trade in a gas guzzler for new vehicle. there is a discrepancy on the threshold. the house proposal, which came out of the energy and commerce committee, was issued, the threshold for older vehicles would be 15 miles a gallon. to qualify for the credit, i think it is " 0.5 mile an hour for cars. one or two miles a gallon for trucks, depending on the size. >> the ho

procedures for dealing with its finances is not good enough and that is very much part of the measures that we are putting forward. these proposals, mr. speaker, are an essential element of restoring trust in the government and i hope it has all party support. >> i would like to thank the prime minister for his statement and, of course, everyone agrees that the political crisis requires big changes in the way we do things so i welcome this death bed conversion to political reform from the man who's blocked change at almost every opportunity for the last 12 years. the labour party will lose the next general election. so they must be in place before the election if they are to mean anything at all. anything else would be a betrayal of the british people, who are angry and demanding that we change the rotten way we do politics for good. this is no time for more committees, more reviews, more consultation. we've been debating these issues for decades. is it not now time to get things done? i strongly welcome the prime minister's commitment to moving towards an elected house of lourdes. i a