Discussion · Senate
Bernie Moreno Republican
“I oppose this bill. It lets the housing watchdog decide its own budget with no cap and no vote from Congress. That money comes from housing groups, which will raise costs and mortgage rates for regular people. Any funding change should have a cap and a recorded vote.”
“Mr. President, Reserving the right to object, this bill would amend the funding statute for the Federal Housing Finance Agency so that the expenses of the inspector general are collected through the annual assessments of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Bank in an amount independently determined by the inspector general. I support independent oversight. The Inspector General Act already requires a separate budget estimate for that office, and it already lets the inspector general tell Congress if a proposed budget would impair that work. Current law already funds this office. It has more than 100 employees and a budget of more than $50 million. This bill goes further, though. It would make the inspector general’s own determination the amount the director must collect. There is no ceiling, no reasonableness test, and no vote of Congress on this matter whatsoever. These assessments, by the way, aren’t free. They are costs on the housing finance system, and they show up in the mortgage market. We would literally be costing working Americans more money for mortgages so that a bunch of overpriced attorneys would charge whatever they want, to do whatever work they felt necessary. If the Senate wants to change how this office is funded, that change could include a cap, a reporting requirement, and, most importantly, a recorded vote. And for that reason, I object.”
Mr. President, Reserving the right to object, this bill would amend the funding statute for the Federal Housing Finance Agency so that the expenses of the inspector general are collected through the annual assessments of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Bank in an amount independently determined by the inspector general. I support independent oversight. The Inspector General Act already requires a separate budget estimate for that office, and it already lets the inspector general tell Congress if a proposed budget would impair that work. Current law already funds this office. It has more than 100 employees and a budget of more than $50 million. This bill goes further, though. It would make the inspector general’s own determination the amount the director must collect. There is no ceiling, no reasonableness test, and no vote of Congress on this matter whatsoever. These assessments, by the way, aren’t free. They are costs on the housing finance system, and they show up in the mortgage market. We would literally be costing working Americans more money for mortgages so that a bunch of overpriced attorneys would charge whatever they want, to do whatever work they felt necessary. If the Senate wants to change how this office is funded, that change could include a cap, a reporting requirement, and, most importantly, a recorded vote. And for that reason, I object.