Congresswoman Laura Richardson In Support of the Richardson Amendment

Mr. Chairman, the Richardson amendment to H.R. 861, the Neighborhood Stabilization Program Termination Act which we've been talking about this afternoon, is a vehicle to discuss a program that was really urgently needed when it was established, when it was funded in the Recovery Act, and why it's still needed today.

The Richardson amendment is simple, it's straightforward, and it's necessary. It takes the politics out of it. It says that the programs should be terminated based upon whether they're needed or not, not based upon using funny numbers.

Now, let's talk about this particular bill. I'm suggesting, with the Richardson amendment, that we could consider two things: One, that it would be based upon a termination of 5 years after the initial date of enactment. Two, that the date would be triggered when the national average of underwater mortgages would be at a point that it's 10 percent or less, or in the highest State that happens to have high mortgages, that it would be at least 15 percent, and if it didn't meet that test then it would be terminated.

Now, the most current data available in the third quarter of 2010 reported by CoreLogic, a leading provider of mortgage information, indicates that of the Nation's 47.8 million residential mortgages, approximately 10.8 million, that's 22.5 percent, are underwater.

In Nevada the percentage is 67 percent. In Arizona it's 48.6 percent. In Florida it's 45.5 percent. And in Mr. Miller's and mine, our great State, California, it's 31.6 percent.

I will insert into the Record a chart indicating the underwater mortgage percentages for each State in the Nation.

Now, clearly the housing crisis is far from over, and anyone who thinks that we've stabilized the neighborhoods in this country is not really living in the real world; certainly, not with Americans like who live in my district.

So now it's time to not terminate NSP. Instead, it should be phased out gradually after it serves the purpose of what it was intended to do.

I offered the Richardson amendment because the NSP grants provide critical assistance to State and local governments and nonprofit developers that collaborate. How do they collaborate? To demolish or rehabilitate blighted properties, to establish financing mechanisms such as down payment programs for low to middle-income home buyers, and it also helps the grantees with at least 25 percent of the funds to be appropriated to house individuals and families whose incomes do not exceed 50 percent of the area's median income.

When I look at this--it's also important: NSP funds and is helping to redevelop hard-hit communities and to create jobs. In fact, 9,700 blighted properties have been demolished or have been cleared.

HUD estimates that NSP will support 93,000 jobs nationwide. I think we need those.

And then finally, when we look at some of the groups that are supporting these programs, it's not about who's on this side of the aisle and who's on the other one. It's the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors. That's what the housing officials in my district are talking about--having a way to be able to solve the problem.