Voted NO on defining "energy emergency" on federal gas prices.
Congressional Summary:
Makes it unlawful, during a period proclaimed by the President as an energy emergency, to sell gasoline at a price that:
is unconscionably excessive; or
indicates the seller is taking unfair advantag
are fair and justified. A vote against my bill is a vote against consumers and a vote for Big Oil. Opponents argument for voting NAY:Rep. BARTON of Texas: [My first issue the bill is that by the bill's own definition], we don't have price g
Reference: Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act;
Bill H R 6346
; vote number 2008-448
on Jun 24, 2008
Voted NO on regulating the subprime mortgage industry.
H.R.3915: To reform consumer mortgage practices and provide accountability for such practices, to establish licensing and registration requirements for residential mortgage originators. Prohibits certain creditor practices with respect to high-cost mortgages, including:
recommending default on an existing loan in connection with closing of a high-cost mortgage
steering incentives to mortgage originators
exercising sole discretion to accelerate indebtedness
single premium credit insurance and
negative amortization mortgages.
Proponents support voting YES because:
Rep. FRANK: This legislation seeks to prevent a repetition of events that caused one of the most serious financial crises in recent times. We have a worldwide problem economically, with a terrible shortage of credit. Innovations in the mortgage industry, in themselves good and useful, but conducted in such a completely unregulated manner as to have led to this crisis.
The fundamental principle of the bill is not to put remedies into place, but to stop future problems from occurring in the first place. We have had two groups of mortgage originators: banks subject to the regulation of the bank regulators; and then mortgage loans made by brokers who were subject to no regulation. The secondary market has been on the whole useful but, having been unregulated, has caused some problems.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
Rep. HENSARLING: This is a bad bill for homeowners in America. There is no doubt that this Nation faces a great challenge in the subprime market, but this piece of legislation is going to make the situation worse. Clearly, there has to be enforcement against fraud in the subprime market. But what Congress should not do is essentially outlaw the American Dream for many struggling families who may be of low income, who may have checkered credit pasts, for whom a subprime mortgage is the only means to purchase a home.
Reference: Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act;
Bill HR3915
; vote number 2007-1118
on Nov 15, 2007
Supports balanced budget amendment & line item veto.
Camp signed the Contract with America:
[As part of the Contract with America, within 100 days we pledge to bring to the House Floor the following bill]:
The Fiscal Responsibility Act: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out-of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses.
Source: Contract with America 93-CWA3 on Sep 27, 1994
Maintain & enforce existing spending caps in the future.
Camp adopted the Republican Main Street Partnership issue stance:
What we offer today are not the precise spending decisions of a given year's budget; rather, we call upon the Congress and the nation to adopt the following guidelines for our fiscal policy over the next decade. This long-term blueprint is essential for maintaining both the immediate public-sector goal of balancing the budget and the private-sector goal of a healthy economy. This can be achieved through the following steps:
A commitment to maintaining and enforcing existing spending caps in the future, when such discipline becomes more difficult to achieve;
A careful and considerate re-definition of the federal role in society (what should be the legitimate and proper role of the federal government in the twenty-first century, and how do we prioritize competing demands?); and
An evaluation of implementing tax cuts based on their social fairness.
Source: Republican Main St. Partnership Issue Paper: Fiscal Policy 98-RMSP5 on Sep 9, 1998