On Thursday four senators introduced legislation that would re-vivify the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program, which helps homeowners finance the high up-front costs of clean energy improvements and retrofits. This "cash for caulkers" program, financed with $150 million in federal stimulus funds, helps people cut their energy bills, curbs greenhouse gas pollution, and has created scores of family-wage-paying green jobs around the country.
PACE was on track to expand, but as OnEarth has reported, it was effectively killed earlier this month, when the Federal Housing Finance Agency, instructed lenders to back away from mortgages in municipalities that run PACE-funded programs. Many cities and towns have halted their PACE programs as a result.
PACE loans are typically connected to a property as a tax assessment, a "first lien," which would have to be paid off ahead of a mortgage in the event of a default. The Federal Housing Finance Agency believes this creates too much risk to the bottom lines of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-backed mortgage guarantors that the agency regulates.
The Senate bill is backed by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), and Mark Begich (D-Alaska). It would, according to Sen. Boxer's office, "require lenders to adopt new, sound underwriting standards that support PACE financing programs, rather than stymie them. It would treat PACE assessments the same as other property tax assessments and respect states' authority to secure such assessments with a first lien."
The Senate measure is the partner to a House bill, introduced by Congressman Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) and 29 co-sponsors on July 15.
It's unclear whether the companion bills will increase the pressure on the FHFA to change its stance on PACE. Jonathan Zasloff, an environmental law professor at University of Californa-Los Angeles, believes the Senate measure would face a filibuster threat from Republicans. "Stopping the bill will simply be another way to frustrate any voters who care about such things, and they will take out their frustrations on the 'governing' party," he recently blogged at LegalPlanet, "even though that party is the one that is advancing their interests."
Keep up with PACE via OnEarth's ongoing coverage.
By what logic and what specific evidence does Zasloff conclude that voters who support PACE will throw will throw out Democrats because Republicans (the Party of "No") vote "No" on PACE legislation??
It is 2010. The clock is ticking. The world may have only 4 1/2 years to start reducing the annual buildup in greenhouse gas emissions that otherwise threatens global catastrophe within several decades. Greenhouse gas emissions have to be stabilized by 2015. The earth is warming more rapidly than previously predicted. The U.S. is way behind schedule on this. Perhaps Fannie Mae's CEO Michael Williams, Freddie Mac's CEO Charles Haldeman and FHFA's Edward DeMarco should take a look at http://www.global-warming-forecasts.com/2015-climate-change-global-warmi...
For those of you who have an opinion and who would like to share your sentiment about the PACE decision, you can reach these key decision-makers at:
Charles Haldeman Jr.
CEO
Freddie Mac
8200 Jones Branch Dr.
McLean, VA 22102-3110
Toll Free: 800-424-5401
703-903-2000 Fax: 703-903-4045
www.freddiemac.com
Michael Williams
CEO
Fannie Mae
3900 Wisconsin Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20016-2892
202-752-7000
Toll Free: 800-732-6643
www.fanniemae.com
Edward DeMarco
Acting Director
Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)
1700 G Street, NW 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20552
Email: director@fhfa.gov
202-414-6923
www.fhfa.gov
Or you can write to:
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Members.Home
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.ContactForm
http://epw.senate.gov/
410 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510-6175
202-224-8832
Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming
See http://globalwarming.house.gov/
http://globalwarming.house.gov/contact
B243 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-4012
Fax: 202-225-4092
http://globalwarming.house.gov/about?id=0002
PACE would increase the resale value of buildings. $171. Green building sales prices are $171 per square foot higher than non-green buildings. “According to a recent study by CoStar, green buildings that are certified under the LEED rating system …are sold for higher sales prices. …LEED certified buildings command sales prices of $171 per square foot more than the sales prices for buildings that are not LEED certified.” (Julie Stamato, Senior Attorney, “Building Green: A Win-Win for All,” Theodora Oringher Miller and Richman PC)
(Julie Stamato, Senior Attorney, “Building Green: A Win-Win for All,” Theodora Oringher Miller and Richman PC, September 2008)
>By what logic and what specific evidence does Zasloff conclude that voters who support PACE will throw will throw out Democrats because Republicans (the Party of "No") vote "No" on PACE legislation??
You'd have to ask him that question. It does seem to be weak point in his argument, since voters "who care about such things" seem likely to manifest their concern, in part, by being more politically astute than he suggests they'll be.
The real issue may be whether the bill will move at all in this sluggish and polarized Senate.
It looks like climate legislation has been vivisectioned by threats of filibuster and guillotined by the super-majority death blade. And the clock keeps ticking as Seneca pointed out.
What ever happened to majority rule in Congress?
It works for the Supreme Court. They hand down plenty of 5-4 decisions on very controversial issues. They don't seem to need a 60% super majority. They get along fine without a system that allows a justice to filibuster judicial decisions.
It works for the executive branch. We elect plenty of presidents with slim margins. We don't require a 60% super majority to elect a President. The executive branch seems to get along fine without electorate filibusters.
What's wrong with majority rule when it comes to legislators legislating -- which is what we pay them to do. Legislate. By majority rule. A concept that is the bedrock of democracy. Not super majority rule. Who signed on for that?
BHB