PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.647 / 110th Congress

Mark-to-Market Extension Act of 2007

Committee Hearings Held.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 23, 2007

Mark-to-Market Extension Act of 2007 - Amends the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 to reauthorize through FY2011: (1) the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured Multifamily Housing Mortgage and Housing Assistance Restructuring (Mark-to-Market) program; and (2) the Office of Multifamily Housing Assistance Restructuring.

Permits the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to waive rent level limits for: (1) disaster-damaged eligible projects; and (2) up to 9% (currently 5%) of all units subject to restructured mortgages in any fiscal year, based on certain findings of special need.

Redefines multifamily housing project eligible for the Mark-to-Market program to authorize eligibility treatment, upon owner request, for certain projects whose rents do not, on an average per unit or per room basis, exceed the rent of comparable properties in the same market area, if the Secretary determines that such treatment is necessary to preserve a project in the most cost-effective manner in relation to other alternative preservation options.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Requires each mortgage restructuring and rental assistance sufficiency plan to determine, for units assisted with project-based assistance in eligible multifamily housing projects, adjusted rent levels for disaster-damaged eligible projects equal to 100% of the fair market rents for the relevant market area.

Revises requirements for an approved mortgage restructuring and rental assistance sufficiency plan with respect to modification or forgiveness of all or part of a second mortgage held by the Secretary (debt relief) if the project concerned is acquired by a tenant organization or tenant-endorsed community-based nonprofit or public agency.

Sets forth requirements for alternative periods of eligibility for such nonprofit debt relief if the purchaser acquires the project subsequent to the date of recordation of the related affordability agreement.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-35] · D–CA

Committees

  • Financial Services Committee
2 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Committee Hearings Held.

  2. Referred to the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity.

  3. Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.

  4. Introduced in House

  5. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.647 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.647 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.647 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.647 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

View full prompt & sources