PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 16, 2011
NSP Termination Act - Rescinds and cancels permanently all unobligated balances remaining available, as of the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for assistance to states and local governments for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes and residential properties. (Thus, rescinds the third round of funding for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program [NSP].) Urges that all such rescinded and canceled amounts be retained in the Treasury General Fund for reducing the federal budget deficit.
Subjects to possible rescission and permanent cancellation certain amounts allocated by the Secretary under the third round of funding for the NSP to specified states, including city, county, and municipal governments.
Amends the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 to repeal emergency FY2008 appropriations for the Program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
States that such appropriations, together with amounts made available for the Program in the HUD, Community Planning and Development, Community Development Fund under title XII of division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, shall continue to be governed by any provisions of law applicable to such amounts as in effect before the repeal.
Requires the Secretary to terminate the Program upon the obligation of all such amounts and outlays to liquidate them.
Requires the Secretary to publish on the HUD website a statement as to: (1) termination of the NSP; and (2) the availability of a Member of Congress and state, county, and local officials to provide assistance in mitigating the impacts of foreclosed properties on an individual's community.
Requires the Comptroller General to study the economic impacts of: (1) round three NSP funding on states and communities that would occur if it were not rescinded and canceled but remained available, and (2) actual round one and round two NSP assistance on those states and communities.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, Gary G. [R-CA-42] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 242 - 182 (Roll no. 188).
House roll call 188 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 242 - 182 (Roll no. 188).
House roll call 188 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 153 - 272 (Roll no. 187).
House roll call 187 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H1894)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Braley (IA) motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to report the bill back to the House with an amendment to require that states give priority emphasis and consideration to rural areas when distributing Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds that were allocated by HUD and appropriated under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, pending reservation of a point of order. Subsequently, the reservation was removed.
Mr. Braley (IA) moved to recommit with instructions to Financial Services. (consideration: CR H1893-1895; text: CR H1893)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H1893)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 861.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on the question of adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings were postponed.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Comittee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Castor amendments en bloc.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Maloney amendment, the Chair put the question on the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Maloney demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Maloney amendment number 8.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Waters amendment, the Chair put the question on the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Waters demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Waters amendment number 7.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Waters amendment, the Chair put the question on the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Waters demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Waters amendment number 6.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Richardson amendment number 5.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Loretta Sanchez amendment number 4.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Ellison amendment, the Chair put the question on the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Ellison demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Ellison amendment number 3.
VACATED PROCEEDINGS - Mr. Ellison asked unanimous consent to vacate the proceedings by which his amendment numbered 1 printed in Part B of House Report 112-34, was postponed, to the end that the Chair put the question on the amendment de novo. Agreed to without objection.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Hurt amendment number 2.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Ellison amendment, the Chair put the question on the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Ellison demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 170, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Ellison amendment number 1.
On motion to rise and recommend that the enacting clause be stricken Failed by recorded vote: 183 - 240 (Roll no. 182).
House roll call 182 · Individual votesDEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Ellison motion to rise and recommend that the enacting clause be stricken to H.R. 861.
Mr. Ellison moved to rise and recommend that the enacting clause be stricken.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 861.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Charles F. Bass to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 170 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 839 and H.R. 861 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measures will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. With respect to each measure, the resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services now printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 170. (consideration: CR H1860-1896; text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H1873-1874)
Rule H. Res. 170 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 170 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 839 and H.R. 861 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. With respect to each measure, the resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services now printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Financial Services, H. Rept. 112-32, Part II.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Financial Services, H. Rept. 112-32, Part II.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 16.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 112-32.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 112-32.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 31 - 24.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.861 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.
Examine H.R.861 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.
Examine H.R.861 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.
Examine H.R.861 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.