PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 15, 2011
FHA Bailout Protection Act of 2011 - Amends the National Housing Act (NHA) to direct the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to take action to ensure that the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund attains and maintains a capital ratio of at least 2%. Includes among such actions: (1) increasing mortgage insurance premiums, (2) establishing more stringent underwriting standards, and (3) increasing the amount of cash (or its equivalent) required to be paid on account of the property subject to a mortgage.
Directs the Secretary to raise annual insurance premiums and charge an additional risk-based annual insurance premium if: (1) the Fund fails to attain a capital ratio of 2% by a specified date or maintain it, or (2) the Fund's expected claims rate as set forth in the quarterly independent actuarial study is 10.0 or higher.
Directs the Secretary to require a mortgagee to indemnify HUD for losses resulting from payment of an insurance claim with respect to a mortgage: (1) executed under the direct endorsement program or insured by the mortgagee pursuant to a delegation of authority, but (2) not originated or underwritten in accordance with HUD requirements. Requires indemnification also in the event that fraud or misrepresentation was involved in an origination or underwriting.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary of HUD to take any actions required to seek indemnification for any early term delinquency on a mortgage which: (1) is an obligation of the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund; and (2) at the time of origination was not in compliance with NHA requirements.
Directs the Secretary of HUD to establish a program to review the cause of each early term delinquency on such a mortgage.
Converts from annual to quarterly the frequency of an independent actuarial study of the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund.
Amends the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury from entering into specified transactions with the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund.
People & committees
Sen. Vitter, David [R-LA] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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 S.1997 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 S.1997 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 S.1997 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 S.1997 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.