	Introduction

The bursting of the U.S. housing bubble in 2006 precipitated the December 2007-June 2009 recession and a financial panic in September 2008. Because the housing market was a locus for many of the economic problems that emerged, some Members of Congress and other experts propose intervening in the housing market not only as a means of improving the housing market itself but also the financial sector and the broader economy. Skeptics, however, worry that further intervention could prolong the housing slump, delay economic recovery, and affect outcomes based on the government's preferences. Three frequently discussed approaches are (1) reducing mortgage principal for borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth, (2) refinancing mortgages for borrowers who find themselves locked into paying high interest rates, and (3) renting out foreclosed homes. Principal reductions aim to improve the housing market by minimizing defaults and foreclosures, thus reducing collateral damage to the economy. At the same time, principal reduction might improve the wider economy if it stimulates consumer spending, allowing borrowers to divert income from debt repayment to spending on other goods and services. These include H.R. ); H.R. The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), the regulator and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, decided against allowing the enterprises to reduce principal for mortgages that they guarantee. A second approach, large-scale refinancing, helps borrowers who are current on their mortgage to refinance into a new mortgage with a lower interest rate. Because refinancing generally helps borrowers who are current, it is unlikely to have a major effect on the housing market, but it may prevent some foreclosures that could occur in the absence of a refinance. Although some investors (including banks) may lose investment income from refinancing, other banks and mortgage originators benefit from the increased business associated with refinancing. In his 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama proposed streamlining the existing program to refinance Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans and establishing a new mass refinancing plan for non-Fannie Mae and non-Freddie Mac loans. Congressional proposals for large-scale refinancing in the 112 th Congress include H.R. A third proposal, renting out foreclosed homes currently held by banks, GSEs, and other financial institutions, has the potential to stabilize housing prices by reducing the supply of homes on the "for sale" market. A successful rental program depends on house prices increasing in the future such that the rented properties can eventually be sold in a healthier market. Any impact on consumer spending is likely to be indirect through favorable effects on household net worth due to stabilizing house prices and preserving neighboring homeowners' equity. FHFA has started a pilot project to convert GSE foreclosed homes into rentals. ); H.R. A mortgage refinance lowers a borrower's monthly payment, freeing up more income for non-housing related spending. Some of the additional spending of borrowers may come at the cost of the financial sector. ); H.R. To be eligible a borrower must
have a mortgage owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac; have a mortgage on a single-family home; owe more than 80% of the value of the home on the mortgage; be current on mortgage payments with no late payment in the past six months and no more than one late payment in the past 12 months; have the ability to make the new payments; and have had the mortgage sold to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac by May 2009. S. 170 and H.R. Consumer Spending

Unlike principal reductions and mass refinancing, renting foreclosed homes does not reduce existing homeowners' payments or increase their disposal income.
The bursting of the housing bubble in 2006 precipitated the December 2007-June 2009 recession and a financial panic in September 2008. With the housing market seen as a locus for many of the economic problems that emerged, some Members of Congress propose intervening in the housing market as a means of improving not only the housing market itself but also the financial sector and the broader economy. Critics are concerned that further intervention could prolong the housing slump, delay recovery, and affect outcomes based on the government's preferences. Three frequently discussed proposals for the housing market are (1) reducing mortgage principal for borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth, (2) refinancing mortgages for borrowers shut out of traditional financing methods, and (3) renting out foreclosed homes.
Principal reductions have the potential to improve the housing market by minimizing disruptive defaults and foreclosures. However, by shifting the debt burden from the borrower to the lender, principal reduction may negatively impact financial institutions that would have their investments' principal balances reduced. Principal reduction, nonetheless, might improve the broader economy if it stimulates consumer spending, diverting income from debt repayment to spending on other goods and services.
Legislation introduced in the 112th Congress to reduce mortgage principal includes H.R. 1587, H.R. 3841, H.R. 4058, and S. 2093. The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), the regulator and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, decided against allowing the enterprises to reduce principal for mortgages that they guarantee.
Large-scale refinancing helps borrowers who are current on mortgage payments to refinance into a new mortgage with a lower interest rate. Because refinancing generally helps borrowers who are current, it is unlikely to have a major effect on the housing market, but it may prevent some foreclosures that could occur in the absence of a refinance. In addition, refinancing has the potential to have a larger effect on the economy by stimulating consumer spending. A mortgage refinance could lower a borrower's monthly payment, freeing up more income for non-housing-related spending. Some of the additional spending of borrowers may come at the cost of the financial sector. Although some financial institutions may lose investment income from refinancing, others could benefit from the increased business associated with refinancing.
President Obama, in his 2012 State of the Union address, proposed streamlining the existing program to refinance Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans and establishing a new mass refinancing plan for non-Fannie Mae and non-Freddie Mac loans. Congressional proposals for large-scale refinancing of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans include H.R. 363, S. 170, and S. 3085.
Renting out foreclosed homes currently held by banks and other financial institutions has the potential to stabilize housing prices by reducing the supply of homes on the "for sale" market. However, this policy depends on house prices increasing in the future such that, when the rented properties are eventually sold, they are sold in a healthier market. Unlike principal reductions and mass refinancing, renting foreclosed homes does not reduce existing homeowners' payments or increase their disposable income. Any impact on consumer spending is likely to be indirect through stabilizing house prices and preserving neighboring homeowners' equity.
FHFA implemented a pilot project to convert foreclosed homes into rentals. Legislative proposals to expand the renting of foreclosed properties include H.R. 1548, H.R. 2636, and S. 2080.