Evolved especially over the last decade or two. There are parts of this country where manufactured housing looms very large as a portion of housing stock. Particularly rural areas and some of the more difficult train of appalachian segments in Southeastern Ohio for example. But there are many of these around the country. And making sure that people are treated fairly in terms of being able to buy and finance manufactured housing is an important part of this spectrum. So it is something were going to continue to Pay Attention to. The white paper was represented as a pretty serious effort to lay some groundwork for people thinking about policy measures, whether its us or congress or others. And so it will continue to be a focus of intention for us because of the fact that it is such meaningful alternative for a number of folks. Especially on the lower to moderate income end of the housing spectrum okay. We have time for one more audience question. Thank you. My name is taylor with the new england council. I was hoping you can speak more about the first time home buyers and as the market recovers how confident are you with that aspect and whether you think the growth is coming and whether you are s unsfied with that growth. Thank you. We have to go back to the back drop of this. Everybody agrees although they have different accounts sometimes as the causation here. That it was the housing and Mortgage Market that broke and caused the financial crisis. And when there is an element of the economy thatt causes such a severe dislocation generally throughout the economy, it is almost inevitable that area of the economy will be the slowest to recover and repair itself. The damage was so deep in the mortgage and Housing Market that it just takes longer to recover. That has been our experience. Since the crisis going back to 2008, 2009. So, you know were talking five six almost seven years now. The Housing Market has lagged had recovery in the economy. Now, that also means that over time we may have pent up demand and were seeing signs of that, especially among first time homeowners. But what we dont know and the Federal Reserve had a great very succinct summary of eight or ten things weighing on the Housing Market that has achange were going to see how the Housing Market may change. When they talked about this in their open Market Committee minutes from june of last year. With first time home buyers what we dont know is whether theres been a temporary lull that will now lead to increased demand, or whether there is some sort of more permanent change going on here. The student loan overhang if it is not alleviated could be a somewhat more permanent change or at least temporary over a longer period of time. If attitudes towards credit and borrowing and home buying have changed among young people because they now view itni as a riskier market, that could be a dynamic that could extend for some time. And people are speculating about this now. We dont yet know. As i said earlier, Home Ownership continues for the middle class ine1 this country to be the single greatest engine of building wealth. Most of the wealth is tied up in the homes and over time they tend to build wealth most effectively by being a homeowner. So you have an significant segment of the young people who would miss that opportunity and miss the savings that come with that would be i think a negative for the economy and a negative for our society. So im concerned about that. And i think the people need to make good judgments about the possibility of Home Ownership and not shy away from it simply because they tend to be most focused on most immediate results that they saw in the recent past. So it is a market that is recovering. And i believe that first time home owners will begin to recover at greater pace. But we dont know that for sure and well all be interested the see how it develops. I had hoped to do more from the audience but i promised answer for staff. My answers were too long . Well i think the questions were too hard. Ive promised your staff that i will get you out of here timely. I had one more question that i wanted to pose to you. Ill ask you to answer for us. You gave your maiden speech as cfpb director here at brookings i think it was on your first day, or thereabouts 2012. We sit here now three years later. Can you quickly tell us looking back now over that three year old period what the Biggest Surprise has been both pleasant and otherwise of those three years as you thought it might have unfolded when you sat here three years ago. Well there was a pleasant surprise i hoped would occur when i was confirmed in the senate by a the in 2013. So that p÷ meaningful. What id said about the processes i encountered at the bureau. There are two things i didnt quite appreciate before i came. One is we operate in a space thats fairlycrowded with other policy makers. Congress is the primary policy maker in our country and thats a appropriate. But there are a number of agencies that have a different rules and we overlap and it takes real time and effort we all have to put in together. Weve been in a landscape where where he have received that time and effort from our colleagues and i think they have received it from us but who there is always the case it is not a given. The second thing i would say is i came to this job from the attorney general position in ohio, which is an enforcement position. I was not that familiar with the regulatory side of things. It takes longer than i would have wanted or expected tofa work through the thorough processes of, you know, these are complicated issues. You said there were some tough questions today. These are the questions s kind of questions were dealing with all day long every day and how to grade ate policy and balance everything and competingeing principles that are fundamental. And they take a lot of time and effort and require a lot of analysis of data and the like. So things move more slowly than i would like but hopefully they come out better at the other end. As you noted it is very very tough to set up a new agency. Not every new agency that has been. Set up has as happy a story to tell as the extremely successful three years that you have enjoyed. And were very pleased to have you here today. I can tell from the many hands that were raised that we easily could have gone longer. So id like to invite you back. To come and talk to us again and share your reflections. And let me just go back. I want to thank you again and all those who worked on doddfrank and continue to work on it and think about it. The fact that an agency like this was created, established, to look after the middle class in this country, the average consumer and to recognize they make choices every day that affects their lives. Some are difficult choices they dont fully understand. Some are choices they make all the time. To the extent we can help them to be in a position to do that better and improve their lives] financially. That is significant across this whole country. And we recognize that oz our mission and it motivates and makes it a pleasure to go to work every day. Thank you. Thank youtn for the work that you all your colleagues do. [ applause ] legislative work is under way this hour in the house and senate. The house wrapping up the building over haul for the federal process for regulations. Still to come the spending bill. The current measure expires in february. That may include language that would reverse president obamas executive action on immigration. Over in the senate they have greed to move forward on the debate of the key stone excel measure. Look for amendments to be offered and debated at least through the end of this week. Although the senators are out for Party Retreats tomorrow and thursday. Follow the senate over on cspan cspan2 cspan2. On cspan3 tonight the state of the state coverage continues. Well hear from Indiana Republican governor mike pence. Well have his comments just after 7 00 eastern here on cspan3. And up next remarks from kentucky senator rand paul on judicial restraint and the role of the courts. He spoke today at the heritage foundations conservative summit and this portion of that conference is an hour and ten minutes. Im very proud i supported him when it wasnt cool. I was told i was stupid. He couldnt get elected and im grateful he has proved all the critics wrong. Rand pall i think has been a fresh face on the political scene and i think very important to the conservative movement. I have said a number of times that the only majority that is left for freedomminded americans is a majority that comes from welding a lot of theq libertarian ideas with conservative ideas. I believe that the libertarian concepts of individualismht Self Reliance and free markets are certainly consistent with the foundation of conservative thought. And if we can weld with those libertarian foundations the conservative values that build a Strong Society and the guarantees of a Strong Defense that we will have the majority of american who is understand how do we build a stronger country, a Brighter Future and more opportunity for every american. Rand paul represents that in many ways and he easts shown as he goes around the country that folks are not particularly interested in politics are interested in a lot of things he says and talks about. Which is very important to our movement. Hes attracted millennial hes spoken on college campuses. Hes shown our ideas are persuasive when presented in a persuasive way. So we are honored and excited to have senator rand paul here at the heritage foundation. Hes been here many times since ive been at heritage speaking on a number of issues. And today i think hes here to probably stir you up just a little bit more than he has before. So please welcome senator rand paul. [ applause ] thank you. Thank you. Thanks jim. Think you are doing a great job and heritage continues to grow. I this i they sayo[ online weve got 20 maybe 25,000 people watching online. And i asked laughingly is this off the record and i can say anything i want. Can we just be frank. He said yeah nobody is going to be in there in the immediate. Here we go. Id like to make it a little more interactive. Were going to poll the crowd to begin with. Media and cameramen may participate also. Who in the crowd thinks judicial restraint is a great philosophy versus judicial activism . Who in the cloud thinks legal philosophy would be judicial restraint . [ hands ] this is going to be a tough sell. How many think judicial activism is the way to go and that is really what we should have as an activist court . Nobody. This is really going to be a tough sell. Dune why Justice Roberts did not strike down obamacare . Jushl restraint. I guess everybody here is for obamacare. Thinks the courtnr should stay the heck out and obamacare is just find because the majority wants it. And thats what Justice Roberts said. Wenr should not get in the way of the majority. Do you know where that comes from . Oliver wendell holmes. In the lotner case. He says the court has no business getting in the way to what the majority will is. We should leave it up to the majority. So if you are for judicial restraint, i guess then what happens when a legislature does bad things . Says, well were going to pass jim crowe throws through the 19th nicentury, most of the 20th century century. Should we have an activist court that comes in and overturns that. I wont bore you with slides but we have oneqn slide. Where is it going to be . I cant see it. Thats not going to help me any. We have a time line. We go back and start in 1995 with lockner and go through the way through obamacare. In each of the case who should conservatives be for is the question. Restraint oar activist. We go back to lockner. State legislatures were becoming more progressive and were restricting the right or the liberty of contract. So what happened is you had an activist court in the lockner case that rules 54 says states cant interfere with the right to contract. So are you for activism or restraint when it is with regard to State Governments interfering with the liberty to contract. We move on a little bit later and we get into the new deal. Here it is not state but the federal governments. They are passing all kinds of laws assuming new powers that werent essentially in the institution. So you once against have an activist court in the beginning until fdr got his way you have an activist conservative court who overturns federal laws one after another. And until finally a majority of the fkr apainoinpointees who say no judicial restraint is the way to go. Then you move on longer and you come out the depression and were look at the brown vars the institutionalized racismzci or separation or segregation. What is the position of judicial restraint . It says let the states do whatever they want . Is that the conservative position . I think its not my position. I think if the states do wrong that we should overturn them. That there is a role for the Supreme Court to mete out justice. The 14th amendment gives the Supreme Court, it gives the federal government a role in saying the states cant do certain things. There is a book called the conscience of the constitution by timothy because he talked about it in if we were to say well gosh if we just believe in states right federal government has no role in the states could you be in favor of john calhoun. He spot not only supported slavery lu a tierneyearni tyranny of State Government. They could do whatever they want. Do we believe so much in a small State Government that we have no belief in nationally government. Im a traditional activist when it comes to lockner and when it comes to the new deal. But im also a judicial activist when it comes to brown. Thinkty federal government was right to turn over State Governments saying separate buzz equal is find. Pressey versus ferguson is restraint. When we get to brown im an activist. What is the next one in activism versus restraint . It is griswald. And you9 say why are we even having this discussion. Any of this have anything to do with the Current Events . They ask what do you think about grizwold. A lot of people didnt know what it was probably. But it had to do with Birth Control. State government said you cant sell Birth Control to women. So if you are a states rights person you say i guess hands off. If you believe in judicial restraint, you are like let the states do what they want. That is a state right. Or you might say well individuals have rights also and states cant tread upon individual rights . V9 . And then you might say maybe i am for griswald or for over turning the sysy say yooss you cant have Birth Control. And it led to rowe also. You have a competition of rights between a mother and a child. So it is a little different than just whether or not you are restricting someones liberty. Because i think thr are two individuals involved. Why is this rz pertinent . Because we move all the way up to obamacare. When we get to obamacare, whether he believes it or not i dont know. But justice report roberts laid down the gauntlet and said judicious restraint is why the government can do whatever they cnp r t hahp hc want. Not only, but if there are two equal arguments for whether its constitutional or unconstitutional we just have to accept that the presumption is of constitutionality. This kind of gets back to this idea of restraint. If we rebelieve in judicial restraint we presume the majority is correct. We presume that laws are constitutional until we can prove otherwise. Now there is a school of thought that thinks differently. Ran dibarnett rights about something o. This he talks about the presumption of liberty that maybe we should start with the presumption of liberty. I liken it to sort of saying well maybe we should be presumed innocent until found guilty. Maybe we should be presumed to be free until we are restricted. [ one person clapping ] yes ive got one con convert. Yes. My point is to think about it. I think it is not as simple as we make it sound. We say we dont want judges writing laws. I dont them writing laws either but do i want them to protect my freedom and take an active role in preserving liberty . Do i want the burden on the government to prove constitutionality. I think this is important and becomes so with regard to the obamacare. In that Justice Robert says it is not his role to replace the majority will. Some might say im still for judicial restraint. I dont care about any of these cases. We just need a better majority. That is an argument. But the question has to come also if you dont have a better majority. If you have a jim crowe majority in the south, does the court video have a role in overturning something where a persons individual rights are at take . I think so. I think it is 3x debate because ultimately ideas are important. Victor hugoo i think stayed ideas are more important than a strong army. They are the presupposition behind all this that pe seed all this and impower all of us. I think whatever kind of government we want, what kind of role the judiciary has, it is important to decide and examine ourselves with regard to the restraint or activism with regard to the court. Another issue we have is on separation of powers and i think this is an equally important question. It is legislative question and possibly a judicial question as wells. There is a professor from tufts who wrote recently and said the separation there is an equilibrium that is supposed to be there between the different branches, but were having a collapse of the separation of powers. Were having a collapse of this equilibrium. Our Founding Fathers talked about their being sort of an ambition that we would pit one ambition against another. An ambition for the legislature should be an ambition that is pitted against the ambition of the presidency. The hope was and many times in our history this ambition was i think beyond party label. Unfortunate