Agenda Summary - BI
Agenda Summary2007 Business Issues Committee
National Association of REALTORS®
2007 REALTORS® Conference & Expo
The Venetian Resort Hotel Casino
Palazzo N, Level 5
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
9:00 AM - 11:30 AMChair: Peter Casey (MA)
Vice Chair: Doug Whitehouse (MI)
Committee Liaison: Gary Thomas (CA)
Committee Executive: Marcia Salkin, Scott Rinn (DC)I. Call To Order

II. Opening Remarks

III. Ownership/Conflict of Interest

OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE ANDCONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY
Exhibit Body:Ownership Disclosure Policy1. When NAR has an ownership interest in an entity and a member has an ownership interest* in that same entity, such member mustdisclose the existence of his or her ownership interest prior to speaking to a decision making body on any matter involving that entity.1. If a member has personal knowledge that NAR is considering doing business with an entity in which a member has any financial interest**, or with an entity in which the member serves in a decision-making capacity*, or wit, then such member must disclose the existence of his or her financial interest or decision making role prior tospeaking to a decision making body about the entity.1. If a member has a financial interest in, or serves in a decision-making capacity for, any entity that the member knows is offering competing products and services as those offered by NAR, then such member must disclose the existence of his or her financial interest or decision-making role prior to speaking to a decision making body about an issue involving those competing products and services.Aftermaking the necessary disclosure, a member may participate in the discussion and vote on the matter unless that member has a conflict of interest as defined below.

Conflict of Interest Policy

A member of any of NAR’s decision making bodies will be considered to have a conflict of interest whenever that member:1. Is a principal, partner or corporate officer of a business providing products or services to NAR or in a business being considered as a provider of products or services (“Business:); or1. Holds a seat on the board of directors of the Business unless the person’s only relationship to the Business is service on such board of directors as NAR’s representative; or1. Holds an ownership interest of more than 1 percent of the Business.

Members with a conflict of interest must immediately disclose their interest at the outset of any discussions by a decision making body pertaining to the Business or any of its products or services. Such members may not participate in the discussion relating to that Business other than to respond to questions asked of them by other members of the body.Furthermore, no member with a conflict of interest may vote on any matter in which the member has a conflict of interest, including votes to block or alter the actions of the body in order to benefit the Business in which they have an interest.
________________________________________
*Ownership interest is defined as the cumulative holdings of the member, the member’s spouse, children, siblings and to any trust, corporation or partnership in which any of the foregoing individuals is an officer or director, or owns, in the aggregate, at least 50% of the (a) beneficial interest (if a trust), (b) stock (if a corporation) or (c) partnership interests (if a partnership).

**Financial interest means any interest involving money, investments, credit or contractual rights.IV. Approval of Previous Meeting's Minutes (2007 Minutes)

V. Guest Speaker: Erin Toll, Director of the Colorado Division of Real Estate

Erin Toll
Director Colorado Division of Real Estate

Updated December 11, 2006Erin Toll was appointed theDirector of the Colorado Division of Real Estate in September of 2006. The Division of Real Estate oversees approximately 45,000 licensed real estate brokers, 3,500 licensed real estate appraisers and began registering mortgage brokers a few months ago. Ms. Toll oversees an annual budget of approximately $3.3 million and a staff of 38.

Prior to assuming the Director role, Ms. Toll served as the Deputy Commissioner of Compliance and Market Regulation for the Colorado Division of Insurance. She is a graduate of the University of Colorado and received her law degree from the University of Virginia. Prior to her employment with the Division of Insurance, Ms. Toll served as an Assistant Attorney General specializing in regulatory law. Prior to becoming a public servant, Ms. Toll was a litigator and lobbyist in private practice.

Ms. Toll has taken the lead in uncovering residential real estate kickback schemes. Her investigations into captive title reinsurance arrangements in early 2005 led to multi-million dollar national settlements with insurers and national recognition. She testified before the House Financial Services Committee in March of 2006 regarding her investigations.

Ms. Toll was published in The Denver Law Review. Her article entitled “The Right to Privacy of Medical Records” examines the national and state jurisprudence of medical information privacy including the evolution to codification of the legal principles as evidenced by HIPAA and other federallegislation.

Ms. Toll is active in her community where she served as a Planning and Zoning Commissioner for the City of Greenwood Village for three years and sits on the board of a non-profit organization that benefits women and children. She lives in the Southeast Denver area with her husband Joel and their three sons.

VI. Action/Discussion ItemsA. NAR Immigration PAG Report (Full Report)

The purpose of the Immigration PAG was to review a number of timely issues that relate to the REALTOR® community and provide recommendations to NAR’s Leadership Team. The charge to the PAG consisted of the following:

Review the status of the immigration debate in Congress andthe issues/conflicts involved.

Review the research, issues covered by the Business Issues and Tax Committees in their deliberations

Determine what other real estate/immigration issues there might be.

Review the Silver CardVisa proposal. Should NAR pursue legislation creating a Silver Card Visa? What shape should that legislation take if it is pursued? What are the implications of NAR becoming involved in the immigration debate? How will promoting the ability of foreignersto retire to the U.S. affect the view of NAR by REALTORS® across the nation, U.S. retirees, Members of Congress, and the public at large?

Review ITIN lending. Some have suggested that mortgage lending based on Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) be made more available. These identification numbers are given by the IRS to those who do not qualify for Social Security numbers (usually people who are not permanent residents, i.e. non-resident foreign citizens, green card holders, etc).

Recommend if or how NAR should become involved in the larger immigration issue.B. NAR Insurance Task ForceVII. Priority Legislation/Regulations UpdateA. Small Business Health Plan

Twenty-eight percent of REALTORS® - more than 350,000 individuals - are uninsured. As part of effortsto address the health insurance needs of members, NAR has advocated for more than three years for the creation of small business health plans (SBHPs). With the shift in the leadership of both the House and the Senate, the nature of the debate as to how to address the health insurance problems facing the nation’s small business community has also shifted focus.

Lacking affordable health insurance, many REALTORS® are unable to seek necessary medical attention and/or face significant financial burdens when they or their dependents need medical care. Without changes, problems with the availability and affordability of health insurance will undermine the ability of some real estate professionals to continue in their chosen careers.

C.A.R. Policy:
That CAR take a “NEUTRAL” position on Association Health Plan (AHP) and Small Business Health Plan (SBHP) proposed legislation.  California currently has a small business health insurance plan to keep premiums low and affordable; however, recognizing that not every state possesses a similar plan, C.A.R. does not want to obstruct legislation which may help lower insurance costs for REALTORS® in other states.  C.A.R. staff will continue to monitor this issue because of concerns with the following aspects of proposed legislation:
  • Would pre-empt California’s minimum coverage and rating requirements for health insurance for REALTORS®. 
  • This pre-emption may jeopardize the superior system that California already has in place.  AHP and SBHP coverage will be based on minimal coverage requirements and greatly reduce what Californian’s currently have guaranteed. 
  • Will siphon individuals from California’s small business health plan pool which usesits size to negotiate reduced rates for health, dental and vision plans that small businesses otherwise couldn’t afford.  This will leave a smaller and less diverse group with higher premiums in California’s plan.
  • Will force employers to choose between offering an AHP or SBHP with inferior minimal standards of coverage or continue with the superior California plan but at higher premiums. 
  • The reduced coverage offered by AHPs or SBHPs could put pressure on California’s state legislature to reduce minimum coverage requirements in California.
NAR Policy:
NAR supports the passage of legislation to correct the inequities inherent in the nation's health insurance delivery system, including enacting measure that will address the problems that the self-employed and small businesses face when looking for health plan coverage. Solving the problem of the uninsured must become a top legislative priority for Congress.

While NAR-supported small business health plan (SBHP) legislation, S. 1955 (Enzi, R-WY; Nelson, D-NE) was able to gain a hearing in the Senate for the first time in the history of the AHP/SBHP debate in 2006, changes in Congressional leadership in 2007 make it unlikely that SBHP legislation supported by NAR and the small business community will advance in the 110th Congress. Also complicating thesituation is the fact that health care reform is being seen as a major component of the upcoming 2008 Presidential campaigns.

In an effort to capitalize on the last year's progress in the Senate and an increased awareness of the problems that small businesses and the self-employed have finding health insurance generated by last year's REALTOR® advocacy efforts, NAR and the broad-based SBHP coalition of small business trade representatives have continued to meet with the health staffs of the new Democratic leaders, as well as key Republican offices, in an effort to identify alternative legislative proposals that would address the REALTOR® and other small businesses problems with health insurance access and cost. These meetings continueon a weekly basis today.

From these bi-partisan discussions, three points of agreement have evolved. First, leaders of both parties are in agreement that the self-employed and small business community face the toughest health insurance challenges today. Second, market based, small business pooling arrangements can help reduce costs and expand access to health insurance coverage. Third, a willingness to work towards finding such a market-based small business solution would be a good first stepthis year in what will be an ongoing debate over health care reform.

As a result, on Friday, March 23, 2007, the Senate Budget Committee unanimously approved an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution (S.Con.Res.21) that provides the necessary financial foundation for any proposal to create a market-based pooling plan for small business healthcare insurance. The amendment was sponsored by Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) and cosponsored by Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE), Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Max Baucus (D-MT), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Ken Salazar (D-CO), John Thune (R-SD), and David Vitter (R-LA). This amendment creates a deficit neutral reserve fund that would be used in the event that the Senate develops abill to allow market-based small business health care pooling plans. While this is not a legislative fix , it was the first very public commitment by the major Senate players in the healthcare debate to work together on a new proposal to find healthcare coverage for small business.

More recently, on August 2, 2007, the Senate approved a Sense of the Senate resolution recognizing that there is a crisis in small business health care markets. The resolution continues by saying that the Senate should act this year and provide a solution that builds on existing private markets, offers across state line pooling and provides tax credits. The resolution was sponsored by Senators Lincoln (AR), Snowe (ME), Nelson (NE), Baucus (MT), Grassley (IA), Kennedy(MA), Enzi (WY), Durbin (IL), Crapo (ID) and Smith (OR), Hatch (UT), Isakson (GA), Dodd (CT), Carper (DE), Pryor (AR) and Kerry (MA).

While each measure is not a legislative solution, both are very public commitments by the major Senate players in the healthcare debate to work together on a new proposal to find healthcare coverage for small business by year end. NAR continues to work with Senators. Enzi (WY.), Nelson (NE), Lincoln (AR) and Durbin (IL) to refine their respective small businesshealth reform proposals and with Senator Max Baucus (MT), chair of the Senate Finance Committee, on his parallel efforts to deliver targeted small business health reform this year.

In addition to continuing to meet with the staffs of those Democratic and Republican Senators with an interest in finding a compromise approach, NAR has also participated in a round of Congressional hearings that have focused on the broader health insurance issues. Most recently, on Wednesday, March 14, 2007, Maryland Realtor Adam Cockey, the 2007 Immediate Past Chair of the NAR Business Issues Committee testified before the House Small Business Committee's hearing on the "Challenges and Solutions to Health Insurance Coverage for Small Businesses. " The hearing was the first of what the chair of the committee, Representative Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), characterized as a series of hearings focusing on the problems that small business owners have finding affordable health insurance coverage for themselves and their employees. Chairwoman Velazquez was the lead Democratic co-sponsor of last year's association health plan legislation, HR 525.

In his testimony, Mr. Cockey explained the problems that independent contractors and the self-employed face and stressed how important it is that any discussion of solutions to the nation's health insurance crisis must go beyond the traditional focus on the state of the large and small group markets and include individual health insurance market reforms. Testifying along withMr. Cockey were representatives of America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), Project Hope, the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB); and a small Ohio electrical contracting firm.

Earlier in January, NAR President Pat V. Combs participated in the first roundtable discussion of health care issues held by the incoming chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee. Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA). One of ten panelists invited by Mr. Kennedy to participate in the first hearing of his chairmanship, Ms. Combs highlighted the challenge that the self-employed, including real estate firms and agents, face today finding affordable health care coverage.B. RESPA ReformSince June 2005, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has continued its efforts to revamp the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) regulations. A new proposal to modernize the Good Faith Estimate (GFE) to more closely mirror the HUD-1 Statement is expected to be sent by HUD to OMB in late October or early November, 2007.

A simple modernization of the GFE will help consumers identify any changes to their loan terms and estimated settlement costs from the initial terms first discussed with the lender and those presented at closing. Consumers will be better served by a summary GFE, tied to the HUD-1 that willallow the consumer to obtain the most appropriate mortgage for their financial circumstance and to allow for greater transparency at the time of closing.

NAR supports efforts to modernize the GFE and allow consumers to compare the intial mortgage terms discussed with those presented at the loan closing. In addition, NAR advocates a market-based approach to RESPA reform that encourages fair competition, protects consumer choice and provides full disclosure of costs and services in the mortgagetransaction. NAR does not support efforts to create exemptions under section 8 anti-kickback provisions.

A new proposal has been delayed but is expected to be submitted by HUD to OMB in November 2007. RESPA reform has been ongoing at HUD for the past five years, including a series of roundtables in 2005 to gather industry input. NAR has been an active participant in this effort and has urged HUD to provide a Summary Good Faith Estimate (GFE) that tracks the HUD-1 so that consumers can shop andmake informed decisions prior to closing and then easily confirm that the consumer’s loan and pricing decisions are transparently transferred to the HUD-1 at closing. NAR President Pat V. Combs sent a joint letter to HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson on August 8, 2007 encouraging HUD to continue to undertake reform of the GFE under RESPA. The letter, co-signed by Center for Responsible Lending (CRL) President, Michael D. Calhoun, reflects the two organizations’ common approach to RESPA reform andaddresses abusive lending practices, in part, through a summary GFE. The letter also states that additional strong legislative and regulatory action will be required. HUD did announced this fall that it has abandoned a proposal that would have allowed for bundling of some settlement services for a single fee (known as a Mortgage Packaging Option) and which would have qualified for an exemption under the section eight prohibitions against kickbacks and unearned split fee arrangements of RESPA. Also this fall, HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson revealed for the first time that HUD has been working on a revised HUD-1 Settlement Statement that will match up more closely with the Good Faith Estimate (GFE). HUD’s actions are in line with NAR’s suggestions over the past five years to improve GFE disclosures and NAR’s opposition to the Mortgage Packaging Option. When HUD’s RESPA regulation is released for public comment, anticipated in early 2008, NAR will continue to take an active role in shaping the final regulation.C. Patent ReformU.S. patent law has remained essentially unchanged for more than 50 years. Efforts now are underway to reform patent law in response to growing concerns that the current patent system is unable to deal with challenges presented by the ever growing number of patent applications being submitted and increasing complexity of the technology for which a patent is being requested. In addition, the growing number of cases of licensing demands being made by holders of obscure software patents as well as number of patent lawsuits being filed point to the need for reform.

The real estate industry is more and more dependent on the use of information technology and software products to market properties and manage their businesses. An increase in patent-infringement claims can drag unsuspecting REALTORS® into expensive and time-consuming litigation putting all REALTORS® at risk.

C.A.R. Policy:
C.A.R. does not currently have policy on this issue.  At C.A.R.’s June2007, business meetings in Sacramento the Federal Issues Committee chose to not take any policy.NAR Policy:
NAR supports greater transparency in the patent application process including (1) a mechanism to allow practitioners with the expertise and knowledge to review and comment on the appropriateness of a patent application prior to the issuance of the patent and (2) create a streamlined and more effective process for challenging a patent outside of the judicial system.

Bothbills were marked-up, amended and reported out. While the House passed a somewhat "watered-down" version of the original bill, the full Senate has not voted on its measure. Consideration is anticipated in late October. The primary obstacle to passage this year is the limited amount of time remaining on the Senate calendar.D. Personal Data SecurityAs technology has evolved and become vital for businesses to thrive, a growing number of public and private entities (including colleges, universities, health insurance companies and data brokers) that keep and maintain personal information (financial accounts, social security numbers, phone numbers), have become victims of security breaches. These breaches have exposed fundamental security flaws in the way that companies handle consumers’ personal information. Individual privacy has been compromised and these breaches have put consumers at an elevated risk of becoming victims of identity theft.

REALTORS® have long been strongly supportive of efforts to protect consumers’ sensitive personal information. The now 94 year old REALTOR® Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice explicitly acknowledge a REALTORS® obligation to preserve the confidentiality of personal information provided by clients in the course of any agency or non-agency relationship - both during and after the termination of these business relationships. REALTORS® support for data protection measures is also bolstered by their day-do-day business activities where they see first hand the damage that identity theft can do to a family's efforts to rent an apartment or buy a home.

REALTORS® strongly support efforts to protect their clients' sensitive personal information but believe that any legislation must not overly burden small firms with limited resources. In addition, any federal data security legislation should not preempt state laws which may offer state residents additional protection.

Most observers believed that data security legislation would be a high priority for each chamber in the 110th Congress. To date,though, action has been slow.

In the Senate, three bills were introduced and considered at the committee level, including S. 495, (Leahy, D-NH), the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2007, S.239 (Feinstein, D-CA), the Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act of 2007, and S. 1178 (Inouye, D-HI; Stevens, R-AK). While each bill varies in its terms, all three would require businesses holding consumers' "sensitive personal information" to institute a security program, notify those consumers whose data has been compromised by a data breach and report breaches to either the Federal Trade Commission and/or the Secret Service. In the House, H.R. 958 ( Rush, D-IL; Stearns, R-FL), the "Data Accountability and Trust Act”, was introduced with similar provisions in February 2007. The bill is still pending before the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

While S. 1178 passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee on a voice vote on April 25, 2007 and S. 495 and S. 239 were approved theSenate Judiciary Committee on May 3, 2007, getting a final bill enacted this year be difficult. A total of at least eight congressional committees in the Senate and House have jurisdiction over some component of the data security issue. Jurisdictional spats derailed efforts to get a consensus bill last year. NAR submitted letters outlining its concerns with each of the bills at mark-up and will continue to work with each of the committees of jurisdiction to ensure that careful consideration be given to the potential unintended consequences that these measures could have for the nation's small businesses, as well as for the ability of states to enact more consumer protective data security measures.E. Net NeutralityThe continuing evolution of Internet technology, applications and broadband capacity has led Congress to take up legislation to amend the 1934 Telecommunications Act. One hotly debated issue has been whether or not there is a need to codify in statute the principle of "net neutrality."

“Net Neutrality” is the principle that calls upon designers of the individual networks that together make up the Internet to create their network in a manner that allows any computer connected to the network to send a "packet" of information to any other computer on the Internet with minimal interference. Those supporting the inclusion of net neutrality language in any final telecommunications bill argue that without legislation, the June 2005 U.S. Supreme Court “Brand X” decision would allow broadband providers to engage in non-neutral practices such as blocking, slowing or degrading access to networks that compete with the broadband provider's own and institute pricing "tiers" for different levels of network access used by content providers.

Some real estate professionals, realty website operators and real estate industry affiliated content providers believe net neutrality provisions are necessary to prevent broadband providers from implementing new practices that could negatively impact realty professionals use of the Internet to market their servicesand listings.

Examples cited include practices that would (1) limit the public's access to real estate websites, (2) charge realty website operators for access to the broadband provider's subscribers, (3) limit a real estate firm access to online service providers who may be in competition with the broadband providers own services, e.g. Internet phone services, or (4) charging websites more for the broadband speeds necessary to properly transmit or display audio or video content such as an online property tour, podcast or phone services.

The NAR Board of Directors adopted, at the 2007 Midyear Legislative Meetings, five principles to guide lobbying efforts on any legislation to require broadband providers to adhere to net neutral practices: 1. consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice; 2. consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; 3. consumers are entitled to connect their choiceof legal devices that do not harm the network; 4. consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers; and, 5. network providers should not discriminate among internet data transmissionson the basis of the source of the transmission as they regulate the flow of network content.

C.A.R.’s Board of Directors took the same positions at the 2007 June Business Meetings. Congress willconsider legislation to amend the U.S. Telecommunications Act of 1996. Among the issues that will be debated is whether there is a need for prescriptive "net neutrality" provisions in any bill enacted. Codifying the principles outlined above will ensurethat consumers, including REALTORS®, have unencumbered and fair access to internet services and content.

While last year's net neutrality debate was played out in the context of two very large telecommunications reform bills,this year's net neutrality debate is shaping up differently. To date, a Senate bill, S. 215 (Dorgan, D-ND; Snowe, R-ME), the Internet Freedom Preservation Act, is the only neutrality bill that has been introduced. Senator Dorgan has indicated that he willpush for hearings on his measure. Some believe that the measure could be considered either this summer or fall. Last year's House sponsor, Representative Markey, has yet to reintroduce his bill.

While Congress has been slow to take up net neutrality, the Federal Communications Commission has continued to deal with those neutrality related measures that have come before it for consideration. Last year, the agency issued a set of net neutrality principles that it indicated would be used to regulate service providers (appended at the end of this document). The FCC also mandated a two-year pro-neutrality requirement as a condition of approval of the merger of AT&T and BellSouth, both fervent opponents of net-neutrality legislation.

More recently, in March, 2007, the FCC began a three month investigation into the behavior of broadband market participants, to determine if business practices are impeding the "neutrality," or equal access, of the Internet. The FCC inquiry is looking atfour main issues:

1) How are broadband providers managing Internet traffic on their networks today;
2) Do providers charge different prices for different speeds or capacities of service;
3) Should FCC policies distinguish between content providers that charge end users for access to content and those that do not; and
4) How are or would consumers be affected by these practices.

On Capitol Hill, observers are still split in their analysis of the situation. Some argue that AT&T's two-year moratorium has given Congress time to act and that it is unlikely that any of the major broadband providers will "rock the boat" while Congress is considering whether to make AT&T's temporary agreement the basis for a net neutrality law that would bind them all.

Others believe that without legislative language, net neutrality will become a thing of the past as the result of the June 2005 U.S. Supreme Court "Brand X" ruling. That decision ruled that cable broadband providers DSL services were not subject to the "common carrier" rules that govern more traditional telecom services like phones and did not have to make their networks open to competing Internet Service Providers. This decision has been interpreted as allowing broadband providers to modify their business practices in a manner that would conflict with the traditional net neutrality principles which have governed the Internet's development to date.

The Federal Communications Commission adopts a policy statement that outlines four principles to encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of public Internet: (1) consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice; (2) consumers are entitled to run applications and services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; (3) consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; and (4) consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.F. 2008 DNC FeesG. Telemarketing One PagerTwo federal agencies, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), regulate interstate and intrastate telemarketing. In December 2002, the FTC issued regulations to create a national “do-not-call” registry for interstate calls. The rules were designed to curtail telemarketing abuses. In a separate but related effort, on June 26, 2003, the FCC extended the FTC National Do-Not-Call (DNC) rules to intrastate calls.

Calls made by REALTORS® to potential home buyers and sellers are subject to both the FTC and FCC telemarketing regulations. As a result, Realtors who make cold calls to consumers with whom they have not done business in the past must comply with all of the Do-Not-Call (DNC) rules. These rules include, but are not restricted to, requirements that those who are making consumer calls register as a telemarketer, check the DNC Registry before making calls to consumers and do not make calls to those consumers listed on the Registry or who have asked not be be called by the caller in the past.

NAR opposes the preemption of state telemarketing laws and strongly advocated for (1) maintaining the long-standing FTC exemption to the telemarketing rules for face-to-face sales transactions, (2) limiting the applicability of the FCC rules to interstate calls, (3) clarifying that calls to FSBOs and expired listings fall outside the scope of the DNC rules, and (4) limitations of fee increases for access to the DNC Registry.

Despite increases in telemarketer fees to access the DNC lists in each of the years since the Registry's implementation, the FTC has announced that there will be no increase in access fees for telemarketers in 2008.

It has been proposed that fees for Registry access should be set by federal statute rather than the FTC. Such an action would take the fee setting process out of the hands of the FTC and likely tie any future increases to a commonly accepted public index of the rate of inflation. The FTC is supportive of such an action. The need for Congressional reauthorization of the DNC Registry program for 2008 and future years may provide an opportunity for such a change to be made.H. NAR Letter to House of Representatives - Do Not Call Update 10/02/2007(Letter)VIII. ReportsA. NAR Housing Policy Principles 10/11/2007 (Full Report)EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In celebrating 100 years, the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTOR® remains dedicated to the protection and the preservation of the free enterprise system and the right of the individual to own real property as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America. We offer the benefits that our knowledge of real estate, our experience, and our technical resources bring to the public in general and the government which serves them. Becausewe are concerned with a number of issues facing our members and our country, the following statement of the principles underlying our policy recommendations is provided so that the public will better understand our specific positions.

We believe in the free enterprise system, and oppose undue intervention by the government in the affairs of American business. We oppose counterproductive taxation, governmental guidelines, regulations, rules and procedures which unnecessarilyincrease consumer costs and unnecessarily burden the business community.

We believe that the political stability and economic prosperity of the United States of America is dependent in large measure upon the right of the individual to own and freely transfer real property and to exercise and enjoy the benefits of ownership. Because we strongly support the full and free exercise of this right, we oppose actions by governments, groups, or individuals which diminish or deny it, and we will concern ourselves with legislation, regulations and litigation which impact on real estate and the REALTOR® organization.

We will continue to be responsive to the increasing needs of our members for directand indirect economic and professional benefits and services by striving to increase the professional image, standards and productivity of our members. The growing specialized and diversified needs of the members of the various disciplines in the real estate industry in domestic and international markets are also of major importance to our organization. Thus, we will work to ensure that our members in both residential and non-residential specialties provide the highest quality services to their clients,while addressing the continually changing nature of brokerage and business practices in real estate, including the professional and liability concerns of our members. We will inform our membership of domestic and international real estate business trends and practices, and the effects of changing demographics. We will promote the benefits of additional real estate education and develop new ways of assisting real estate specialties. We will also work to build coalitions and work with other trade groups, professional associations, and firms in areas such as education, legislation, services, marketing and membership.

We believe that homeownership is a cornerstone of our democratic system of government and deservesa preferred place in our system of values. Homeownership contributes to community responsibility; civic, economic, business, and employment stability; and family security. As real estate professionals we know that homeownership is a primary goal of American families. We also believe that every individual should have the opportunity to live in safe and decent housing. These objectives can best be served by a healthy housing market in an economic environment that fosters an ample supply of safe, affordableand accessible financing provided by both domestic and international sources.

We believe in balancing the needs for private property rights, low- and moderate-income housing, economic growth, and a healthy environment. In this respect, agricultural needs, social and economic factors, and the future growth of our nation must be considered in the development of land use policies.

We firmly believe in equal opportunity in housing. No person of this country should have the right to rent or purchase shelter of choice abridged because of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, handicap, familial status or national origin. Furthermore, these rights should not be limited by ethnic, racial or religious proportions in any defined area.

We encourage persons of all racial and ethnic groups, genders, with and without disabilities, and individuals otherwise protected from discrimination by the Fair Housing Act, to participate at alllevels within the REALTOR® Associations.

We believe in and support policies that promote the healthy growth of the American economy. Investment in structures, equipment, and the skills of people is necessary to increase the standard of living, jobs and household income. To accomplish these goals, we urge changes in tax policy that encourage savings, investment and homeownership.

We believe that active involvement in political activity isa privilege and responsibility of every citizen. We urge qualified individuals to engage in public service. We encourage continuing participation in local, state, and national political affairs and urge support of those candidates who pledge, preserve andstrengthen America's free enterprise system which is based upon the underlying principle of private property ownership.

B. RESPA EducationNAR continues its broad effort to educate its members on RESPA enforcement. The effort began three and a half years ago with the creation of the “RESPA Realities” program atthe Midyear and Annual conventions. NAR’s RESPA education efforts bring together leading RESPA attorneys and real estate and real estate services practitioners to discuss the latest developments in RESPA enforcement and compliance. There is usuallya lengthy question and answer session involving the audience. The next session will be held at the Annual Convention in Las Vegas on Wednesday November 14, 1:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m., at the Venetian Resort Hotel Casino, Venetian Ballroom G, Level 2.

Following on the development of “RESPA Realities,” NAR produced a series of brochures and laminated cards to educate members of their obligations under RESPA. The RESPA “Dos and Don’ts” laminated cards have become popular across the nation. The brochures incorporate more details and questions and answers on key RESPA issues for agents and for those involved in affiliated business arrangements (AfBAs). These materials are available for purchase through the REALTOR® website: http://www.realtor.org/RESPA The REALTOR® RESPA page contains links to the REALTOR® store and other information on the latest RESPA happenings.

In 2006, NAR undertook to create a RESPA education course that would be eligible for state continuing education credit. The first approved course was held in Maryland in April 2007. The most recent session was in Columbus, Ohio and the next session is at the New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania Triple Play Convention in Atlantic City in December. Sessions are also planned for Illinois, Arkansas, and California.

NAR plans to continue to expand its RESPA education efforts. NAR staff members have started to present RESPA education sessions at various state meetings, most recently in Maine and Arkansas. RESPA Realities sessions will be recorded and a DVD will be produced and made available for a reasonable fee as an educational tool for agents, brokers, and associations. NAR will continue to partner with states to offer for-credit RESPA education sessions to members across the country. In addition, an on-line RESPA question and answer project is being discussed which will create a format for NAR members to submit their RESPA questionsto a panel of RESPA attorneys. Finally, NAR continues to remain active in the ongoing debate about RESPA reform. NAR remains engaged with HUD and OMB as well as other industry players in an effort to ensure that all REALTORS® are represented in the decision-making process.IX. New Business

X. Adjournment

  NAR Directors Stipend   Sample Acknowledgement Letter
  Designations/Certifications   Federal Government Affairs
  NAR Meetings   NAR Code of Ethics

Terms and Conditions  |  Privacy Policy  |  Permission to Reprint  |  Site Map  |  Advertise with Us  |  Contact Us  
Copyright © 2012 CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®
Feedback Form