The speaker in the video is the CEO and President of the largest wholesale lender by volume in the country. So he would be someone who is (Hamilton fans, here you are) either "in the room where it happens," or is well connected with those that are - he's one room over, buying lunch for someone that was in the room, to pick their brains about what was just discussed.
He is speculating about what might happen when Fannie/Freddie are passed onto the private sector in a few years, ending over a decade of gov't conservatorship. He casually, almost in passing, mentions that we might see a reduction in the number of investment properties that Fannie/Freddie will finance, that they might not do them at all, and that cash out refinances might become more limited in scope and availability.
Again, this is speculative rumor level commentary, but it's from someone "in" or "adjacent to" the "room where it happens." Might be an argument in favor of locking up more investment property debt before it happens.
We have precedent for what non-Fannie non-Freddie financing for 1-4 unit rental properties look like. Lots of people here have 15 or 35 rental properties, they talk about 20-25 year amortization, balloon payments, ARMs, etc. Basically, bye bye 30YF with a good rate.
There's also precedent for more limited cash out refinances. When I entered the industry, no one with more than 4 total financed properties could get a conventional conforming (read: good 30yf) cash out refinance on a rental property. If the decision was made to get more conservative on the cash out refinances, that would probably be the starting point of the debate / negotiation / conversation in that room with the polished hardwood table that folks like myself, and most likely you, aren't invited to.