[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2026
_______________________________________________________________________
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
______________
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas, Chairman
HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina,
JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida Ranking Member
TONY GONZALES, Texas MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona NORMA J. TORRES, California
DAVE P. JOYCE, Ohio PETE AGUILAR, California
STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma, ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
Vice Chair
DALE W. STRONG, Alabama
NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full
committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking
minority member of the full committee, are authorized to sit as members
of all subcommittees.
Doug Disrud, Avery Pierson,
Andrew Giacini, and Nathan Silverstein
Subcommittee Staff
__________________
PART 2
Page
Federal Aviation Administration................................ 1
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development............... 61
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
___________________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
61-855 WASHINGTON : 2026
_______________________________________________________________________
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
----------
TOM COLE, Oklahoma, Chairman
HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky,
Chairman Emeritus
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
KEN CALVERT, California
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,
Tennessee
DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
DAVID G. VALADAO, California
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
BEN CLINE, Virginia
GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa
TONY GONZALES, Texas
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana
ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia
STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
JAKE ELLZEY, Texas
JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona
CHUCK EDWARDS, North Carolina
MARK ALFORD, Missouri
NICK LaLOTA, New York
DALE W. STRONG, Alabama
CELESTE MALOY, Utah
RILEY M. MOORE, West Virginia
ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut,
Ranking Member
STENY H. HOYER, Maryland
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina
SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
GRACE MENG, New York
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
PETE AGUILAR, California
LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
NORMA J. TORRES, California
ED CASE, Hawaii
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
JOSH HARDER, California
LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois
SUSIE LEE, Nevada
JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York
MIKE LEVIN, California
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
MARIE GLUESENKAMP PEREZ,
Washington
GLENN IVEY, Maryland
Susan Ross, Chief Clerk and Staff Director
(II)
DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2026
----------
Wednesday, June 4, 2025.
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WITNESS
MR. CHRIS ROCHELEAU, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Womack. This hearing will come to order. It is 10
o'clock. And as per our disciplined approach, we like to start
things on time around here. I know that runs a bit counter to
some of the other activities of the Congress, but not here.
Today we welcome testimony from Chris Rocheleau, Acting
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
Administrator Rocheleau, thank you for joining us today as
we review the FAA's budget request for the coming fiscal year.
We have seen air travel rebound since the pandemic with
passenger numbers now consistently exceeding pre-pandemic
levels across our aviation system.
Aviation remains a critical driver of economic growth.
Commercial aviation contributes more than a trillion dollars to
our economy, and new technologies promise to deliver more
opportunities while improving the quality of life for all
Americans.
I am particularly excited to see how advancements in the
aviation sector provide more opportunities in areas of high
growth, like the district that I represent in northwest
Arkansas.
However, rapid growth brings challenges, and we have seen
that very subject in the last few months. We must acknowledge
the recent aviation accidents that have renewed scrutiny of our
safety systems. The tragic crash that occurred on January 29 at
Reagan National is still fresh on our minds--a sobering
reminder of the real-life consequences when multiple parts of
our National Airspace System falter.
Incidents like this, along with the Alaska Airlines door
plug failure, multiple near misses in the air and on the
ground, and a slew of general aviation accidents, make it clear
that our work to strengthen oversight, training, and
coordination is far from finished. Safety must remain our
shared, unyielding priority.
Our airspace is becoming more crowded and more complex. The
infrastructure we rely on is reaching the end of its useful
life.
This committee must take a hard look at how we fund the
maintenance and replacement of infrastructure and equipment
that create the backbone of our aviation system. We must work
together to ensure that all aviation can flourish while
maintaining the highest possible standards of safety and
efficiency for the millions of passengers who fly every day.
Your extensive aviation experience will be vital as we
navigate these issues together. I know a safe and efficient
National Airspace System is your number one priority. It is
also ours.
The President's request for FAA is $22 billion, a 5 percent
increase above the enacted 2025 level, with much of the
increase going toward operations and facilities and equipment,
including your new Project LIFT, which I am sure you will tell
us about in your testimony.
However, this budget doesn't contemplate the scale of
improvements Secretary Duffy has announced that are necessary.
More detail and information will be required for us to fully
consider this eventual request. We cannot repeat the NextGen
boondoggle where we allowed a program to drag on for decades
while technology outpaced its implementation.
If this committee is asked to consider additional funding,
with the expectation the FAA can complete procurement or
deployment through innovative contracts, the FAA must do better
than it did under IIJA. From that bill, $2.5 billion for
facilities and equipment remains unobligated.
Mr. Rocheleau, as we develop our 2026 bill, I intend to
work with you, your colleagues at the FAA, and Secretary Duffy,
along with the aviation community, to ensure that we continue
to support the safest, most complex aviation system in the
world.
Mr. Administrator, I look forward to our discussion today
and hearing from you about the FAA's current and pending work.
We want to know how you plan to modernize the air traffic
system, address staffing challenges, and encourage safety
advancements and innovation. I am confident that we can work
together to support the critical missions of the Federal
Aviation Administration.
Now I would like to recognize my good friend and the
ranking member from South Carolina, Mr. Clyburn, for his
opening remarks.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And welcome, Acting Administrator Rocheleau. I want to
thank you for your service as you assume leadership of the FAA
under very difficult circumstances.
The purpose of today's hearing is to examine how the FAA is
using its current resources and the proposed fiscal year 2026
funding to advance aviation safety.
As Chair Womack just mentioned, last month we had an
opportunity to discuss with Secretary Duffy some of the
administration's proposed investments to modernize the air
traffic control system.
The discussion centered around the air traffic control
modernization plan released last month by this administration.
While the plan is a great conversation starter, it ignores the
realities of cuts to FAA's staff, fair competition, overall
cost, and most importantly, how we pay for it.
The FAA's 2026 budget request provides nominal increases to
backfill the air traffic controller workforce and sustain the
FAA's aging facilities and technology, all of which I support.
While there are proposed resources set aside for
modernizing the FAA, I am concerned that they come at the
expense of advancing FAA's aviation safety research,
engineering, and development programs, which are essential
investments to determine the best modernization and safety
solutions for the National Airspace System.
And though the 2026 budget request proposes hiring up to
2,500 new air traffic controllers, it does not consider
challenges with academy success or retention rates and early
retirements among our existing controllers workforce.
Meanwhile, with the constant shifts in tariffs, America is
losing the confidence of our partners to deliver and improve
the air traffic control system and cost-effective aviation
manufacturing.
American businesses, including manufacturers and suppliers,
face uncertainty and increased costs as they are left in the
dark. Thousands of jobs, many in high-skilled manufacturing and
engineering, depend on the ability of United States aircraft
manufacturers and suppliers to access global markets on fair
and reliable terms. This is especially true for manufacturing
in my own district and home State of South Carolina.
Our aviation supply air system requires certainty from our
global partners and the trust that we can deliver state of the
art transportation and airports.
Mr. Secretary, I strongly support robust investments in
aviation, but we need to know that the administration's
supplemental air traffic control plan and budget request is
backed by action and based on current realities.
I remain concerned that we have yet to see the full
potential of existing FAA resources being used to address our
most immediate threats brought forward by aging technology and
staffing shortfalls at the FAA.
Mr. Chairman, it is our duty on this subcommittee to
continue helping the FAA modernize the air traffic control
system, and in a year where we need to see more robust
investments in FAA my hope is that it does not come at the
expense of strengthening safety for other modes of
transportation or keeping our seniors and working families
housed.
I look forward to learning more about how we can work
together to support the advancement of the FAA. I look forward
to hearing your testimony and yield the balance of my time.
And I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Clyburn.
We are joined today by the overall chairman of the House
Appropriations Committee, my good friend, Tom Cole, even though
he is still writhing a little bit in pain from a pair of very
difficult losses by the Oklahoma Sooners this weekend in
baseball and softball, though your gymnastics program is still
world class.
The Chairman. Thunder looks pretty good too.
Mr. Womack. And Thunder is not bad, yeah.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for joining us today, and I will
recognize you for any opening comments you would like to make.
The Chairman. Well, thank you. And since you brought up an
unrelated matter, I just want to explain those two untimely
losses by our OU women.
We had won the World Series four consecutive times. Of
course, it is hosted in Oklahoma City. And so we got the team
together and said, if we win every year, they are just going to
quit coming. So maybe we need to lighten up, let somebody else
slip through once, and then you young ladies--because it is a
pretty new team. Six new starters out of nine. We graduated a
class that had won the championship every single year they were
in college. So we are going to let Texas Tech or Texas enjoy
one and then they will come back and we will start all over
again.
But thank you. I am awfully proud of those young women.
They are amazing.
First, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it, Chairman
Womack.
And thank you, Ranking Member Clyburn.
Welcome, Administrator Rocheleau, and thank you for coming
before us today and, honestly, for your decades of public
service in uniform and as a career civil servant as well. We
appreciate it. And in the private sector. But you have been
around aviation for a long time, done a lot of great things for
our country, and I think you were a superb appointment.
As we start the fiscal year, Mr. Administrator, I am
focused on providing effective fiscal support to the FAA. We
know you need resources to ensure the safety of our national
airspace, support American manufacturers and innovators, and
invest in infrastructure that improves the efficiency and
reliability of our aviation system.
This subcommittee will support your efforts as we develop
our fiscal year 2026 budget. This will include addressing some
of our aging air traffic infrastructure that is no longer
sustainable in its current form and could become an operational
risk.
I will reiterate what Chairman Womack stated earlier: Our
commitment to safety and security will be steadfast and
unified.
We will begin to do this within the confines of the
President's budget while we wait to receive your broader air
traffic control proposal.
Now, as you know, air traffic infrastructure isn't the only
challenging aspect of our National Airspace System. Personnel
levels are also a systemic concern, and in particular the men
and women who control our skies that are trained at the sole
FAA Academy, located in Oklahoma City.
The training provided in Oklahoma City is unmatched, and I
appreciated having the opportunity to speak with you several
weeks ago about your efforts to improve the completion rate of
the talented students who attend the academy.
As we discussed, the academy must be successful, and to be
successful it must be properly resourced with the latest
technology and the best instructors.
In fiscal year 2024, while I was privileged to be the
chairman of this subcommittee, I worked to ensure the academy
received a significant increase for air traffic and technical
operations training enhancements to strengthen the air traffic
control system for our trainees.
This committee also ensured that in our final fiscal year
2025 appropriation, we provided funding to train an additional
2,000 air traffic controllers, and I understand your budget
request for fiscal year 2026 contemplates pushing that number
potentially to as high as 2,500.
As we advance the fiscal year 2026 appropriation, I look
forward to working with you and the administration and my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to fund critical safety
missions and transportation infrastructure needs for the
country.
With that, let me just add, this is a genuinely bipartisan
subcommittee. All of us are in the skies together. We all have
friends and family that are flying. We all are concerned about
rail safety. We are concerned about road safety.
And so I don't find much partisan division here. It is
really more about figuring out, as Mr. Clyburn said, the
ranking member, what is the right thing to do here? What are
the investments we should be making? And for that we are going
to rely very heavily on your judgment and your recommendations,
and one way or another, we are going to make the investments
that we need to make.
Again, I don't like to look at what we did in 2024 and 2025
as kind of one-hit wonders. They need to be a sustained process
of investment and improvement that is going to stretch over a
number of years.
And I couldn't be prouder of the members of this
subcommittee on both sides of the aisle, because I know they
have got that kind of commitment. I have worked with a lot of
them in different capacities before.
So I think we have the opportunity in this subcommittee to
do something really significant to improve the lives of the
American people and the safety of the American people, and I
think it is something we can do in a bipartisan fashion. So we
look forward to your leadership and your cooperation in helping
our committee get to where it needs to go.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I associate myself
with your remarks. It is a shared responsibility and we have a
lot of work to do to ensure the safety of the flying public.
Mr. Rocheleau, your full written testimony will be inserted
into the record. The chair will now recognize you for your
opening comments before we move to questions and answers.
STATEMENT OF CHRIS ROCHELEAU
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Cole, Chairman Womack, Ranking Member Clyburn, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
discuss the Administration's Fiscal Year 2026 budget request
for the Federal Aviation Administration.
The FAA's mission is to provide the safest, most efficient
aerospace system in the world. To fulfill this ongoing
responsibility, the President's budget invests in the future of
the National Airspace System--or as we refer to it, the NAS--by
requesting $22 billion in the 2026 fiscal year. When coupled
with the $5 billion in previously enacted advance annual
appropriations, this $27 billion commitment will enable the FAA
to fund critical investments needed to keep pace with industry
and enhance the safety and efficiency of our National Airspace
System.
As part of the Administration's broader modernization
effort to build a state of the art air traffic control system,
the FAA is requesting a historic $4 billion for our Facilities
and Equipment account to enable the agency to address emerging
challenges and technological advancements while preserving the
integrity of longstanding capabilities.
The President's budget includes a $1 billion request to
accelerate the modernization of the FAA's telecommunications
infrastructure. The current infrastructure is dependent on
outdated technology, which is facing discontinuance from
service providers and serves as a significant operational risk
to NAS services.
The agency has pivoted to a new initiative to transition
rapidly and safely from point-to-point, hardwired circuits into
a modern Internet Protocol-based telecommunications network.
This new initiative, spearheaded by Secretary Duffy under
President Trump's leadership, will ensure longstanding
stability and the operational efficiency needed to both support
existing operations and future needs and to meet ever-evolving
cybersecurity and resiliency requirements.
The President's budget also requests $450 million to
initiate the Radar Replacement Program, a multi-year effort to
replace the FAA's aging radar systems.
The FAA owns and operates hundreds of radar systems that
are essential detection and monitoring tools for air traffic
controllers. These critical systems are facing more frequent
structural deficiencies and maintenance-related issues as they
get older, causing increased outages, delays, and risks to the
system.
The Radar Replacement Program will invest in more advanced
radar technology to enhance surveillance capabilities and avoid
delays for the flying public.
The FAA is in the midst of a multi-year hiring and training
surge to ensure we have the level of certified air traffic
controllers needed to meet current and future traffic demands.
In February, Secretary Duffy announced our plan to increase
recruitment of the best and the brightest air traffic
controllers by streamlining the hiring steps and increasing the
starting salary for academy trainees by 30 percent.
This budget request includes $97.3 million to further
supercharge the controller workforce and train up to 2,500 new
air traffic controllers in fiscal year 2026.
To achieve this goal, the FAA is filling every seat at the
Academy, bolstering the Enhanced Air Traffic Collegiate
Training Initiative, and offering more opportunities for
experienced military controllers to join our workforce.
By addressing the ongoing air traffic controller shortage
through this multi-pronged approach, the FAA is working to
improve staffing levels and increase the safety of the NAS.
Members of the committee, every day the FAA manages more
than 45,000 flights that connect almost 20,000 U.S. airports,
and I appreciate the President and the Secretary's strong
support as I proudly lead the dedicated men and women of the
FAA.
This budget request upholds our commitment to maintain the
safest airspace in the world by investing in our Nation's
infrastructure and our workforce to meet the challenges of
tomorrow.
We look forward to your support in ensuring the United
States remains a global leader in aviation.
I thank you for the opportunity to be here today, and I
look forward to your questions.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Womack. Thank you very much. As I said, your full
written testimony will be included in the record. And we will
now begin a period of questions and answers.
We will, again, enforce a five-minute rule here, so members
are advised to get as quickly to your questions as you possibly
can so that you can maximize the amount of time we have
available.
I am going to recognize myself for five minutes.
The House and Senate provided about $3.6 billion in our
fiscal year 2025 bills. They never got across the finish line.
So the CR that we are currently under froze this level at $3.2
billion, I think another reason why we should not be living on
continuing resolutions. We lose ground.
Now, the question about sustainability versus
modernization. Unfortunately, you can't do one exclusively.
Secretary Duffy has outlined his plans for modernization, but
you still have to operate a system that you currently have.
How does that work? And how difficult will it be for us to
achieve the overall goals of modernization while at the same
time providing the sustainable safety systems that we currently
have in place? And how is the FAA best equipped to do that?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir, for the question.
Our budget request, in fact, incorporates the needs to
continue to sustain what we have in place today. But, clearly,
we have seen evidence where the equipment today is, as I stated
in my testimony, starting to degrade in our ability to operate
the system, and we see outages and delays associated with that
equipment.
I am confident in our ability to maintain the system. In
fact, I would just share with you all that we had a record-
breaking Memorial Day weekend with respect to our ability to
manage safely the operations in the National Airspace System.
And at the same time, it is imperative that we invest in
the future of our air traffic system. We are spending over 90
percent of our funding right now just on maintaining, sometimes
band-aiding some of the equipment that we have.
And so the Secretary's bold vision, under, obviously, the
President's direction, is to make sure that we are able to
build a new air traffic system to manage what we are dealing
with today and the increase in traffic, safely, and at the same
time anticipate the needs going forward like drone integration,
advanced air mobility, and the like.
The budget that we are proposing today sustains the
operations that we have and at the same time enables our
success in the future as we think about the new systems that we
need to come online.
Mr. Womack. You mentioned the $4 billion that is in the
request for facilities and equipment. How much of that is
strictly sustainability versus how much of that is actually
going to go toward the overall cost associated with full
modernization?
Mr. Rocheleau. You referenced earlier the Project LIFT. One
billion dollars of our request is going to go directly to
advancing in an expedited fashion that transition from what we
call copper wire, or TDM, to an internet protocol-based, or
fiber optic transition, that will enable the resiliency, the
efficiency of the system, and the ability to make sure that as
we increase operations that we will be able to do that in a
consistent manner without the outages and the struggles that we
have been facing as we have seen in the news just recently.
Mr. Womack. Given your time at the FAA, going all the way
back to nearly the turn of the millennium when we started this
NextGen project, and we have spent billions of dollars on
NextGen, how would you grade--and you heard in my testimony or
in my opening remarks about the fact that we got bogged down
and the speed of technology was not matching the speed of our
ability to improve--if you were giving a letter grade to the
NextGen project, how would you grade it? And how much of that
$14 billion that we spent on NextGen could have been better
spent? Put it that way.
Mr. Rocheleau. I would certainly agree with the premise
that it could have been better spent. As I think about the
advancements, today we do have systems in place that NextGen
generated like Data Comm, which is texting between controllers
and the pilots. Some of those capabilities came online.
At the same time, let's recognize that, for a variety of
reasons, that vision was not fully realized, which is why I
pivot to what we are trying to do now with this new and bold
plan.
When we think about the future, when we think about what we
are sustaining today and where we need to go with respect to
new technologies, safety technologies and efficiency
technologies, this is what we are looking for as we think about
this new air traffic modernization plan.
Mr. Womack. You didn't give it a letter grade. But can I
assume that you are not advocating that it be on the honor
roll?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I can agree to that.
Mr. Womack. Fair enough.
Mr. Clyburn.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[Inaudible] which is a relatively small State, but in my
congressional district you are going to find Shaw Air Force
Base, headquarters to the Ninth Army--or the Ninth Air Force--
and headquarters to the Third Army. We have the Marine Air
Station, the Columbia Airport, the Charleston International
Airport.
All of those air traffic controllers have been in to visit
with me about the challenges that they have trying to maintain
safety with the way things are currently organized or being
implemented, and they are really concerned about the shortages,
the resignations, the problem we have getting trained air
traffic controllers up to snuff.
How do you plan to do more with less?
Mr. Rocheleau. I would start by saying I believe the FAA
can be a more efficient organization. That is the charge to me
by the Secretary, and I believe we can accomplish that goal. We
have an amazing, amazing workforce that comes to work every
day, as I mentioned. During the Memorial Day holiday is one
example of that.
But to the center of your question, what we are talking
about is the ability to continue to sustain what we have today
and at the same time accelerate, whether it is on the
controller workforce--and by the way, it is not just the
controller workforce. We are also talking about maintainers,
safety inspectors, engineers, all of the people that go into
our ecosystem to make sure there is a safe and efficient air
transportation system.
And while we are looking at the workforce piece of it, we
are also looking at modernizing the equipment that is so
essential to what your constituents are talking about with
respect to safe and efficient airspace in the system.
We are approaching it from a multi-pronged approach. Part
of it has to do with the workforce. And, again, supercharging
the controllers is so critical to our ability to manage the
traffic we have today and what we expect to see in the future.
Mr. Clyburn. Well, looking at your plan, I am still trying
to figure out the budget numbers. And the amount of money being
requested to do this seems not to line up with the amount of
work that you have got to do, especially in keeping with all of
the--or the lack of numbers coming into the system. And I have
not seen what I consider to be a definitive plan on how you are
going to increase the number of air traffic controllers. I
forgot the number. Some ungodly number in terms of the
shortages that we currently have.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
This year we are projecting to need 2,000 air traffic
controllers through our system. Just a few months ago we
realized we may not hit that. Thanks to the Secretary and his
leadership, we have supercharged that, so we will get 2,000
people into the training academy--which, by the way, Chairman
Cole, is a gem for us when we think about what we are talking
about there in Oklahoma City and the ability to put controllers
through that system.
As it relates to the technology plan, again, the billion
dollars is to make sure that we have that resiliency in the
fiber optics so that there is good connectivity between the
facilities themselves, and then the additional moneys would go
to, in fact, accelerating the Radar Replacement Program.
When we talk about the larger plan that the Secretary so
artfully outlines, it is going to be critical that we work with
Congress to understand, to lay out our plan.
So going from TDM to IP, from copper wires to fiber optics,
to new radar replacements, new radios for the controllers so
they can talk to the pilots, and then, of course, facilities,
all of those things are going into this approach to modernize
the airspace system.
Mr. Clyburn. Well, thank you.
My time is almost expired, but I would like to know at some
point, Mr. Chairman, whether or not we plan to utilize those
colleges and universities to supplement that which I know is
great training out of Oklahoma City. However, in terms of
numbers, the volume we need, I think we ought to take a look at
those colleges and universities.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
Mr. Womack. I thank the ranking member.
I now recognize the chairman of the Appropriations
Committee, Mr. Cole from Oklahoma.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And I probably shouldn't say this before I get into my
questions in front of somebody as shrewd as my friend the
ranking member, but when I think ahead about negotiations that
will come if we are going to avoid a CR and get to a successful
conclusion, I always look, where are the things in common that
the two sides can set aside differences on and come around? I
think this is one of those things.
Mr. Clyburn. Absolutely.
The Chairman. We are all very interested in what it takes
to fly safely. It is important commercially. It is much more
important, obviously, in terms of lives.
So I would just advise you and advise our former colleague
to be ready to take advantage of that opportunity down the
road. This is one where we will work together and try and make
a significant investment to move us materially toward the goals
that you have outlined.
Your budget proposal increases the Facilities and Equipment
account in order to upgrade the system for air traffic
facilities. Does your request include improvements at the
academy to ensure that the students are actually training on
the equipment that you intend for them to be using in the years
ahead?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, it does. In fact, as we talked
about recently, our effort to supercharge the hiring through
the academy with controllers, what we have been able to do--
and, again, giving credit to the Secretary for accelerating and
encouraging us to work hard--we didn't think we were going to
hit the 2,000 controllers this year. So we have shortened the
time frame by which we hire those controllers--academy
attendees--through the system by five months.
In fact, as a quick story, as we look for the best and
brightest, we had an individual recently that in 44 days, from
start to finish, got into the Academy, got an Academy start
date.
So that system is really working. Now, that is not going to
be the case for everyone, but that is encouraging there.
The budget request we have does, in fact, accommodate and
consider what we want to do with respect to getting up to 2,500
people through the Oklahoma City academy this year in addition
to the enhanced CTI trainings that we are doing with
universities around the U.S.
The Chairman. That is terrific.
Just toward that goal of reaching 2,500, when you and I had
our visit, we also talked about the failure rate, because we
lose about a third of those students over the course of their
studies.
In some ways you expect that. It is a pretty rigorous, very
demanding profession. What might look attractive at the
beginning as you get into it may not be your cup of tea as you
understand how difficult and challenging this job is.
But having said that, I am curious about, number one, as
you stair step up anything additional you need. And, again, I
am like you, I commend the Secretary for increasing that pay
and making this a more attractive option for the kind of people
we want coming there.
But what are you thinking about doing in addition to help
those students that are there so that we have a higher success
rate and don't lose them?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question.
As part of this initiative, I would highlight two efforts
that we put in place there.
First and foremost, in the first roughly five weeks of
training, there is a basic course--what we will call Air
Traffic 101--that we do not need certified professional
controllers to teach.
And so, there we have an ability to bring in professional
instructors to help that. So, we are augmenting the instructor
workforce at the Academy, and we think that will be helpful for
the evaluation period as people get closer to graduation.
In addition to that, one of the things that the Secretary
had heard in his recent visit back to Oklahoma, was that some
of the students were looking for a little extra time on the
weekend for training.
And so we are now offering tutoring on the weekend with the
use of high-definition simulators, which is going to improve
the graduation rate probably up to 30 percent. Because at the
end of the day, to get the throughput, to get the controllers
to the boards that we need, we want to make sure that that
failure rate of roughly 35 percent these days, because it is an
incredibly demanding profession, that we get that down to, say,
25 percent, maybe even lower than that.
Through those two initiatives alone, we are trying to make
sure that we get a better throughput and a better graduation
rate.
The Chairman. That is great.
Well, my time is almost up, and I certainly respect the
chairman on that. Just one thing: it is not a question, but I
am sure you are thinking, given the fact that you are going to
increase, as you implied, the number of instructors. Because if
we are going to move it up, you have got to have more people on
the ground. You are comfortable you can do that? And that is
basically a yes or no.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Womack. I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma.
And not to belabor the point necessarily on air traffic
control, but it is one thing to get a certified air traffic
controller, but it is a whole nother thing to certify them or
to prepare them for whatever assignment they are going to get.
And that could be a pretty lengthy process as well. Is that
correct?
Mr. Rocheleau. That is correct, sir. It can take anywhere
from two to three years to get a certified professional
controller through the system and qualified at the facility
they are going to be working at.
Mr. Womack. Mrs. Torres.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman.
And thank you for being here also.
As I mentioned to Secretary Duffy a few weeks ago, we are
seeing a troubling rise in near misses, including navigation
systems shutting down themselves while a plane is attempting to
land. These are serious close calls that could have ended in
terrible disasters.
These aren't isolated incidents. They signal a deeper issue
with the FAA's ability to provide the strong, consistent safety
oversight that our aviation system demands.
Pilots today are operating in increasingly complex
conditions where even small breakdowns--mechanical issues,
miscommunication, ground movement risks--can easily escalate a
situation. It is a lot of stress for them.
That is why we need an FAA that is fully staffed, well
supported, and fully focused on its mission. That is protecting
lives. I assume that continues to be its number one mission.
Acting Administrator, you recently said in a town hall that
the FAA will be leaner, and that statement in the current
environment is a little bit alarming. A leaner FAA raises real
concerns about the capacity and readiness.
You took some responsibility for what was missed in the
recent DCA incident, saying: ``I take that seriously and I take
that on myself. I returned to the FAA just two months ago and I
care about the National Airspace System for safety and the
workforce.''
I sent you my questions in advance so that there would be
no concerns or mistakes. What immediate steps is the FAA taking
to reduce near misses and protect safety on the ground and in
the air?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question.
Yes, first and foremost, let me just start by saying the
system is incredibly safe, and that matters to me personally,
it matters to my leadership team that I meet with on a weekly
basis, and it matters to the 45,000 people that come to work
every day for the FAA.
As it relates specifically to what we are doing now, as a
result of the tragic crash of American Airlines 5342 a few
months ago, we initiated a very aggressive effort to look
across the Nation for what we refer to internally as hot spots
at 20 locations around the Nation to ensure that we were
picking up on the data that we may have missed previously. We
are using new tools like AI and machine learning.
Mrs. Torres. But safety incidents, sir, haven't stopped. So
what can we aggressively change today, yesterday, tomorrow to
stop these incidents, these near misses?
Mr. Rocheleau. I will give you three quick examples.
First and foremost, Las Vegas, Nevada. We identified early
on that the vertical and lateral boundaries for helicopters and
fixed-wing (traffic) were not where they needed to be. And
traffic advisories calling out controllers to pilots to telling
them about helicopters in the area that was something else we
did immediately when we identified those issues.
In the L.A. Basin we are looking at the mix of traffic
there between helicopters and fixed-wing in some of the more
dense air traffic areas there.
And then finally in Alaska, where weather is so important
to the people in Alaska, we are testing new technologies to
bring additional satellite weather into that area too.
Mrs. Torres. Have you raised these concerns with the
Secretary?
Mr. Rocheleau. I talk to the Secretary regularly and he has
impressed upon me----
Mrs. Torres. But specifically on these issues that you
identified?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes. Yes, we have.
Mrs. Torres. Okay. So how is the FAA reassuring our pilots
and our crews and passengers that every aircraft is held to the
highest safety standard?
Mr. Rocheleau. And I really appreciate that, because in
addition to what we call this hot spots review, we actually had
a series of engagements with the community.
The first one was general aviation, business aviation. Then
we moved to the helicopter community. Then we moved to ramp
workers to make sure the airport safety on the ground was well
done. And then we just finished recently with the airlines
themselves.
So, we have engaged directly with the operators within the
system.
Mrs. Torres. I am very concerned about the software
mechanics, engineers, whatever we want to call them, the people
that are working on the system that was launched in the 1970s.
You can't bring in a modern worker to replace that worker.
And I think I am out of time. So you and I will continue
this conversation in the next opportunity.
And I yield back.
Mr. Rocheleau. Be happy to.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Strong.
Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairman Womack and Ranking Member
Clyburn, for holding this hearing today.
I would also like to thank the subcommittee staff for their
hard work. It does not go unnoticed.
Mr. Rocheleau, thank you for being here today.
My district in north Alabama is home to Huntsvillle
International Airport. I am proud to say Huntsville has been
named the best small airport in the country for the second
consecutive year.
Airports can find it difficult to plan long-term
infrastructure projects when they don't have clarity on funding
timelines or FAA approvals.
Mr. Administrator, has the FAA considered establishing
response deadlines for project approvals, allowing them to move
forward if no determination is issued within a set time frame?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. I know by law--and let me just
say, I have been to Huntsville a number of times, both in the
Air Force and within the FAA, and it is amazing how Huntsville
has grown.
With respect to timelines specifically, reauthorization
requires that deadline to be 45 days. In addition to that, we
have the NEPA requirements, which is a year for an
environmental assessment and then two years for the EIS, the
environmental impact statement, and we work closely to that
within the Airports division.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
I serve as the co-chair of the Army Aviation Caucus
alongside Ranking Member DeLauro. I would like to express my
deepest sympathies for those impacted by the horrific collision
at DCA on January the 29th.
In the aftermath, the Army's use of Automatic Dependent
Surveillance-Broadcast--affectionately known as ADS-B--
transponders and information communicated to the DCA air
traffic control has come under focus.
Reports from more recent close calls have highlighted that
even through Army aircraft have been transmitting ADS-B
information and haven't deviated from approved flight paths,
air traffic control has issued go-arounds to commercial
airliners because they have been unsure of the helicopter's
position.
Mr. Administrator, does air traffic control utilize ADS-B
data for deconfliction of aircraft at DCA? If so, is it the
sole means of tracking aircraft or does it use a mix of
different systems?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. We use a mix of systems. We use
ADS-B. We also use radar. And we use visual separation as well,
as appropriate.
Mr. Strong. Does using the mixed systems, does this create
an ability or degrade ATC's ability to ascertain the aircraft's
position?
Mr. Rocheleau. I think the multiple systems offer the
controllers the ability to manage the air spaces as efficiently
but safely as possible.
Mr. Strong. Despite previous actions to increase funding
for the FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation, the
industry still faces long delays in licensing for launch and
reentry.
What is the FAA's strategy to streamline licensing while
maintaining public safety? Are there any specific tools or
systems the FAA is investing in to ensure regulations don't
ground our space industry?
Mr. Rocheleau. I am very excited about the commercial space
industry, and it is certainly one of the areas that I have been
focused on in coming back to the agency. We did 142 launches
last year. We are expecting close to 200 this year. And it is
really an exciting time.
With regard to what we are using to streamline, we recently
issued Part 450 and we are working with the space operators to
better understand how we can do that more efficiently going
forward.
And with respect to airspace, we use what we call the Space
Data Integrator. Our air traffic people work very closely with
the launch operations to make sure that we can minimize the
time that we need to open the airspace for the launches so that
we can have smooth transitions between commercial airlines and
commercial space launches.
Mr. Strong. What steps is the FAA taking to integrate space
launches into the national airspace center effectively? I know
you have mentioned a couple there.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
The Space Data Integrator that is located out at the FAA's
Command Center is really a key element of that, because as we
see normal air traffic operations within the system and we see
the increase in space launch operations, we want to make sure
we deconflict, first and foremost, and second, minimize the
impact to the traveling public through airlines.
Mr. Strong. Thank you.
I know that Chairman Cole and Chairman Womack mentioned
this. You look at this budget, it is not a budget that is
divided partisan. Four billion for equipment account. One
billion for modernization of telecommunication network, Radar
Replacement Program, hiring and training, add 2,500 new ATC.
That is what America is looking for. We want to be sure it is
safe. I thank you for your efforts.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Administrator, how many total FAA employees have taken the
President's early retirement opportunity?
Mr. Rocheleau. How many total employees?
Those numbers are not finalized yet, largely because we are
processing through what we call DRP 2. We had our first tranche
of people that came through, and I believe that was roughly 700
that applied for the DRP. And now we are going through that
process for the second one.
We will roll those numbers up as we go through. I am in
constant contact with my leadership team to understand what the
impacts of those will be.
And I would just note that in a number of those cases we
have been able to talk to people who have expressed interest
and negotiate their time if they, in fact, do want to leave.
Mr. Quigley. But for air traffic controllers, for example,
they have been saying that there have been no cuts to them, but
how many have taken early retirement?
Mr. Rocheleau. There have absolutely been no cuts, and the
controllers themselves are not eligible. They are not eligible
for early retirement.
If anything, what the Secretary and I have done is
incentivized the people who are retirement eligible. So, if you
have done 25 years and you are 51, 52, 53 years old, we are
giving those senior controllers that we need right now another
20 percent increase to their base salary just to stick around
for another couple or three years.
Mr. Quigley. I just wanted to confirm that, because we have
heard there have been no cuts to air traffic controllers. The
concern is we have heard that there have been cuts to those
workers who help specifically some of the critical safety
functions that support the front-line workers.
With the dismissal of probationary employees and early
retirement buyout program, we are hearing that about 12 percent
of the aeronautical information specialists have left the FAA
or are poised to leave. These are informational specialists who
update charts, maps, and key data after disruption or
disturbances in airspace like weather or a collision.
This is accurate we have been told and how do you plan to
make up for those losses?
Mr. Rocheleau. So, again, we have not stopped hiring any
safety critical positions, any of them. And the people----
Mr. Quigley. But those people have left or are leaving, so
you are lower than where you were.
Mr. Rocheleau. Sir, there are people that support the
critical safety positions, and that is part of the ongoing
assessment that I do with my leadership team to make sure that
if we have people that have accepted early retirement that we
are managing through that to ensure that there are those
services to our controllers and our maintenance people and the
like.
Mr. Quigley. How do you do that? If you have lost 12
percent of the people who do those critical functions, who is
doing it in the meantime?
Mr. Rocheleau. Well, there are a few ways. First and
foremost, we are assessing how we are doing that and what can
we do better.
For instance, going from a paper-based process to an
electronic-based process, that is one of them. Making sure that
we are hiring for critical safety positions and leveraging the
talent that we do have that is staying and making sure that
they can both do the critical safety functions as well as those
support functions.
Mr. Quigley. And, respectfully, you call them critical
safety functions. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a plan,
an assessment of how to replace them or how to phase them out,
rather than just do this so dramatically at the start? It is
sort of managing your own crisis rather than planning to
implement a program like this.
Mr. Rocheleau. We have been very intentional on how we work
through this, recognizing that, as I mentioned, there are some
people that may express interest in leaving earlier, and we can
sit down with them and work through what that timeline looks
like, so we can plan for what is behind them.
And I would just say this. The people that are leaving,
while we will miss them because they have been amazing public
servants, there are a lot of talented people right behind them
that are going to come in and pick up the pace.
Mr. Quigley. I just have to belabor it. Wouldn't it have
made more sense to have those discussions, see who is going to
take this up, plan on who is going to take their place, and
phase it in as you go through this rather than do the cuts and
then come back and figure out how do we manage that?
Mr. Rocheleau. Even though we may look back and may have
approached it a different way, there was an opportunity to
allow people to leave that wanted to leave and at the same time
negotiate with them for a smooth transition.
Mr. Quigley. I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Chairman Rogers.
Mr. Rogers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Secretary's new state of the art air traffic control
system is long overdue. It seems like it is almost every other
day that we are having some problem with air traffic control in
this country with souls in the air under our care.
This plan is holistic and it is big and it is expensive:
replacing antiquated telecommunications with new fiber,
wireless, and satellite technologies at over 4,600 sites;
25,000 new radios; 475 new voice switches; and so on and so
forth; replacing 618 radars, which are past their life cycle
already; addressing runway safety by increasing the number of
airports with a service awareness initiative to 200; building
six new air traffic control centers for the first time since
the 1960s; replacing towers and TRACONs; installing new modern
hardware and software for all air traffic facilities to create
a common platform system throughout towers, TRACONs, and
centers; and then the special problems in Alaska with adding
174 new weather stations just in Alaska. This is a huge
undertaking at great cost.
I have got a mechanical question that Chairman Womack
opened up. How are you going to do this? Are we going to build
a new system separate and apart from the present system and one
day when you get the new one built you will switch one to
``on'' and the other one to ``off''? How is that going to work?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. And there is no
doubt we are looking for a real investment in this. And I
believe it is a true investment in the U.S. and the future when
I think of the aviation industry as an economic generator of
over a trillion dollars and 10 million U.S. good-paying jobs.
As it relates specifically to our plan that you so well
outlined, a big piece of that is being able to sustain the
operations we have today. I can talk a little bit about Newark,
where we are transitioning from the copper wires, the old-
fashioned telephone lines, over to fiber optic cables. That is
just one example of where we are taking what we have in place
and we are transitioning into a new system as it relates to
radars and facilities.
All of those things are going to be part of this where we
continue to operate the system safely every day, and then we
switch over, as you described, into these new modern systems
with intentional, deliberate testing to make sure the
redundancy and the resiliency is there to ensure the safety of
the traveling public.
Mr. Rogers. Would you be using some equipment under the
current----
Mr. Rocheleau. I am sorry, what equipment?
Mr. Rogers. Will you be mixing in pieces from the new
system to the old system and vice versa?
Mr. Rocheleau. The whole idea is to replace the system, but
that is going to take some time to get there. Yesterday we
issued a request for information for the best and brightest
companies to come in and help us do that transition. I think
that is a real opportunity for us.
But the plan, as we described it earlier, is to essentially
continue to operate the system as we do today and then switch
over to the new technologies.
Mr. Rogers. So it will be all new equipment----
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rogers [continuing]. In the new system, none of the
old?
Mr. Rocheleau. No more floppy disks or paper strips.
Mr. Rogers. So you will turn the switch to ``on'' and take
the shovels and do away with the old system?
Mr. Rocheleau. It is a little more complicated than that,
but we will switch it over to the new system.
Mr. Rogers. All right. Good luck.
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Rogers. Thank you. Yield back.
Mr. Womack. And they will be doing it while you are in the
air, Mr. Rogers, I am pretty confident.
Mrs. Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, sir.
Good morning to you.
I have a couple of questions that have to do with the
Newark airport. I also have some questions regarding just air
traffic controllers in general.
Could you just tell me, what is the starting salary for an
air traffic controller?
Mr. Rocheleau. It really depends on the facility. We bring
them in as an Academy student in roughly that $45,000 to
$60,000 range. As I mentioned earlier, we have incentivized new
Academy people to join us with a 30 percent increase.
But when you get to a facility, it really depends on the
facility. It can range anywhere from the 60s and 70s all the
way up to a fully certified professional controller can be in
the 145 to 150 range.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. And that depends upon how large the
airport is, how busy it is, et cetera?
Mr. Rocheleau. Correct. There are levels, yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Where is the Newark airport in that
sort of----
Mr. Rocheleau. I will have to take the IOU on what level
the controllers are at Newark. I should know that. But I do
know that that is well understood for the tower specifically, I
am not sure the level of the tower there. And then obviously we
have the controllers at Philadelphia Area C, which is
controlling some of the incoming to Newark.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. The problems with the Newark airport
delays----
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. What percentage of that
delay or those delays were due to staffing issues, staffing
shortages, and what percentage of it is due to infrastructure
that is old and needs to be replaced?
Mr. Rocheleau. There are three primary reasons for the
delays.
First and foremost is weather, and that is the constant
one. The second is the outages that we were experiencing that
we are working through and fixing now. And then the third is
staffing.
Staffing continues to be a challenge for us. We have 27
certified controllers that are operating in Philadelphia Area C
now to manage the air traffic going into Newark. And we have
22, including six new people going through training now.
So, we will be healthier towards the end of this summer for
Newark specifically and that Area C. I am confident that the
delays will be reduced going in there.
In fact, we have been working with the airlines through our
recent delay reduction effort. We will be here shortly,
probably next week, at a 34 rate, which we will be able to
manage safely through that air traffic system with the
controllers.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So is it infrastructure, is it
congestion, or is it staffing that is going to delay Newark
being up and ready at its capacity in October as opposed to
July, August, September?
Mr. Rocheleau. I would say I am confident that by the
October timeframe, the technology issues will be resolved. The
Secretary has been very clear with me that we need to fix this,
and we are fixing this now. The second piece to that is the
staffing. By October, we will be very healthy in there at
staffing levels that we need. And then, of course, the weather
is always going to be one of those challenges.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So I know, sir, that there were not
cuts to the air traffic controllers, but as my colleague
mentioned, there were cuts to the staff that support it, those
functions. And I am wondering, to what extent--I understand
that in February Elon Musk's DOGE folks came there with their
chainsaw, and as a result, 400 people were let go or went on
their own. Is that accurate?
Mr. Rocheleau. I would clarify by saying that there were
400 probationary employees that were terminated, 360 of which
returned to the FAA.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Why did they return, because they
were--because it was wrong to let them go? It was----
Mr. Rocheleau. It was a court case. My understanding, the
court case ended up having those probationary employees be
returned to duty.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So I know that you have been in
service in your capacity for quite a while. Were you at all
consulted when those 400 people were identified to be released,
and did you have any input on whether or not that was going to
impact your ability to do what we all agree is your primary
function, is to make sure planes don't crash----
Mr. Rocheleau. Right.
Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. Into one another or into
grounds.
Mr. Rocheleau. Right. I certainly was in the chair. I have
been in the chair for 4 months. I was in the chair when those
decisions were made and was consulted as to how we were going
to manage through that period of time. Again, I would say that
we preserved the safety critical positions, and we made sure
that as we were working through the probationary employee
situation that we were managing the workload. These folks were
there for probably less than a year, obviously for the
probationary terminations. But at the end of the day, what we
did was we consulted with the leadership teams in each one of
those lines of business.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Administrator.
Apparently they are needed, though, in that capacity, and so I
am glad that they are back.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Sheriff Rutherford.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member.
And, Acting Administrator Rocheleau, thank you for being
here this afternoon to talk about some of this. I want to go
back to the ATCs and talk a little bit about that as well,
because it is very important to my district where we have the
Jacksonville air route traffic control center for all of
northeast Florida, which has that funnel effect and it is
incredibly busy, 160,000 square miles of airspace, 20 military
installations, 200 civilian airports. How these folks do it, I
have no idea. It really is--incredibly proud of those guys and
gals and what they do.
I was really happy to see this $97 million to hire 2,500.
Question though, how much of that are we going to be able to
accomplish? I am concerned about that. One of the things that I
would like to ask in finding those people, the DEI biologics
assessments that were being used previously for selection of
ATCs, air traffic controllers, that, you know, were part of the
DEI process before, which I think 1,000 that were proficient
but refused hiring because of their biologics were then--filed
a lawsuit. Of that 1,000, are we going back to those folks? I
know we have gone back to performance-based selecting, correct?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Mr. Rutherford. Okay.
Mr. Rocheleau. Merit-based approach to hiring.
Mr. Rutherford. Right. Right. And so, have we gone back to
those that were rejected who were proficient but rejected
simply because of their race back, you know, 3 years ago,
whenever that was?
Mr. Rocheleau. I am not specifically aware of those
individuals, or an effort to go back to them. I will be happy
to take the IOU and get back to you and your staff to make sure
that we follow up on that.
Mr. Rutherford. I mean, if they are still willing to come,
that would be a great source to tap into, I would think. And I
think what you are going to find also is that 35 percent
failure rate in the academy is going to go down significantly
when it is more based on merit than biological information. So
I am glad to see you all moving in that direction.
Can you talk a little bit about--a little more on--what
specifically can we do to help you with this process? I mean,
we are talking about $39,000 per student of the--you know, you
take $97 million, that ain't a lot of money for 2,500 students.
That is $39,000 a head. Is that going to be enough, and are
there other things that we can do to help you in this process?
Mr. Rocheleau. Well, first and foremost, I appreciate the
support. Clearly, working with Congress is going to be critical
to our success going forward. We have budgeted--we have
programmed for up to 2,500 in our current budget request with
the $97.3 million.
I would also make a very important point here as it relates
to the throughput. We have truncated the process to get
additional people into the Academy itself, and we have added
instructors to provide the basic instruction, as we continue to
use the certified controllers to do the evaluation piece. We
are confident that we are going to see a better graduation rate
coming out of there. Part of that is the tutoring piece that I
talked about earlier as well. I am confident in what we have
put in place to be able to meet our goals this year. It is
aggressive, I will acknowledge that.
Mr. Rutherford. Is that going to be official tutoring over
the weekends and that sort of thing that you mentioned earlier?
Mr. Rocheleau. We will have tutors available, but we will
also have the high-definition simulators for people to go and
practice.
Mr. Rutherford. Right.
Mr. Rocheleau. I learned that in the military when we did a
lot of that. Those simulators will be very valuable to those
people who want to put in the extra work.
Mr. Rutherford. Let me switch over to some of the work that
they are going to be dealing with. You know, particularly
looking at your long career at FAA and in the Air Force, I am
sure you have seen, you know, areas where there is a lot of
progress as well as a lot of stagnation within the aviation
sector. And part of the future of aviation is drone and how
that is going to fit into the commercial space.
Now, I see the budget deals with some of that in a modest
amount, and I am appreciative of that. But let me ask you: Can
you share with this subcommittee a bit about your vision for
how the drone commercial space is going to fit together,
because it is coming quickly.
Mr. Womack. I will give you a few seconds to answer the
question.
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you.
Mr. Rutherford. Oh, I am sorry.
Mr. Rocheleau. It is coming quickly, and it was one of the
reasons why I was so excited to come back to the FAA bringing
new innovative technologies into the airspace. That includes
drones; that includes advanced air mobility, the eVTOLs or air
taxis; and it includes commercial space as well.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you.
I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I went over my time. I yield
back.
Mr. Womack. No worries.
Mr. Espaillat.
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Acting Administrator Rocheleau, for being here.
I think we all acknowledge here that the stakes are very
high with regards to air safety, and the FAA is in the business
of air safety. I myself, in addition to other Members, I would
say a bipartisan group of five Members were on a plane whose
wing was clipped at Reagan while taxiing. This is just a few
months after the horrible accident that took so many lives, so
safety is really in danger for the American public.
And we had Secretary Duffy testify, and he acknowledged
that the skinny budget fell severely short of the kind of
investment that is needed to meet the challenge of safety, and
we see an increase, but it still falls short of the $31 billion
that are required to ensure that the American public is safe
while traveling.
As we approach the holiday season and other important
seasons, we approach the World Cup, the Olympics, there is
going to be a substantial increase in travel here, and we are
not ready. In fact, some of the changes that need to be made
are going to take some time, so we may even--they may even
require a supplemental budget.
So my question first is, do you acknowledge that we are
short at the $22 billion level, and do you feel that we need a
supplemental to meet the demand?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thanks for the question. There is a lot of
activity. Looking forward to the World Cup and a number of
other things.
As we have programmed here in the budget request, I believe
this is appropriate for what we need to do with respect to
moving from copper wire to fiber optic. I believe it is
appropriate to supercharge controllers to get in the system,
and it will take some time.
Mr. Espaillat. How much time will it take?
Mr. Rocheleau. For?
Mr. Espaillat. For us to meet the demand, you know, for the
World Cup, for the Olympics, for heavy travel during the
holidays.
Mr. Rocheleau. I should have started with this: The system
is safe and will continue to be safe. We will make sure of
that. The 45,000 people at the FAA will make sure of that.
Mr. Espaillat. I know we have gaps in air traffic
controller supervision of air travel and landing and takeoff in
Newark, and severely putting people in danger. How long is the
overall plan to be ready and really at an optimum?
Mr. Rocheleau. We will maintain the safety of the system.
We may slow it down, but we will maintain the safety of the
system.
Mr. Espaillat. Can you give me a timeframe?
Mr. Rocheleau. I believe, particularly engaging with
Congress here, when we talk about the Secretary's plan for a
big, bold--and the President is a champion of this as well--for
a new air traffic system, we are looking at a three to four
year period. I believe we can get there even quicker.
Mr. Espaillat. Do you think that will require a
supplemental budget--that I think will be bipartisan. I think
everybody wants safety here.
Mr. Rocheleau. I wouldn't disagree. We are going to need
Congress' help for additional funding.
Mr. Espaillat. So you will need a supplemental, okay.
My next question is, Elon Musk brazenly pushed for the FAA
to use his Starlink satellite for air traffic control, as has
been reported. Do you ever have--have you ever had a
conversation with Mr. Musk or personnel at the White House or
DOGE staff about potentially using Starlink for air traffic
control systems?
Mr. Rocheleau. I have never had a conversation with Elon
Musk. I have worked very closely to make sure that as we
experiment with new capabilities, including satellite
technologies like Starlink----
Mr. Espaillat. Well, have you had a conversation with the
White House staff or even with DOGE staff about using Starlink?
Mr. Rocheleau. No, sir.
Mr. Espaillat. Okay. Thank you so much.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Gonzales.
Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Administrator, for testifying today.
I want to talk about safety. We often talk about aircrafts
falling out of the sky, which is important, or getting clipped
as you are taxiing, but I am worried about these increased
amounts of unmanned aircraft systems, UAS, drones, that are
falling out of the sky. We just saw Ukraine conduct one of the
most significant operations of the Russian-Ukraine war.
And with a small amount of money, with a small amount of
quadcopters, they were able to decimate Russia's long-range
strategic bombers, okay, to the tune of billions of dollars. I
am worried about that. I mean, that is not a what-if. That is
now. That is currently, right now, what is happening. My
question is pretty simple: Is our U.S. airspace safe from drone
threats?
Mr. Rocheleau. I would refer that question to our national
security partners, but our airspace today is capable of
managing safe integration of UAS.
Mr. Gonzales. Because this is what I worry about, is after
9/11 everyone is pointing fingers and everyone saw this coming,
but it is always somebody else's preview, right. And I am
trying to figure out--everyone has a piece of it, and I am
trying to figure out what role FAA plays in this when it comes
to drone technology, when it comes to drone interaction, when
it comes to that piece to it.
Mr. Rocheleau. It is a great question, and I should
highlight the close coordination, collaboration, and
communication between the FAA, the DOT, the Department of
Defense, the Department of Homeland Security for the things you
are talking about. As we work through integrating UAS into the
airspace, we are working alongside our national security
partners every day.
Mr. Gonzales. Let me ask you another question. How many
drones were in U.S. airspace yesterday?
Mr. Rocheleau. I will have to take an IOU on that one for
you. I know we fly thousands of drones every day in the
airspace. I don't have an accurate count for you today.
Mr. Gonzales. We should absolutely know what drones are in
our airspace every single day, and that is what I want us to
get to. Who is in the air? What are they doing in the air? What
are the intentions? And I don't want to wait until it is after
the fact. I want to get ahead of that.
To that point, what resources do you need--does FAA need
from Congress to ensure that critical infrastructure from
future drone threats is safe?
Mr. Rocheleau. Our budget, in fact, does incorporate our
need from Congress, our support from Congress to make sure that
as we work through the safe integration into the airspace that
we are working specifically on things like drone detection,
drone mitigation, again, working with our national security
partners who do this for a living.
Mr. Gonzales. I think this is important.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzales. Once again, this isn't the future. We are
here, right. And guess what, every drone that is up in the air
isn't necessarily going to cause harm, but there may be some
that do, and we are at a point where very soon, you know,
Amazon packages are going to be delivered, it is going to be a
very busy airspace. It already is. And the fact--we need to
know how many drones are in the air, and we need to know what
those drones' intentions are. And we also need to have counter-
UAS incentives--our mitigations involved in that, and I think
FAA plays a role in that.
I understand. I understand you are working with other
partners, but the airspace belongs to you, right, in many
cases. So how do we continue to work with that? A big part of
that is the budget on that. I would love to continue to work
with you and hear back on some of your answers.
Mr. Rocheleau. I would be happy to do that. We are very
much in favor of the drone detection and, of course, the
mitigation, when appropriately utilized.
Mr. Gonzales. I have 1 minute left.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzales. My last question is on this: Section 570 of
FAA Reauthorization Act directs the Department to partner with
National Academies to assess the loss of commercial air service
in small communities and identify options for restoring it. And
I appreciate the directive, and I think it comes at a critical
time for Del Rio. Del Rio is a border community. Del Rio is
central to Laughlin Air Force Base as well as the Del Rio
Border Patrol sector.
Can you speak to how the Department is--and we are
currently without an airline, right. That community has no
access to an airline. Can you speak to how the Department is
implementing the section 570 study, and whether Del Rio, given
its proximity to international trade, military installations,
and key trade corridors, will be considered in this assessment.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. And appreciate the question,
because having just returned from the general aviation and
business aviation community, I understand the importance of
small community air service. I know that our team has been
working intensely on doing the analysis that you talk about
that reauthorization directs us to do. I will circle back with
you with the latest on that effort.
Mr. Gonzales. Right. Thank you.
I yield back, Chairman.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Gonzales in his previous question asked a
good question, so I am going to follow up real quick. Would it
even be possible for the FAA to know how many drones were in
U.S. airspace in a given period of time?
Mr. Rocheleau. In a given day total?
Mr. Womack. Based on our current requirements, based on
current law, is it even possible?
Mr. Rocheleau. I don't believe the FAA would know every
single drone in the sky today. But we do, in fact, work with
legal operators, and we would be able to collect that data. A
child with a drone would be more challenging. I just returned
from Texas, and watching some of the demonstrations there,
utilizing what we call UAS traffic management. It is an
incredible system, and it will keep count of the drones you are
talking about.
Mr. Womack. Well, while it may be impossible to know if a
child getting a Christmas present is launching a drone, I think
Tony's question is more relative to the nefarious actor out
there who wouldn't be adhering to any rules and regulations
that we have.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. And that is why I would just
highlight our constant effort with our law enforcement
assistance program to go after the clueless, the careless, and
the criminal to make sure that we are interdicting as quickly
as possible to change that behavior.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Aguilar.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Administrator. I wanted to ask, I understand and
I know there have been questions about staffing, Administrator.
I understand the FAA has continued processing airport
applications for Federal grants, but review times have
increased as the agency loses staffing expertise at its
headquarters and district offices. This is troublesome for many
airports as these airports work to keep their construction
projects on schedule, as you understand.
How has DOGE's efforts to downsize the FAA impacted the
agency's grant review time and processing to date?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. I don't believe
that any DOGE activities, which have not directly related to
any FAA activities, have had any impacts on the grant
specifically. When we first came in, there was a backlog, a
serious backlog of grant announcements that we had to work
through. As I look at my sheet here, we are looking at $1.7
billion here getting out over 465 grants. So, we have got our
momentum going back, but with respect to DOGE specifically, I
would say there were no impacts.
Mr. Aguilar. You don't think a loss of head count has had
any effort in the timing and the delays of implementing the
grants?
Mr. Rocheleau. I don't believe there was a loss in head
count that impacted grants, just to be specific to the
question.
Mr. Aguilar. We could run through the head-count losses
that you have had, but you are--so you are saying at the
district level or at the HQ level you don't believe any of the
loss of head count has had a direct impact on processing and
implementing grants?
Mr. Rocheleau. No, sir. I think the delay has been related
to the backlog and us working through it. I don't believe it
had to do with any change in the staffing.
Mr. Aguilar. How has the downsizing impacted the FAA's
ability to approve airport projects in a timely manner?
Mr. Rocheleau. The opportunity really is to go from what we
will call traditional or paper-based types of processing and
using a more streamlined process. One of the things we are
looking at specific to airport grants is the use of AI. Much
like we do in the safety realm, now we are looking at
processing grants and using categorical exclusions, for
instance, when we talk about specific projects as it relates to
environmental issues.
We are using a number of different tools that we have today
that we probably didn't have a year ago in order to expedite
that. But again, I go back to it is not about the change in the
workforce specifically; it is more along the lines of building
out a more efficient process going forward.
Mr. Aguilar. And we would love to be partners in building
an efficient process. I think that is what the chairman and the
ranking member have indicated they are focused on, and we want
to be willing partners here. I think what is frustrating is
when actions happen or grants don't get out and we just see the
impacts and the results, not just of safety concerns, but of
actual dollars getting out on the streets, back home, closer to
our district.
But since you mentioned projects or since we are talking
about projects, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 included
provisions to speed up airport infrastructure projects by
reducing regulatory overreach and land use approvals. You
talked about categorical exemptions and streamlining the
process for approving these projects with local user fees. Can
you give an update on the FAA's progress in simplifying airport
land use approvals and launching fully streamlined passenger
facility charge approval process?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yeah. Again, I appreciate that question
simply because of what we described earlier as backlogs. We
have looked at the opportunity, in addition to what
reauthorization has directed, for our staff to be able to look
for like opportunities, whether it is in the West Coast or the
East Coast and be able to streamline that.
Specific to environmental issues, that is obviously a
little bit more challenging, but one of the ways we are doing
that is, in fact, using the categorical exclusions to expedite
the projects out there. Because I understand getting that money
out there, particularly in an important building season, is
critical to the local communities.
Mr. Aguilar. When will the locals see that benefit? When
will they see the projects, and when will they see the delays
cease?
Mr. Rocheleau. The delays have begun to decrease
significantly, and they will continue to see more money coming
out. Again, in the next few weeks we are going to see hundreds
of millions of dollars coming out through those grants.
Mr. Aguilar. I have got a local issue. We will put it into
the record for you to get back to us on San Bernardino
International Airport is a Federal contract tower, and we have
had some language that we secured in the reauth, and we would
love your attention to this and your help with this. We will
send it to the record as well.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Joyce.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Rocheleau, thank you for being here today. I would like
to follow up on my distinguished colleague, Mr. Aguilar's
comments there, and all of us here are among those who travel
through DCA on a pretty regular basis, and we wait at DCA
with--most of the traveling public does--for reasons
unbeknownst to us. But can you share with the committee any
specific steps that is being taken to improve the operational
performance at DCA, particularly during these peak travel
periods?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. There are a handful of ways we
have tackled that. First and foremost, after the tragic
collision, we cleared that airspace. We made it less complex by
removing the helicopter traffic. That really did contribute to
the ability for the controllers to manage our traffic in a
safer, more efficient manner.
Second, we focused on the controllers themselves. We had an
authorized staffing at 28. We are now at 30, and we are going
to 31. We have prioritized hiring for DCA traffic specifically
and getting people up to speed there.
And then we work with the carriers. At the end of the day,
you have to work with the airports and you have to work with
the airlines to make sure that as we have traffic surges, that
we are able to spread that out throughout the day to make sure
there aren't these peaks, which contribute to delays
themselves, and add workload to the controllers.
Mr. Joyce. Having sat on the runway, whether because we
missed our slot because we were a little late taking off----
Mr. Rocheleau. I apologize for that.
Mr. Joyce [continuing]. Getting into DCA is an issue as
well, I understand.
What aspects of the FAA's 2026 request are directly aimed
at addressing those challenges? Are there further measures or
plans under consideration to enhance reliability and efficiency
with this critical airport while continuing to prioritize the
safety?
Mr. Rocheleau. I would point you directly to the staffing
piece. The staffing piece, whether it is at DCA, and we are
focused on DCA, obviously, in addition to places like Newark
and other locations, that money that we are requesting for
staffing is going to make a difference. We are not waiting for
that money to come. We are working towards staffing
appropriately as we can with the money that we do have.
But I would say that the staffing is a big piece. When we
think about introducing new technologies, we are in a good
place as it relates specifically to DCA with respect to our
fiber and our communications efforts. But, again, I go back to
how it integrates within the larger system, within the Potomac
TRACON and the Command Center and some of these other
locations, it is going to be critical for us to make these
investments into the technologies in addition to the controller
workforce itself.
Mr. Joyce. As we discuss this modernization efforts of the
national airspace more broadly, it is important to ensure that
the smaller airports, like those in Ohio, were not left behind.
These airports do not have 24/7 air traffic control staffing
and, therefore, rely mostly on automated systems, like the
automated weather observing system and the automated surface
observing system for weather reporting to ensure that
operations can be carried out safely at all hours.
Investing in the infrastructure and technology at these
smaller airports is essential to maintain this sufficient and
accessible airspace for all Americans. With this in mind, how
do you plan to ensure that the smaller airports, those outside
of the core 30 largest airports that rely on these automated
systems the most, are adequately prioritized with any system
with modernization efforts that are moving forward?
Mr. Rocheleau. That is a great question, because again, I
certainly appreciate, having just come from the industry, the
importance of being able to have that connectivity with local
regional airports. The technology specifically is part of our
ongoing refresh, if you will. And when we think about surface
monitoring or airborne monitoring, all of these technologies,
they may not have the same thing that, say, a JFK or a Newark
would. But we want to make sure the tools are there, whether it
is a staff tower or an uncontrolled airport, that they have
those technologies in place. And so, part of this effort is to
ensure the continuing refresh of the technologies there and the
enhancements as they come available.
Mr. Joyce. So how will your 26 requests ensure all the
airports, regardless of size, have access to the needed funding
so they are able to operate at full capacity?
Mr. Rocheleau. Certainly that is part of the ongoing
process as we look at rolling out what we have today, and that
is separate from what we are talking about with respect to a
whole new modern air traffic plan. It goes back to what I
mentioned, where we identify these airports through our NPIAS,
through our system, through our approach, and make sure that as
these refreshes are necessary that we are devoting the
resources that are critical to get them back up to speed.
Mr. Joyce. I had the opportunity, as I addressed Secretary
Duffy a few weeks back, back in 2017, to go with then-Chairman
Shuster and Secretary Chao up to Canada to see the system that
they have there. And when you go into our towers and you see
the paper and the floppy disk and the other thing, that's not
the way it should be, and I appreciate the efforts that you are
going to take to fix that. I won't bore you with any more
NextGen questions.
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you very much, Chairman.
Mr. Womack. And, finally, the distinguished vice chair of
this subcommittee, Mrs. Bice.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Administrator, for being with us this
morning.
I want to follow up on a comment that you made in response
to Mr. Joyce's question, and that was after the DCA accident
that you took a good look at all of the incoming traffic paused
helicopter traffic in. But subsequent to the accident there was
another incursion--or close call, I should say. I am sorry, not
an incursion--a close call that happened with two aircraft
leaving DCA. Interestingly enough, I was on the tarmac and saw
that happen. So my question to you is, do you believe that you
are able to effectively communicate with DOD on military
traffic coming in and out of the DCA airspace?
Mr. Rocheleau. I do believe we have a very good
communication link with our Department of Defense partners. I
would also say they are not flying right now, because we are
revisiting the letter of authorization that we have going.
Unless it is a mission critical operation----
Mrs. Bice. Who defines mission critical?
Mr. Rocheleau. We have protocols set up through this letter
of agreement that a national security mission, a law
enforcement intervention, something along those lines, a
medevac-type thing, those would be coordinated with the
controllers and there are certain codes they use to talk back
and forth.
But in terms of what we will call priority transport or
some of the other more routine activities that the Army was
conducting, we have shut those down until such time as we are
comfortable with what we will call new rules of the road.
Mrs. Bice. And you do believe that the airspace in DCA is
safe?
Mr. Rocheleau. Absolutely.
Mrs. Bice. Okay. Earlier we talked about the Mike Monroney
Aeronautical Center. When I was elected in 2020, that was
actually in my congressional district. It is now not after
redistricting, but I am very conscientious of what happens at
that facility. One of the things that surprised me is the
length of time it takes to actually get an air traffic
controller into a tower. They apply. They have to have an
initial screening. Then they have to do testing. Then there is
a medical evaluation. This process takes some time.
And the one thing that surprised me the most is how long
the medical eval can take. Can you talk a little bit about what
you are doing to address that specifically?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes. Thank you. It did take too long, and
that is one of the reasons why the Secretary has tasked us with
supercharging this hiring process, cutting 5 months out of the
process in general.
Specific to medicals though, one of the ways we truncated
that process was by looking at security and medicals in tandem
to make sure we process them efficiently, effectively, and not
waiting in line. We are doing it concurrently. That made a big
difference in reducing that timeline.
Also, the medical certification piece of this, whether it
is for the controllers or the pilots that we talk about, I meet
with the airspace surgeon on a regular basis to track that. We
have just recently provided some additional information for
people to, essentially, educate themselves to bring the proper
paperwork. It is over 90 percent of the people that come in,
and they get that medical certificate when they walk out. That
is a real tribute to, again, the Secretary and the team that
has put an emphasis on this.
Mrs. Bice. Let's talk about air traffic controllers for a
moment. Certainly, you have talked about an increase in hiring,
which we all agree is necessary. There are people that are, you
know, maybe, you know, want to leave the profession because
they have been in it for many, many years, and it is a high-
stress position, a lot of expectation. It is a zero-failure
mission.
Can you talk a little bit about the overtime that has been
potentially placed on air traffic controllers, particularly at
larger airports due to maybe shortages and how that is
impacting their ability to, you know--maybe longevity in that
role?
Mr. Rocheleau. I work very closely with the controller
union president. We have a number of engagements to basically
keep a finger on the pulse of the health and the welfare of the
controllers. There are indeed facilities that require overtime
simply because of staffing and we make sure that we do that. At
the same time, we have a number of safety reporting systems in
place that if someone is feeling that stress or someone needs
that time off, we allow that person to take that time. So, we
are very focused on the safety, the health, and the welfare of
the controllers themselves.
As it relates to additional staffing, that is part of what
we are going through here with hiring new controllers, and in
those facilities that are most critically understaffed
prioritizing them for controllers that can come in and hit the
ground running.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you for that.
My time is almost up, but I just want to offer you the
opportunity, when you have time, to come to Oklahoma City,
visit the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center. I am sure that the
full committee chairman, Mr. Cole, and I, along with
Congressman Lucas, would love the opportunity to just visit
with you and see what we can do to continue to strengthen the
facility. It is a large facility. It has a lot of, I think,
infrastructure needs that we need to invest in. And so,
certainly, we are here to help you make sure that the facility
meets the needs of the next century.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
Mr. Womack. I thank the gentlelady.
As I recognize the final member of our panel here this
morning, the chair notices a young man in the audience with a
similar tie to Mr. Ciscomani.
Mr. Ciscomani, do you have a guest here?
Mr. Ciscomani. I do, my son, Kenny. He is here joining us.
I already told press that he's not available for questions just
yet, but he will be at some point.
Mr. Womack. You are recognized.
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Administrator Rocheleau, for being with us
today. I first want to ask about an issue that is top of mind
for many airports around the country, including Tucson
International Airport in southern Arizona, and that is
regarding PFAS remediation. In my district, the presence of
PFAS is a major public health threat. The FAA has previously
mandated the use of PFAS containing foams for commercial
airports. And while many airports like Tucson International
Airport are now transitioning to foams that do not contain
PFAS, they are still burdened with the cost of remediation for
previously used foams. How does your agency plan to assist
commercial airports in these critical remediation efforts?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. Tucson has a
special place in my heart. It was my first assignment as a
second lieutenant in the Air Force, and so I am familiar with
the airport and the importance of it.
With respect to PFAS and the mitigations there, I connected
with my Airports office yesterday, and I understand we have
ongoing dialogue with how we are going to manage through that.
I know that there was an authorization to further mitigate PFAS
that we are talking about, not just in Tucson but in other
locations. An appropriation will be particularly critical to
being able to move forward on some of those mitigations.
At Tucson, and a few other airports, the plan to mitigate
that is ongoing with respect to ensuring that the airports have
the information they need to follow that up when the funding
appears.
Mr. Ciscomani. Yeah. And I think that is critical, so I
will certainly advocate for you all to receive the funds that
are needed to clean up PFAS in our community without creating
the undue burden on the airports themselves that already have
limited budgets, as you know. So I appreciated your attention
on this critical issue.
Next, I would like to highlight a key facility in my
district, Pinal Airpark. If you have been in southern Arizona,
you probably are familiar with Pinal Airpark. This general
aviation and military facility, originally known as Marana Army
Airfield, is notably where more than 10,000 pilots trained
during World War II. Today the airpark supports a mix of
military and commercial aviation activities with over 100,000
flight operations annually. Pinal Airpark is among the busiest
multiuse airports in the Nation operating without an air
traffic control tower.
Last year, Congress passed the FAA reauthorization bill
with the provision prioritizing the construction of air traffic
control towers that support safety at multiuse airports. Pinal
Airpark fits this description perfectly and was recently
accepted as a candidate for the FAA contract tower program. Can
I have your agency's commitment to fully considered Pinal
Airpark as a candidate for a new tower under this program?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, you can.
Mr. Ciscomani. Perfect. Thank you. That is critical here
for us. On the air traffic control tower at Pinal Airpark is
greatly needed, and I look forward to working with you to make
that tower a reality.
Here with the last minute or so that I have, I want to ask
about something that you touched on in your testimony and some
of my colleagues have mentioned as well is the air traffic
control tower staffing side of it as well. What specific steps
is the FAA taking to ensure adequate staffing levels at
critical facilities across the country on that matter?
Mr. Rocheleau. Again, I can't emphasize enough the
importance of making sure that under the Secretary's
leadership, that we do, in fact, realize the supercharge goal
that we are attempting. Right now, we are focused on making
sure that we get up to 2,500 through Oklahoma City, as well as
through our enhanced CTI training schools and the collegiate
partnerships that we have. In addition to that, we are
incentivizing people to come to the FAA and go to tougher to
staff locations with financial incentives.
I think one of the things that is really going to help us
in this effort, though, and it is critical, is we are giving 20
percent more per year to experienced controllers to stay on as
certified controllers, whether that is in an operational role
or is in a training role, and make sure that we have that
bridge to get healthy again in our controller staff. We are
3,000 down, and we are working to make sure that within the
next couple years that we have got that back healthy.
Mr. Ciscomani. Real quick here, what do you think the
shortage--what is the reason for it? I mean, it pays well, you
know, high training. Now you have incentives to stay. Just real
quick, what do you think highlights of the shortage is?
Mr. Rocheleau. I think there were a variety of reasons.
Part of it is advertising. We are trying to make sure people
understand, this is an exciting, very rewarding career field. I
also think that the time to get people into the Academy was too
long. We were at a year and a half in some cases, and a 25-
year-old is not going to wait around for a year and a half to
get a job. They are going to go do something. Truncating the
process and getting them into the school quicker, is going to
help us.
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, sir. We would love to welcome you
back to your old stomping grounds----
Mr. Rocheleau. All right.
Mr. Ciscomani [continuing]. In Tucson and have you there
soon. Thank you so much.
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you.
Mr. Ciscomani. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Ciscomani.
If it pleases the subcommittee, we are going to do one more
round of just a single question, so be thinking about your
question.
But before I go to my last question, I am going to
recognize the overall chairman of the committee once again, Mr.
Cole, who has been gracious enough to sit through this entire
hearing today.
Mr. Cole, I am going to recognize you for any final
comments you would like to make, because I know you have an
agenda and you have got to escape.
Mr. Cole. I do. Thank you.
I just want to compliment you, Mr. Chairman, you, Mr.
Ranking Member, and every member of this committee.
And I particularly want to single out you, Mr.
Administrator.
This is the way a hearing ought to work. This is a really
good hearing. All the questions were substantive. All of them
focused on real needs. All of you had real concerns. You put
them out there. I want to compliment the leadership of this
committee on both sides of the aisle for the manner in which
this was done.
And I want to compliment you, Mr. Administrator. You are a
terrific witness. You know your stuff. And you have been very
candid and forthcoming with the committee and very helpful in
us understanding.
And I am serious, I do think this is one of the areas we
can and should cooperate on. I don't see much in the way of
partisanship that deals with this or even profound
disagreement. We mostly agree on what needs to get done here.
And again, I want to thank the members of the committee,
because everybody came here with a legitimate concern and very
legitimate questions. And I didn't think, with all due respect,
anybody was looking for a television moment. They just wanted
to know the stuff and figure out what they could do to help you
and the mission you have in keeping our skies, in particular,
safe.
A lot more committee meetings are like this than we get
credit for in the media. And I want to thank all of you, again,
on each side of the aisle and our witness for making it a
really excellent and useful committee hearing. So thank you,
Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Ranking Member. I appreciate it.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Cole. And
you have honored us with your presence here today, and we truly
appreciate it.
My final question goes back to staffing. You have a lot of
things that you are responsible for, and it is good that on the
mission-critical safety required things, that people have been
excluded from the DRP and efforts to downsize. But the fact is,
you do so many other things that are not directly related to
aviation safety. And I am talking about certifications and lots
of other different programs, reevaluation of airspace as an
example and things like rulemaking beyond the visual line of
sight.
Can you confirm that our staffing reductions are not going
to interfere with your ability to conduct some of these other
lesser-known functions of the FAA?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I can. Again, safety critical, we
will always continue, where we find need, to bring people back.
The Secretary has been very clear with me, if I have a need for
something, whether it is aeronautical services or an engineer--
and by the way, we continue to hire engineers to do our
oversight--I have that ability to do that. We will be solid on
staffing.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Clyburn.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr.
Chairman, I do have a question.
Mr. Administrator, you have had a long career in the United
States Air Force. Do you know--this is more rhetorical. If you
don't know, I won't be insulted--the name of Daniel ``Chappie''
James?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much. Do you remember who he
was?
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Clyburn. Well, Daniel--I knew Daniel ``Chappie'' James.
When you have been around as long as I have, you would know
these people. He was a good buddy. He became the first African
American in this country to be a four-star general. He got that
generalship because of a DEI program that was put in place that
became known as the Tuskegee Airmen.
Now, there seems to be some preoccupation with DEI on this
subcommittee, so I am not going to be able to sleep with myself
if I don't raise this issue. Now, in his first administration,
President Trump put in place a DEI program for people with
disabilities and it was successful. Now, in this
administration, he has gotten rid of that program. Are you
familiar with that program that brought people with
disabilities into the FAA?
Mr. Rocheleau. I am generally familiar with it.
Mr. Clyburn. It was a very successful program, but we have
gotten rid of that program now because of this notion of DEI.
Mr. Chairman, I know that every time--this comes up in these
subcommittees, but every time it comes up, I am going to always
rebut with facts. Chappie James is one of the most successful
air fighter pilots, not a Red Tail because he became a real
fighter pilot, and he helped us to win that war. And I yield
back.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Ciscomani.
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And one of the things that I talked to Secretary Duffy
about as well, Administrator Duffy, was about a midair crash
that happened on February 19 in Miranda, Arizona. Two people
died in that terrible accident. You know, Mr. Duffy called it
tragic. I agree. I know there is a report being compiled on
that with more details on it. I know that we briefly talked
about some of the potential reasons for that incident, but I am
just, you know, just to comment more than anything that I am
looking forward to receiving the report here from the FAA
hopefully soon.
Do you have any idea of a timeline that we could
potentially be looking at? Are you familiar with the incident
or----
Mr. Rocheleau. I am familiar----
Mr. Ciscomani. Yeah.
Mr. Rocheleau [continuing]. With the incident. It was
indeed a tragedy. I am not familiar with the status of the
report. I will certainly take that as an IOU and get back to
you. It is one of those things where I continue to encourage,
coming from business general aviation, there is some very
important equipment that I think people have an opportunity to
equip their aircraft with that can increase safety in those
circumstances. I understand it was an uncontrolled airfield at
the time.
Mr. Ciscomani. It was, yeah, uh-huh.
Mr. Rocheleau. But I commit to you to getting you the
update on that report.
Mr. Ciscomani. Excellent. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Mr. Chairman, I will abide by your one
question. This will be a five-point question----
Mr. Rocheleau. Okay.
Mr. Quigley [continuing]. If that is all right. I am just
kidding. There is a bipartisan Quiet Skies Caucus, and on a
bipartisan basis got provisions into the last reauthorization,
including creation of an aviation noise officer, regional noise
officers, and then a requirement that you review and revise the
FAA noise standards. Where are we at with that, and will the
budgetary issues affect that as well?
Mr. Rocheleau. I am aware of it. I understand that we
regularly engage in Quiet Skies Caucus efforts, not to mention
community engagement. I can't tell you today--again, I will
commit to getting back to you--where we are specifically. But I
can tell you that the budget that we are requesting goes
directly to supporting those activities.
Mr. Quigley. And I would appreciate--we don't have the time
today, but I would appreciate you or your staff, they can
engage with myself or my staff, to talk about this further, and
perhaps have an ongoing discussion with that bipartisan Quiet
Skies Caucus. Thank you.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Strong.
Mr. Strong. Mr. Administrator, I know that you mentioned
earlier that 35--you had a 35 percent failure rate in the
training of air traffic controllers. I encourage you to
maintain the highest of standards, never lower those standards.
It was interesting for you to mention that.
In 2021, Huntsville International Airport was selected as
one of the five locations of UAS detection and mitigation
testing. Section 383 of the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act
directed the FAA to test and evaluate technologies and systems
that can detect and mitigate potential safety risk posed by UAS
at and near airports. Mr. Administrator, what is the status of
that testing, and what feedback have you received from DHS,
DOJ, or other law enforcement partners?
Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. Yes, in fact,
the testing at Huntsville was very valuable. In fact, my
understanding from my team is that 48 different UAS were
tested, and 30 different types of detection equipment were
tested at five different airports, most recently up in New
Jersey, but Huntsville was a particularly important part of
that effort. What we learned from that effort was that the
detection capabilities are there today, and whether it is
airports or law enforcement, and certainly DOD and DHS, we are
working closely with them to make sure that those detection
equipment capabilities are there for the right people.
In addition to that, since we are responsible for the
safety of operating in the skies, we want to make sure that
those mitigation efforts are carefully put in place, because
mitigation can, in fact, affect civil aviation traffic. And so,
that is part of that effort that we are going through, both on
the detection side, critically important, and then we partner
with the appropriate law enforcement security agencies to do
the mitigation piece.
Mr. Strong. Thank you, Mr. Rocheleau.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Bring us home, Mrs. Torres.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman.
And there is two things that I want to ask of you, but I am
going to put them in writing to you. I just want to let you
know about them today, because they are critically important
for some of my constituents. One is an update on where the six
studies stand, included in the 2024 FAA reauthorization studies
on cabin air quality, temperature, radiation, and modern
evacuation training; and the other is on the PAPI system. You
know it as the Position Approach Path Indicator. It is a
bipartisan supported program that requires substantial updates.
It saves a lot of money on energy by replacing the bulbs. Can
you give us an update on the progress of this program for the
runways that still need to be updated?
Mr. Rocheleau. I am familiar with the PAPI program. I do
commit to getting you the status on both of those issues.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Womack. And just in time, Pete, welcome back. You have
got just a few seconds to ask your last question.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You told me it was
the best for last. You are not saying that in public anymore,
but that is fine.
Mr. Womack. Well, I kind of inferred that with Mrs. Torres,
but you made it back.
Mr. Aguilar. I wanted to build--thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Appreciate your indulgence.
Mr. Administrator, I wanted to build off of what Ranking
Member Clyburn discussed, and one of the programs that exists
within your agency and within DOT broadly is the DBE program,
the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program. The FAA
Reauthorization Act included a bill that was mine that was
specific for DBE supportive services expansion. It created DBE
supportive services program at the FAA. I appreciate that the
FAA budget justification highlights that the FAA is
prioritizing implementing DBE programs in fiscal year 2026.
However, the budget justification did not request funding
for DBE programs. Just as a refresh here, these are small, for-
profit businesses and at least 51 percent owned and controlled
by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals: women,
minorities, other socially and economically disadvantaged
groups. Oftentimes, our Federal programs reward prime
contractors and very big folks who have more compliance people
than they know what to do with. And making sure that smaller
businesses have an opportunity to bid on contracts and to
procure is an incredibly important part of what we do. How does
the FAA plan to implement the DBE program in this new
supportive services program without requesting any funding?
Mr. Rocheleau. I understand the importance of this. As you
mentioned, there are certainly those vendors out there that
have subs, and that is how they conduct this. I know that both
our disadvantaged business office as well as our Airports
office work together in executing these plans, working with
airports, working with associations that support these as well.
With respect to what we are doing as it relates to today's
activities, I will take the IOU to get back to you and come in
and give a briefing to you and your staff. I know we have a
subject matter expert on that topic itself, and I am happy to
get him engaged.
Mr. Aguilar. Specifically related to the funding, this is
the Appropriations Committee.
Mr. Rocheleau. Yeah.
Mr. Aguilar. And the funding and the resources that you
decide to use as you implement this program, I would be
interested in seeing it. If you want to work with our office, I
would definitely take you up on that. Thank you.
Mr. Rocheleau. Very good. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Administrator, thank you so much for being here today.
I want to echo the sentiments that Mr. Cole made earlier
about the quality of the hearing, and certainly, the quality of
the witness, but I am also mindful of the fact that you have a
good staff of great people behind you. And Kate and Julie and
Hannah, and others across that spectrum, do yeoman's work and
are dedicated to the service of the general public and the
taxpaying public.
And so to the staff, I want to thank you for the work that
you do as well.
I want to remind our members that you have 7 days to submit
any questions that you would like submitted to the record with
our subcommittee staff.
Again, I want to thank everybody for being here today.
Mr. Clyburn, as always, good to share the dais with you,
and I hope it is a good week for you.
Mr. Clyburn. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you for what I consider to be a very substantive hearing. I do
and will always reiterate that we aren't asking--I have never
asked--for any standards to be lowered. I only ask for what I
call fair--not preferential but fair--treatment. And so as a
member of this committee, I am going to always insist upon the
record carrying that notion.
Mr. Chairman, when I was studying in college, I studied a
man named Alexis de Tocqueville. I am sure you are familiar
with Mr. Tocqueville.
Mr. Womack. Very familiar. French nobleman, yes.
Mr. Clyburn. Absolutely. He wrote a two-volume work called
``Democracy in America.'' And de Tocqueville wrote in that book
that America's greatness is not that it is more enlightened
than any other nation, but rather because she has always been
able to repair her faults. That is what makes this country
great. We find a fault and we repair it. That is how Daniel
``Chappie'' James, Jr., became great, repairing a fault. Thank
you, and I yield back.
Mr. Womack. And on that note, this subcommittee stands
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:58 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, HUD, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS
FOR 2026
----------
Tuesday, June 10, 2025.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
WITNESS
HON. SCOTT TURNER, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Womack. The subcommittee will come to order. Today, I
welcome the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the Honorable Scott Turner, a Big Ten champion in
a previous life. Mr. Secretary, I want to thank you for being
here to discuss HUD's fiscal year 2026 budget request. I also
want to thank you for your visit recently to my district in
April. It was great to have you on the ground to see the impact
of HUD programs in my district. Let me add, we caught a
Razorback baseball game while we were there, and in a shameless
plug, I will give my Razorbacks some credit for making it to
Omaha, where they will play Saturday evening against those
Bengal Tigers of LSU.
It is this committee's responsibility to complete our work
on time. I believe we can achieve this goal, and I am pleased
that under Chairman Cole's leadership, we have already begun
marking up 12 appropriation bills for fiscal year 2026. At the
same time, it is our expectation that the departments under our
jurisdiction spend the funds consistently with the way we
appropriate them. We appreciate your partnership as you
continue to fully implement the funds Congress made available
to HUD for fiscal 2025. HUD's request for new budget authority
in fiscal year 2026 is $33.2 billion. That is a $35.5 billion
decrease. Let me say that again. That is not a typo. $35.5
billion decrease from the fiscal year 2025 enacted. HUD also
uses mortgage guarantee fees from the Federal Housing
Administration and the Government National Mortgage Association
to offset its spending. The Congressional Budget Office
estimates $6.9 billion in offsetting receipts for fiscal year
2026. That is a billion and a half dollars less than receipts
in 2025. Regardless of what the administration sent over in its
budget request, the CBO score is what we have to live with,
which means we are in an even deeper hole than the President's
budget, which suggests, to state the obvious, this is a
significant reduction in the discretionary budget authority for
the department.
Mr. Secretary, you heard in April in my district that many
Arkansans are struggling to afford the rising cost of housing.
Of course, it is not unique to Northwest Arkansas. The Census
Bureau's American Community Survey found that 31 percent of
American households were cost-burdened due to rising housing
costs in 2023, including 27 percent of households with a
mortgage and 50 percent of households with rent. This is why
HUD's impact is felt in every district. Through its rental
assistance programs, HUD ensures that the poor, veterans, the
elderly, and those with disabilities can live with dignity. It
provides economic development dollars for local governments,
helps fight home-based hazards, and provides a hand-up for
communities recovering from disasters.
Because of your department's important mission, Secretary
Turner, I am deeply concerned about the deep cuts the
administration's budget makes to HUD. These proposed cuts would
radically affect HUD's mission and operations. I am interested
in hearing how a $27.6 billion reduction to HUD's rental
assistance programs will help HUD serve our Nation's most
vulnerable. Your proposal is light on details on how the
formula for your proposed state rental assistance program will
ultimately work. I am also curious how HUD will support
community development in low-and moderate-income communities
when some of its most important and popular programs, like
community development block grants, have been zeroed out. These
programmatic changes need to go through the authorizing
committees, particularly the proposals to block grant
assistance to the states and the dramatic changes on how we
combat homelessness in America. These ambitious proposals
require an all-in effort. I welcome ongoing dialogue with our
authorizing colleagues.
HUD's program should work better for the American people.
You and I have discussed how there is fat to cut at HUD. But if
we cut too deep and if we cut too fast, HUD's programs will not
serve the communities you and I have pledged to help. I look
forward to learning about your goals for HUD for this upcoming
fiscal year and beyond. This subcommittee stands ready to work
with you to better serve all Americans as we write this year's
THUD bill.
I would now like to recognize the Ranking Member and my
partner in this effort, the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr.
Clyburn, for his opening statement.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman, and welcome
Mr. Secretary. I think we can all agree that housing is a basic
human need and serves as a foundation for education, health,
and financial outcomes for nearly every family in America. And
where you live matters. Without a safe and stable place to
live, it is difficult for families to improve educational
outcomes, maintain good health, or increase their earnings and
build wealth.
Across the country, more than 771,000 people are
experiencing homelessness, and 75 percent of low-income renters
spend more than half of their income on rent. According to the
Census Bureau, last year, the annual cost of renting grew
faster, 3.8 percent, than home values, 1.8 percent, for the
first time since 2011. This comes at a time when more than 56
percent of African American households and 53 percent of
Hispanic households pay more than 30 percent of their income on
rent, compared to less than 47 percent of White Americans.
Meanwhile, because of existing budget constraints, only one in
five families can receive Federal rental assistance. Despite
these despairing realities, your department's 2026 budget
request proposes to cut HUD funding by more than half. This is
not only unacceptable but unrealistic, given the dire need to
lower the cost of living for Americans.
As the Secretary of your budget proposal to eliminate
Section 8 public housing, housing for the elderly, housing for
persons with disabilities, housing for persons with HIV/AIDS,
and the continuum of care programs. Instead, you are proposing
to establish a so-called state rental assistance program to
block grant rent payments via a formula you have yet to define.
Your budget also proposes to eliminate nearly all of HUD's
housing construction, supply, and preservation programs. Time
does not permit me to enumerate all of them. These so-called
reforms would shift HUD program costs onto low-income
residents. And I have yet to see from your budget evidence that
funding that we could save in these time limits and work
requirements if they become law. This doesn't help families who
already are working multiple jobs to become self-sufficient.
Instead, it creates chaos and financial uncertainty and pushes
these families into more severe trade-offs. A choice of feeding
your family, paying for medications, or paying rent.
Lastly, I would be remiss if I did not highlight the cuts
to fair housing enforcement and your attempts to deregulate
long-standing civil rights law. Mr. Secretary, let's remember
the long and painful history that led to the creation of the
Fair Housing Law. The Federal Housing Administration, banks,
and insurance companies literally drew red lines on maps around
the neighborhoods where they refused to provide home loans and
insurance to otherwise qualified home buyers. I know. I was
born in one of them, and I currently live in one of them.
This discrimination extended to Black veterans returning
from World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. These men and women had
served their country yet were excluded from the GI Bill's
housing benefits that were transformational for White families.
Black Veterans were denied VA-backed loans. Of the first 3,350
VA home loans in Mississippi, only two went to blacks. Not 2
percent. Two out of 3,350. Not even fighting for our country
abroad earned Blacks a fair shot at the American Dream here at
home.
Black families were denied the primary path to building
generational wealth, and that created a racial wealth gap that
persists to this day. I know this as well. I serve on two of
the boards of the predecessor banks to what is now Bank of
America. I chaired the Community Reinvestment Act Committee,
and I served on the Audit Committee. I led the investigations
into my own bank for its discrimination. The Fair Housing Law
of 1968 represents a simple but crucial promise that every
American would have an equal opportunity to secure safe, decent
housing.
Unfortunately, since the start of this administration, we
have seen an attack on long-standing laws that were enacted to
stop excluding Blacks from the drapelessness of this country.
The current state of housing and the cost of living in America
calls on us to question our National priorities. Unfortunately,
Mr. Secretary, this budget proposal ignores far too many
realities, and it is not a reflection of what should be the
values of our country. It is an exploitation of our most
vulnerable.
Mr. Chairman, I implore my colleagues on this panel to work
together to find some real solutions to the housing crisis and
drive down the cost of living, not increase the economic
burdens on every American. And I yield back.
Mr. Womack. I thank the ranking member. Before I introduce
our witness this morning, the chair recognizes a very familiar
face in the front row on the HUD staff, Graydon Daubert, former
staffer for this subcommittee. Mr. Secretary, you got a really
good one there.
Secretary Turner. Indeed, sir.
Mr. Womack. But stop the poaching.
Secretary Turner. It is a team. We are all one team.
Mr. Womack. He is a good man and a valuable asset. And I
know you will enjoy his service to your organization.
At this time, I am going to recognize you for your opening
statement. The entire prepared statement will be included in
the record.
Secretary Turner. Yes.
Mr. Womack. But we are going to give you 5 minutes to
briefly summarize your comments, and then we will open our
question and answer period. And with that, Mr. Secretary, the
floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT TURNER
Secretary Turner. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And good
morning to you, Chairman Womack, Vice Chair Bice, Ranking
Member Clyburn, and all the distinguished members of this
subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify today
in support of President Trump's 2026 budget for the United
States Department on Housing and Urban Development. And again,
thank you, Chairman Womack, for having me in Arkansas and
showing me innovative housing solutions there in your district
in April.
Members, we have a small window of opportunity to help
every American achieve the dream of home ownership. And the
clock is indeed ticking. As of this past April, the National
median home price is $414,000, up from more than $341,000 in
April of 2021. And this is a dramatic increase of more than 21
percent. It became very hard for Americans to afford homes due
to the policies of the Biden administration, which have been
marked by negligence and a lack of stewardship of American
taxpayer dollars.
We cannot keep running the same plays that are causing
Americans to lose. It is time to run new plays and get a new
playbook, and this budget, the President's fiscal year 2026, is
indeed that new playbook. It requests $43.5 billion for the
Department of Housing and Urban Development to fund critical
programs and provide greater fiscal responsibility and
restraint. It carries out President Trump's Day One directive
to increase housing supply and make it affordable again. This
budget supports HUD's mission, and we will indeed maximize the
funds Congress, and you and your colleagues provide to us, no
matter what the amount, be it $10 billion or $10.
We have been taking inventory of every program and found
HUD's rental assistance to be full of waste, fraud, and abuse.
It is broken and deviated from its original purpose, which is
to temporarily help Americans in need. HUD assistance is not
supposed to be permanent. It should be a trampoline, not a
hammock, not a resting place. It is supposed to be like a
Treadway, which is a military bridge which is used temporarily
to get over obstacles and then is removed.
We are also eliminating radical political agendas and
wasteful spending at HUD. We identified as an example $260
million in savings for taxpayers. We canceled $4 million in DEI
contracts that had nothing to do with HUD and recovered an
additional $1.9 billion from inactive contracts that should
have been closed out during the Biden administration. We have
seen that pouring money into programs just fuels its existing
status, which is not good. No. Here we are, reversing course to
be efficient and effective, not bloated and bureaucratic. We
want to be efficient and effective, not bloated and
bureaucratic.
We are also undoing harmful regulations, including the
Obama-Biden era, affirmatively furthering fair housing rule,
which effectively turned HUD into a National zoning board. We
are cutting red tape, and that is important. But we are also
increasing the housing stock and opportunities for first-time
home buyers. The Federal Housing Administration, FHA, which
insures mortgages on more than 7 million homes and has insured
mortgages for more than 140,000 first-time home buyers since
January when President Trump returned to the White House. In
addition, we are ending taxpayer-funded subsidies for HUD
programs for illegal aliens entering our country.
But HUD is more than just housing. We streamline the
disaster recovery process to help funding to get to communities
more quickly and efficiently. For our tribal communities, we
announced $2.2 million under the expansion of the Tribal HUD-
VASH program to address veteran homelessness. And for our rural
communities, we have convened roundtables in states around the
country and discussed solutions for workforce housing.
Returning HUD to its intended purpose, serving Americans
through localized solutions.
The President's budget continues this approach by limiting
the size and the spending of Federal programs. It proposes a
state-based formula grant to encourage states to have skin in
the game for the funding and design of their own rental
assistance. The block grant will empower states to be more
thoughtful and precise in their stewardship.
HUD currently has 30,000 program awardees and recipients.
No wonder the system is plagued by abuse. Empowering states
through this reimagined system would prone the administrative
burden and maintain necessary assistance for the elderly and
the abused. The budget also continues our commitment to promote
economic independence and adopt compassionate common sense and
historically a bipartisan conversation around reforms like time
limits and work limits to encourage able-bodied residents to
move up and get out of assisted housing.
It addresses our Nation's homelessness crisis by returning
solutions to the local authorities. The President's budget
saves billions of taxpayer dollars and helps restore fiscal
responsibility. And Mr. Chairman, in order to properly serve
the American people, we must care about our mission, care about
the ones that we serve, and care about this country. And that
is what HUD is, and that is what we have returned to do, sir.
So, the 2026 HUD budget request will allow us to operate at a
standard of excellence that we have not in previous years and
return the President's golden age. I am in support of this and
look forward to Mr. Chairman talking to you and your
distinguished colleagues. Thank you, sir, for your time.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. There is at least one
other committee meeting that is underway this morning that will
carry some of our members away, including the ranking member of
the full committee and the Chairman of the full committee, who
may or may not come in time here. If they do, I want to
recognize them----
Secretary Turner. Okay.
Mr. Womack [continuing]. When they get here so that we can
maximize their appearance.
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Womack. But the Defense Subcommittee is meeting this
morning with the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs in order to get the posture hearing for that
budget framework.
And so, now, let's go to the Q&A portion of our meeting
this morning. Mr. Secretary, I appreciate your commitment to
reforming our Federal rental assistance programs. The current
system, as you have already articulated, is rife with
inefficiency. The Administration's request proposes placing the
major HUD rental assistance programs, tenant-based, project-
based, and public housing, into a single state rental
assistance block grant program that you referenced in your
opening. This is a substantial change to business as usual.
Now, as we consider this proposal, I want to make sure that
we are good stewards of taxpayer dollars while still meeting
our obligation to help those most in need. I would also note
that an overhaul of these programs would need the work of the
authorizing committee, that of financial services. I support
reforms that promote work, that reduce dependency and give
state and local governments more control.
But I want to ensure that we are not creating gaps that
could lead to increased homelessness or hardship for vulnerable
populations.
So, Mr. Secretary, can you walk us through the concept of
how proposed block grant programs like this would maintain
assistance to the approximate 10 million Americans currently
served by these programs?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman, and
thank you for your question. As you stated, and I stated in my
opening remarks, you know, the status quo is not good enough.
And the way that we have been going about serving the American
people from a HUD perspective is no longer good enough.
And so, with this new paradigm,--it is indeed a paradigm
shift. It is a culture shift. The goal here is not to serve
less Americans. The goal here is to serve Americans better. And
so, to give states an opportunity to have skin in the game, to
identify their unique need, and then to be very deliberative
about how they put the resources out as it pertains to rental
assistance, as it pertains to taking care of the most
vulnerable in their state. And there is a focus in this budget,
Mr. Chairman, to take care of the elderly and those that are
disabled.
And when you look at HUD, HUD has had record funding over
the past few years. In the last 8 years, HUD's budget went from
$42 billion to $77 billion. And yet, HUD lost focus of its most
basic mission. We are only able, currently, to serve one out of
four eligible families at HUD. And that is unacceptable when
you have a $70 to $77 billion budget. And so, this is a
paradigm shift.
You know, playing in the NFL and playing in sports, you
know, when you have a playbook, or you are running plays that
are not, that are not working, the best teams that I have seen
are those that go in, they make adjustments, say, well, we can
no longer run this play because it is causing us to lose. So,
let's run a new play. Let's reimagine what we are doing. I
don't like to lose, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member. I don't
like to lose, and I don't like the American people to lose. And
so, we have to do something different in this country.
It is not about just throwing money at situations. It is
about what we do with the money that we have to best serve
effectively and efficiently the people of our country. And that
is my mindset. That is my heart. It is not about the money for
me. It is about the people. And we are returning HUD to that
focus, mission minded. We understand what our call is, we
understand who we have been called to serve, and we understand
the critical mission. And so, at HUD, currently, that is what
we are focused on.
Mr. Womack. So, to use a football vernacular, when we break
huddle on this block grant program, what conditions will be in
place? What will you do to ensure that we have adequate service
levels for, you mentioned, the elderly, for the disabled,
people that are very vulnerable in their lives? What assurances
do we have? What can we do to ensure that there is a service
level that is fitting for these individuals?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir, and that is a great
question. So, in this SRAP, State Rental Assistance Program,
there is money in the budget from our PD&R program office at
HUD to make sure that we work with states to implement an
appropriate strategy and also to work with you and your
colleagues on this committee to make sure that this strategy is
serving the most vulnerable in our country.
HUD is a great facilitator of this, and we are very
focused. And as you see in the budget, there is money set aside
so that we don't just say there is a new program, but we can
say this is how we are going to join in with states and join in
with stakeholders to implement and execute this program. And
so, those conversations have begun and will continue, and we
welcome your input, you and your colleague's input, to make
sure that this new strategy works effectively for the people we
serve.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, sir. Mr. Clyburn.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me, if
I might consider--I am not going to do football. I played the
game, not at the level you played it, but I am a pretty good
golfer, and I know that If I have got 150 yards to get to the
green, it doesn't matter what club I use. What matters is what
skill I have got. That is what matters. And I always hear
people say, what club do you use? What does it mean to you? You
are not the same as I am. So therefore, at soon to be 85 years
old, it is going to cost me a little more with a 6 iron that is
going to cost this young man over here. So, get the right
equipment.
Now, so if you tell me that HUD has been ineffective, do
you cure ineffectiveness by refocusing or do you cure it by
eliminating? So, if you say, well, I have been ineffective, you
eliminate the funds, how does that make HUD effective? Tell me
about refocus.
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And I have heard that you are a
great golfer. I do look forward to playing with you. Your 8
iron might be a different club than mine, but you are right; it
is a skill.
I am reminded that during the previous administration,
during COVID with a $70 billion budget, sir, HUD hired 2,000
people during COVID, most of which stayed home. And there was
continuous waste, fraud, and abuse. And so, when you have that
many people and still not carry out the job, and you have that
much funding and still not carry out the job for the American
people, then we have to refocus. And part of that refocus is
taking inventory of staff, taking inventory of the budget,
taking inventory where the budget is going. And currently, in
the programs we have, we don't have a lot of purview, if you
will, and transparency, if you will, where the money is going,
is it serving those that are supposed to be serving. And so
part of this refocus is to bring that back to house and bring
it to the stage to say, now, let's have more transparency.
Let's have more accountability. And so, when I look at refocus,
and I look at the skill set, all of that, to me, is in the same
bucket.
Mr. Clyburn. Don't you----
Secretary Turner. When you look at your people, are you
doing a job you have been called to do? Are you doing at the
level you have been called to do it? And is there transparency
in the process that we have? And at HUD, that is what they are
doing. And, sir, I said it in my confirmation process that we
are going to take inventory of every program office at HUD, we
are going to maximize the budget that we do have, and we are
going to serve the people that we are supposed to be serving.
So, the amount of people, the amount of money, that is not the
deal here. Because with the tremendous amount of money and a
tremendous amount of people, we haven't, prior to us getting
here, carried out the job we have been called to carry out.
Mr. Clyburn. I agree with you, but I think that to deal
with COVID is a false. This is a false narrative here. I
chaired the Select Subcommittee for the Coronavirus. I knew
where the fraud was, and it wasn't in housing. The billions and
billions and billions of fraudulent money went to some pretty
wealthy people, at least one of whom is in this administration
right now. So, that is not the criteria that we ought to use
here. Let's look at what the needs are and how we need to equip
ourselves for these needs.
Now, you mentioned the Obama-Biden administration. If you
want to cure what you see to be the problem of the Obama-Biden
administration, why would you advocate the Andrew Johnson and
the Woodrow Wilson administrations? And I used those two
administrations because I disliked them immensely, and they
were Democrats. So, I want you to think this is policy. Woodrow
Wilson was a Democrat and, I think, one of the worst presidents
we ever had. So this is not policy here. This is whether or not
we are going to have a program to meet the needs of the
American people or whether we are going to just get rid of and
throw out the baby with the bathwater. And that is what you
seem to be doing here with half of the budget. And then you
tell me you want to refocus the agency with what? With what
equipment? The five iron, or will you leave it in the bag?
Secretary Turner. Well, I think it is the right equipment
for the situation. And right now, prior to us being here, we
haven't been using the right equipment for the right situation.
Mr. Clyburn. So, what is the right equipment?
Secretary Turner. Well, the right equipment, sir, is called
transparency. It is called inventory. It is called, you know,
let's refocus and let's have a new paradigm. And, you know, you
talk about the Biden-Obama administration, and I make note to
them just because that is what----
Mr. Clyburn. No, you did.
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Because that is where the rule
came, not politics. And so, sir, I will assure you that my
heart and my focus is on serving the American people. And we
are refocusing in order to do that appropriately. Thank you,
sir.
Mr. Clyburn. Okay. I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Womack. You will get a mulligan here and in another
little while when we do a second round.
Mr. Clyburn. I look forward to it.
Mr. Womack. How's that?
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. Sheriff.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ranking member.
Mr. Secretary, you know we are facing historic shortages of
affordable housing. And one of the, I thought, one of the best
programs that HUD had was the SHOP program, where nonprofits
would actually assist people in home ownership. And I can tell
you, as a former sheriff, everywhere in my community, and we
did this on purpose in Jacksonville, Florida, we went into the
most challenged neighborhoods, working with these nonprofit
groups who would then bring homeownership into these areas,
these most challenged public safety areas, and everywhere that
home ownership went up, violent crime went down. And so, that
is why I love this SHOP program because it puts people into
home ownership. I like SRAP, but I really want people to own
homes because I know it changes the whole community. So can you
tell me a little bit about, you know, how are we going to
address this issue if we are doing away with SHOP?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Sheriff. I really appreciate
it--sorry, Congressman. Thank you for your service in law
enforcement. You know, again, I reiterate that this is a new
way of looking at how we distribute funds. And by bringing in
the states and bringing in localities and giving them the
flexibility to identify programs, such as you stated, that have
been successful, then they'll have the ability to continue to
fund and work with those programs. I, too, am for the
workforce. I, too, am for skills training and home ownership.
Moving from rent to home ownership, moving from being
subsidized to now living a life of self-sufficiency. And that
is the heart here.
Mr. Rutherford. So, if I could interrupt. So, you have
SRAP, which is going to be basically a block grant for rental
assistance programs. And you are saying there is going to be
another block grant process where programs like SHOP can be
funded out of if the state or the city decides that is how they
want to use those funds?
Secretary Turner. No, sir. Not an additional block grant
but included with.
Mr. Rutherford. Included in the SRAP?
Secretary Turner. Yes, include with. When I say this,
meaning that the states will have the authority and the
flexibility to identify programs that are doing well and be
able to not just fund those but support those opportunities in
the states that you are talking about in particular, like SHOP,
that you mentioned.
Mr. Rutherford. Yeah, but all of those others are rental
assistance programs.
Secretary Turner. They are. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rutherford. You are saying that those dollars will also
be used for home ownership, affordable home ownership?
Secretary Turner. No, sir. What I am saying is that when
you have--when you have programs that promote home ownership,
when you have programs that promote----
Mr. Rutherford. They won't promote----
Secretary Turner. [continuing]. Individuals being able to
buy homes, states will now be able to identify those better
than the Federal Government. The Federal Government is not the
one that identifies those unique needs like states. And so,
this, the whole paradigm is to return that back to the states
as it pertains to rental assistance that we talked about. And
so, this is a refocusing of taking the Federal Government out
of it and putting the states in charge and in control of how
they want to distribute the funds.
Mr. Rutherford. Okay. Let me ask one more question in this
round. In Jacksonville, we had a project-based rental
assistance program, Eureka Gardens. I don't know if you are
familiar with that, but this is dealing with public housing
units and basic safety and quality standards and how those
complaints and inspections are handled. What sort of oversight
do you see HUD having for those--for those rental facilities?
You know, this one got so bad that we actually had an
explosion, and I mean, it was horrible. How do we improve the
inspector training and accountability to make sure those
inspections are consistent and reliable across the board?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And HUD will still be involved,
obviously, when it comes to inspections such as this. You know,
I have traveled around the country and visited public housing
authorities and seen some of the conditions that people are
living in across our country. And some of them are deplorable.
And so obviously, HUD will continue to be involved as such so
that those public housing authorities are safe, that they are
secure for the residents that are living there.
Mr. Rutherford. Okay. So even with the block grant, you are
still going to be in the inspection business?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I see my time is
up. I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Sheriff. Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I
don't know if you really believe all this stuff or you are just
parroting what you are told to say because--let me begin. I
wrote reports on this that were detailed about how to
streamline and consolidate government and make it more
effective. Not because I hate it, but because it is so
important and the resources are scarce. But there is absolutely
no details. So, when you just say refocus and reform, it falls
on deaf ears. It doesn't mean anything. You can talk about
compassion, but no reform measures are going to be able to
allow us to cut HUD by 50 percent and not have our most
vulnerable people, seniors, kids, and people with HIV/AIDS on
the street.
Mr. Secretary, you have to understand that housing is
everything. Housing for people with HOPWA. HOPWA is health
care. These people will die. There is no way you can believe
that a 50 percent cut won't mean a dramatic increase in people
being put on the street. So just--you can say what you want,
but it is when you cut the programs like pro, which is designed
to remove regulations, something you seem to be focused on,
that are stopping localities from building more housing. It is
just, it defies credibility. So, if you just want to say we got
to cut these things because that is our plan, I would respect
you a lot more than telling us that you care about people as
you put them on the street.
So, let's just talk about HOPWA for a second. It zeros out
HOPWA and says they currently can receive emergency short-term
and medium-term assistance through the emergency grants
program. But 64 percent of the people on HOPWA are not short-
term folks. 2 years isn't enough for them. And the Emergency
Solutions Grant, which is going to solve all the problems, is
now supposed to absorb seven existing programs, including this,
and a cut of $532 million.
I don't know if you have known anybody who died from HIV/
AIDS. I have, so it is personal for people in my district and
myself. So, what is the detailed plan that says those folks
aren't going to go on the street where they won't get their
medication and they'll die?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir. And I will say, sir, I am
not just speaking. I do actually care, and I do actually
believe in what I am saying. If I didn't believe it, I wouldn't
say it. You know, as a Christian, as a pastor, I care about all
people. And when you talk about HOPWA, and you talk about the
Emergency Solutions Grant, you know, this will help us to
better serve people in the community. This will help us to more
effectively and efficiently serve people in the community.
Mr. Quigley. How?
Secretary Turner. HUD had record funding. 770,000 people
were homeless in January of 2024. And the point-in-time report,
on one single night, January 2024, 770,000 people were
homeless. And so, when I say refocus, I really mean to refocus
because that is unacceptable when you have record funding and
yet you have almost 800,000 people on the streets. Why would we
continue to do the same thing that we have been doing, and it
is not working appropriately?
Mr. Quigley. So, the alternative is besides just saying we
are going to refocus, you are going to find a place for these
folks to stay overnight. Okay, let's just talk us, Christians.
There is something about the story of the Bible in Christ
having not a place to stay, right? So that is on your mind.
Faith without acts is dead.
Secretary Turner. That is right.
Mr. Quigley. What is your detail?
Secretary Turner. Yeah, faith.
Mr. Quigley. Besides saying that you have--your faith won't
put a house over their head?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Faith, what I was going to say,
faith without action is dead. And this is the action that we
are going to take.
Mr. Quigley. What?
Secretary Turner. To do it better.
Mr. Quigley. How?
Secretary TURNER. Because what we have been doing is not
working. And I believe that----
Mr. Quigley. What is plan B?
Secretary Turner. I believe that you all, your committee,
we should have been asking what and how way before today.
Mr. Quigley. I wrote those reports.
Secretary Turner. Yeah.
Mr. Quigley. I am with you if you have details and how.
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Quigley. But all you are doing is cutting and there is
not even a transition period.
Secretary Turner. Sir, we are going to be more effective
and more efficient.
Mr. Quigley. How?
Secretary Turner. We are not just cutting. It is a new
paradigm.
Mr. Quigley. How?
Secretary Turner. It is a new way to do things.
Mr. Quigley. Let's come up with more words than compassion
and paradigm. Detailed plans where these----
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Quigley [continuing]. Folks are going to stay in the
meantime.
Secretary Turner. And we look forward to working with you
and your staff on--on those strategies, and I commit to that.
It is not just words. We will be happy to work with you, sir,
if you are willing to work with us.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Quigley.
Secretary Turner. Okay.
Mr. Womack. Before I recognize Mr. Gonzales, who is our
next questioner, I am going to be stepping aside from the gavel
here for the remainder of this hearing so that I can get to the
Defense Subcommittee and ask some appropriate questions there.
I will be yielding the gavel to Ms. Bice here after this line
of questioning. Mr. Gonzales.
Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
Secretary, for your service to our--to our great country. I am
a military veteran. I served 20 years in the military. Chairman
Womack's a veteran. Secretary Zinke is a veteran. My question
is on homeless veterans. My first question. One of the issues I
care deeply about is homeless veterans. Back in 2024, HUD
identified that on any given night, there are more than 32,000
homeless veterans. That is 32,000 too many. This issue hits
close to home in my district in rural parts like Alpine and Van
Horn, where there is little to no affordable housing supply,
and in urban areas like San Antonio and El Paso, the housing
availability for homeless veterans through HUD is often
substandard or inadequate. Secretary Turner, would you be
willing to visit my district so we can work together on this
issue and find solutions to address the challenges facing both
rural and urban homeless veterans?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir, Congressman Gonzales, thank
you. It is great to meet you. I do commit to visiting you and
your district to come up with these viable solutions and also
working with my colleague, Secretary Collins, as it pertains to
veterans and veterans homelessness.
Mr. Gonzales. Thank you for that. My next--well, will be a
comment on the Community Development Block Grants. The
Community Development Block Grants have been a vital tool in my
district, especially in the Colonias. I mean, these are
communities that don't have running water. It is absolutely
atrocious the conditions they are in. They are in predominantly
rural, unincorporated communities that often lack less than
basic infrastructure like running water, waste system,
electricity, and paved roads. But I would also urge the HUD to
take a serious look at preserving this program or making sure
that it just isn't completely removed with the right safeguards
in place. I believe we got to find the waste and the abuse, and
I love the idea of how do you change it, right? It is not
working. How do you fix it? So, to that, continuing to find
critical and infrastructure improvements in this community
through that program I think is important.
My next question is on--is on foster youth. One of the
things I encouraged--I was encouraged to see in HUD's budget
request was the inclusion of $25 million for foster youth to
independence grants. As a member of the Congressional Caucus on
Foster Youth, I recognize how critical these programs are for--
how critical these programs are for helping youth transition
out of the foster care system. Last year, I passed a bill in
the House Find and Protect Your Foster Act. So clearly, it is
important. Is HUD--my question is this, is HUD actively helping
to track the number of fostered youth who experience
homelessness, and what steps is HUD taking to ensure vulnerable
populations don't fall through these cracks?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Thank you, Congressman. And we,
too, are glad and excited that we have money in the budget to
make sure that our youth that are aging out of foster care have
a solid ground to land on, as we know that being in foster care
is very difficult for our youth. And when I was in the House of
Representatives sitting on the committee dealing with foster
care and our youth in foster care, so I, too, have a heart for
this and so happy to be working with the First Lady and her
team and you and your team on how we help, from a HUD
perspective, these youth that are aging out of foster care to
make sure that they have safe and sustainable places to stay
and get on a good trajectory for their lives.
Mr. Gonzales. I appreciate you making it a priority, and I
look forward. Once again, I like the idea of, hey, how do we--
how do we reimagine things? And I think this is a positive part
of that reimagination. Very personal to me. My wife was a
foster child, and so I want to make sure that we work together
to see that program get off the ground and grow and be
productive.
My last question is on law enforcement housing. I represent
nearly half of the overall Southern border places like Eagle
Pass, Del Rio, El Paso. My district has been ground zero for
this border crisis. As a result, we have seen a large surge of
law enforcement personnel from CBP, and the National Guard
deployed to this area. But in many cases, these are small rural
communities, and there is simply not enough housing supply to
meet the need. Out in West Texas, for example, I have been
fighting to secure housing for first responders. My question is
this, given the President's commitment to supporting first
responders, what is HUD doing to ensure that first responders
and those that are deployed to these areas have affordable and
adequate housing?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir, Congressman, and thank you for
that. You know, I, too, have a heart, and it is top priority of
our first responders and all Americans to make sure that they
have affordable, sustainable places to stay. And obviously, you
know, we have our FHA program, and the President, too, is a
priority of his. And so, we look forward to working with you
and your colleagues and your staff on how we can ensure and
help our first responders as they, too, look for housing to
purchase and rent in your district and around the country.
Mr. Gonzales. Thank you for that. Because as we surge these
people to these areas, there is just--there is just no housing.
And that is, that has been one of the take-backs. You can't
just put pieces on a board that you got to drill down a little
bit. So, thank you again for your testimony. I look forward to
working with you. And Chairwoman, I yield back.
Secretary Turner. Thank you.
Mrs. Bice [Presiding]. Thank you. Next up we have Mrs.
Watson Coleman. You have 5 minutes, Mrs. Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. Welcome, Mr. Secretary. You
have said a lot today. You have not answered one question, but
you are consistent. You have not answered the how's, all the
questions that the Republicans have asked. And you certainly
haven't asked--answered how you are going to make something
happen on this side either. What I am concerned about is how
you could even open your mouth and say that you care about this
population or these populations when you are willing to come
here and advocate for a 51 percent reduction in the budget. And
so, I want to go over a little bit of this stuff with you
because I don't think you are refocusing. I think you are
devastating, and this is a ludicrous proposal.
I am sure you know that 74 percent of Americans are
concerned about housing, and 771,000, you mentioned it, are
currently homeless. I know you know the 7.6 million, including
2.9 million children, are facing the threat of eviction. I know
that you know that this budget does not usher us into any
alleged golden age but perhaps a gilded age. I am unsure how
you and this administration arrived at the decision to cut HUD
by 51 percent, specifically $45.6 billion, during a period of
rising homelessness and housing insecurity. I want to remind
you that 4 years ago you were here.
You and the administration are going to try to sell the
American people a story that these cuts are justified. And you
are giving--while you want to give your money back to very
wealthy donors. It is my job to show the American people that
these are unjustifiable cuts. And so here, let us go with this.
A 40 percent cut to rental and homeless assistance programs
totaling $27.25 billion. A $53 billion cut to Section 8 rental
assistance. An $8.8 billion cut to public housing. A $1.2
billion cut to Sections 202 and 811 programs for the elderly
and disabled. A $505 million cut to HOPWA. A $22 billion cut to
HUD's Housing Construction Supply and Preservation program. A
$1.25 billion cut to the HOME program. You care about home
ownership? I don't think so.
A $75 billion cut to the Choice Neighborhoods program. A
$12 million cut to the SHOP program. A $6 million cut to Rural
Capacity Building grants. A $10 million cut to the PRICE
program. A $296 million cut to the Lead Hazard Reduction and
Healthy Home program's grant. A $3.3 billion cut to Community
Development Block Grants. A $100 million cut to PRO Housing. A
$196 million cut to Family Self-Sufficiency programs. A $58
million cut to housing counseling. A $101.4 million cut to fair
housing.
Now, Secretary, I am sure you know that these cuts will
successfully increase housing instability and evictions. I am
sure you know that those facing evictions don't have a right to
counsel. I am sure you also know that your budget is making
massive cuts to legal aid for those facing evictions and
homelessness. So I am sure you know that cutting rental
assistance, eliminating fair housing protections, and defunding
legal aid will not reduce homelessness and eviction in this
country.
I am sure you are aware that you are worsening the housing
crisis with your budget proposal. If you really believe that
you would not, you would not slash your agency's budget by over
50 percent.
And by the way, you talk about giving the authority back to
the state. You want to give them authority, but you don't want
to give them resources. You can't do anything with your
rhetoric and your narrative. You got to show with your actions
and with your resources.
And last but not least, I want you to tell me what DEI
contracts you have terminated. What does that mean? Did you
terminate contracts to veterans? Did you terminate contracts to
disability organizations? Did you terminate contracts to Black
contractors? Did you terminate to Latino or Asian or whatever?
What the heck are you talking about eliminating DEI contracts
in HUD? Who is your population? Who should you be looking
after? It is shameful and you ought to be ashamed of being
here.
You don't have to answer any question because you haven't
answered one yet.
Secretary Turner. Ms. Vice Chairman, I would actually like
to answer her.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I yield back. I don't need your
answer.
Secretary Turner. Okay. Thank you, Congress lady. You know,
and thank you for stating all the stats of our budget. We
really appreciate that because it just reiterates my point that
with record funding, HUD has still not carried out its most
basic mission. And I have answered questions.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Don't act like you haven't been here,
sir. Just 4 years ago, you were here. Don't act like you care--
--
Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. About this population.
Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Watson Coleman, if you will let him answer
the question.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I don't need----
Mrs. Bice. Your time has expired.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Listen, I reclaimed my time back. I
yielded my time. You want to let him waste your time? You let
him.
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. And thank
you, Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you for reiterating my point
that status quo is not good enough, that also homelessness has
gone up in spite of record funding. And----
Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. If we could move on.
Secretary Turner. Oh, sure.
Mrs. Bice. The gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Strong, is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Secretary Turner. Okay, thank you.
Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairwoman Bice and Ranking Member
Clyburn, for holding this hearing today, and to our hardworking
subcommittee staff. Secretary Turner, thank you for joining us
today.
During my 26 years on the Madison County Commission, the
second largest county in the state of Alabama, I became
extremely familiar with the benefits and bureaucratic burdens
of HUD dollars. Something I hear consistently from local
communities in North Alabama is that HUD's regulatory burdens
are often delay projects. Some projects are delayed to the
point where they are penalized for not spending funds they
couldn't access due to HUD's review timelines.
Secretary Turner, how are you working with local
communities to ensure that HUD acts as a partner, not a barrier
in project delivery?
Secretary Turner. And thank you, Congressman Strong.
Appreciate your service, sir.
You know, we have a tremendous staff at HUD that is very
communicative and open, has open lines of communication with
constituencies around the country to make sure that we are
being efficient and effective as it pertains to getting
resources out of the door and working with yourself, your
staff, and this committee is a goal that I commit to continue
doing to making sure the resources are going out, sir, in an
effective and efficient manner.
And as we have taken inventory and as you alluded to, to
take down the burdensome and the bureaucracy and the red tape
is a goal of ours, to make sure that we are serving the
American people properly.
Mr. Strong. What is your plan to streamline permitting
review and compliance processes to prevent these punishing
penalties for Federal inefficiencies?
Secretary Turner. Sir, so right now, you know, we have a
tremendous CFO team, and our CFO, Irv Dennis, is second to none
in our country. And he and his team are putting in financial
controls to make sure that we are streamlining properly as it
pertains to the question that you asked in all of the processes
that we have at HUD working with our constituency around
America.
Mr. Strong. Next, I would like to discuss the
accountability and flexibility with HUD grant programs. Local
communities, including the growing mid-sized urban centers
found in North Alabama, often have the most accurate
understanding of their unique housing and development needs.
The administration's budget proposal to consolidate multiple
housing programs into block grants, such as the State Rental
Assistance Program, appear to be a bold step forward in
increasing efficiency and allowing states greater flexibility
in addressing their unique housing needs.
Secretary Turner, could you elaborate on how these
consolidations will help local communities to better allocate
resources and reduce administrative burdens, ultimately leading
to more effective outcomes for low- and moderate-income
Americans?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And so, as you alluded to, you
know, the streamline and the effectiveness, putting the
resources back to the states will allow them to not only
identify their unique needs, but also to be very deliberative
and precise in how they distribute those funds around their
state and in their localities. And so I am looking forward to
this new strategy to put it back in the state's hands. While
HUD obviously is a great convener and facilitator, but to give
the states that flexibility, I believe, will help us to operate
more efficiently and serve people better than we have in the
past.
Mr. Strong. Thank you. How are you implementing
performance-based criteria that reward communities that
responsibly leverage Federal funding?
Secretary Turner. Sir, and that is a good conversation that
we are having, an ongoing conversation that we are having right
now. And we would welcome your ideas to how we can better do
this from a performance base. I know at HUD internally we have
a great performance-based strategy to where we make sure that
people inside of HUD are performing the way that the American
people have called us and expect us to perform. But, sir, I
welcome your ideas as it pertains to that strategy.
Mr. Strong. Thank you. Chairwoman, I yield back.
Mrs. Bice. The gentleman yields.
The gentlewoman from California, Mrs. Torres, is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you. Secretary Turner, I represent
California's 35th Congressional District, a region that was
severely hit by flooding and the recent Los Angeles wildfires.
They have had a devastating impact not just my community, but
the entire region. These fires displaced thousands of people,
destroying homes, and devastated critical infrastructure. Yet
the administration's budget for fiscal year 2026 proposes zero
funding for the Community Development Block Grant, CDBG, money.
And HUD has not requested CDBG disaster recovery funds to help
California, specifically, and other disaster-stricken states.
Mr. Secretary, when will HUD, you, submit a request for
disaster assistance to support recovery efforts in California?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, madam. As you know, California
has received disaster recovery funds. I myself was in L.A. a
couple of months ago to visit families there and constituents
there on the ground as it pertains to the wildfires.
Mrs. Torres. Okay. California, sir, has not received a
single penny in recovery funds for the recent wildfires.
California is still owed $6 billion for wildfires and flooding
that occurred last year. Do you believe that state and local
governments, already stretched thin, can fill the massive gap
alone?
Secretary Turner. You know, what I do know, ma'am, is that
there has been a stewardship issue in California as it pertains
to taxpayer dollars. And as I was there meeting with local
authorities and leadership there, that is a point that I raised
is that what are you doing with the resources that you do have?
Because the people of California are not being served properly.
And so to throw more money, if I may, ma'am, to throw more
money at a situation when the money that has been sent has not
been stewarded well, is something I believe that we need to
take inventory of.
Mrs. Torres. So I am going to reclaim my time because you
are talking about wasting Federal dollars, but yet you are
coming from an administration that seems to only care about the
top 1 percent.
Let me tell you, the Federal minimum wage, in case you
don't know, is $7.25. Can you tell me where in the U.S. can
someone making those wages rent a one-bedroom apartment? Let me
tell you, nowhere. Right now, families who lost their homes in
wildfires are struggling trying to find a place to live. And
the Federal Government has a responsibility, you have a
responsibility to return our Federal dollars back to California
to help communities in desperate need.
But here's what makes it even more unconscionable: that you
are sitting here while California sends $83 billion more in
Federal taxes than we receive back. We are literally funding
your salary as well as housing programs in other states while
our own veterans sleep on the streets, sir.
I fully support disaster aid request for California and for
other states. The people rebuilding after a disaster deserve
better than to be ignored and to have egos speaking words that
mean nothing. What we need is actual actions. We need funding
to ensure that we are able to provide the housing that we need.
Secretary Turner. Thank you, ma'am. And I would say again,
and I reiterate, it is a stewardship issue. It is not a funding
issue.
Mrs. Torres. You have no proof of stewardship issues. All
you have been doing is talking around and around and stroking
your ego, sir. Right here we need dollars and cents and we need
programs that actually are going to house our veterans and our
homeless population.
What you are doing with the cuts that you are demanding in
this budget is you are destroying every single opportunity that
we have built up, not just in my community, for people that
have been severely addicted to narcotics, people recovering
from those addictions, from illnesses, veterans in the street
that, by the way, under the Obama administration we managed to
have zero homeless people and in San Bernardino County living
in the streets. Okay? So don't come to me and tell me that it
is an issue of not having accountability.
Secretary Turner. Ma'am, did you know homeless was up----
Mrs. Torres. The accountability----
Secretary Turner [continuing]. 16 percent in California?
Mrs. Torres. The accountability lies in this most corrupt
administration----
Secretary Turner. And we just closed two----
Mrs. Torres [continuing]. That we have had.
Secretary Turner. Madam Vice Chair, we just had to close
two field offices----
Mrs. Torres. My time has expired, and I yield back to the
chair.
Secretary Turner. We just had to close two field offices in
California----
Mrs. Bice. The gentlelady yields her time.
Secretary Turner [continuing]. Due to the unrest going on
in California. And so, I say it is time for a paradigm shift.
Mrs. Bice. The gentlelady has yielded her time back.
The gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Ciscomani, is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Chairwoman Bice. And thank you,
Secretary Turner, for being here today. Really appreciate that.
I want to first like to ask about an issue that is top
priority for me as a member of both this committee, but also
the Veterans' Affairs Committee, and that is veterans
homelessness. It has been brought up a couple of times, and I
want to piggyback off what my colleague Tony Gonzales was
talking about on that issue when he brought it up, but mine's a
little more specific.
As you know, the HUD VASH program is a collaborative
initiative between HUD and the VA that aims to end homelessness
among veterans. While the HUD VASH program has made meaningful
progress in reducing veteran homelessness, challenges like
voucher underutilization and case manager storages persist
still. So what steps is HUD taking to ensure veterans not only
receive vouchers, but can successfully use them to secure
permanent housing with the wraparound service that they need?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Congressman. Nice to meet you,
sir. Again, you know, working with my colleague, Secretary
Collins from the VA, we just met a couple weeks ago, and this
is of top priority for us, our veterans in our country as it
pertains to homelessness and housing. And also, to be able to
have the states working closely with us to prioritize veterans
I believe is a great strategy going forward. And, sir, we look
forward to working with you and Representative Gonzales to have
ideas and strategies to bring to the table where we can best
serve our veterans.
Mr. Ciscomani. What are some examples you would say that
are--will be good to--that maybe HUD hasn't been doing so far
on the voucher system? Because it is being underutilized, and
we want to make sure that they have access to that. Is it
awareness? Is it outreach? How can we get that information to
our veterans?
I represent about 80,000 veterans in my district. In terms
of congressional districts, it ranks about nine of the most
populated areas for veterans: D-M Air Force Base, Fort
Huachuca, and Sierra Vista. So I have a large veteran
population. I want to make sure that they have the access is
there, but the ability to get it and that we are being
proactive on reaching out to them with that.
Secretary Turner. Yes sir. I believe awareness and outreach
and also to take the bureaucracy out of the program and process
to take down the red tape, to make sure that we are serving our
veterans in the manner that we are supposed to be serving. So I
agree, awareness, outreach, and taking down the burdensome
regulations and red tape to make sure we prioritize our
veterans.
Mr. Ciscomani. A lot of red tape to tackle, that is for
sure. I have got one more question that I want to fit in here.
I would like to thank you for mentioning in your testimony
that HUD will begin to partner with faith-based organizations.
I will also like to highlight a highly effective organization
in my district, the Gospel Rescue Mission. The Gospel Rescue
Mission's Center for Opportunity is one of the most effective
homelessness providers in Arizona, offering not only shelter
for homeless individuals, but also substance abuse services,
faith-based consulting, employment training and placement, and
much more. They even have a mobile cafe where their program
training--where the program participants are able to gain on-
the-job training.
Since 2019 they have helped 542 people make a full recovery
from addiction, 2,356 people obtained permanent stable housing,
assisted 1,960 people with finding a job, and have provided
over a million meals for those in need, all without a single
dollar from the government. They can tell us exactly what their
ratio of success is. They know where their dollars are going.
They know exactly what is going on without a single dollar from
the government.
Can you please elaborate more on how HUD will work to
support a faith-based provider such as the Gospel Rescue
Mission? And what role do we do you see faith-based providers
playing in HUD's mission moving forward?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir. And you are exactly
right. You know, the Gospel Rescue Mission, Union Rescue
Mission in L.A., the Dream Center in L.A., and other faith-
based and nonprofit organizations are the ones that are
actually doing the work on the ground with data-driven results.
And so historically, it is been hard for faith-based
organizations to work with the government, but they are some of
our best partners. And so, we want to make sure that we ensure
that these partnerships are thriving around our country because
they are the ones that are actually doing the work. And so, HUD
has prioritized this in these public-private partnerships and
working with faith-based institutions because they are the ones
that are actually doing the work.
And so that is a priority of mine. It is a part of our
team. And we look forward to working with you, sir, on that.
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you. They don't just say they are
doing the work, their data proves it. Again, they can go to the
numbers. I have asked many through these hearings about
specific information and successive programs, data-driven
results, and government often is not able to give those
specific numbers and data points like these organizations are.
The Federal Government has spent $36.6 billion to end
homelessness and the number of homeless people has only
skyrocketed. So that issue is not being solved by just throwing
money at the problem. We need to show accountability here. And
the way that these programs and these nonprofits have done it
in faith-based is a great way and example to do that. So I
really encourage you to look into that and keep on partnering
with them. Thank you.
Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir.
Mrs. Bice. The gentleman's time has expired.
The gentleman from New York, Mr. Espaillat, is recognized
for 5 minutes. Mr. Espaillat, your mike, I think.
Mr. Espaillat. I think it is on now.
Secretary, I want to ask you some basic questions. Do you
consider that there is a homelessness crisis in America?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Espaillat. Do you think that there is a housing
affordability emergency in America?
Secretary Turner. I do.
Mr. Espaillat. Mr. Secretary, is the rent too damn high in
Washington, D.C.?
Secretary Turner. I believe it is high in a lot of places,
sir.
Mr. Espaillat. So there is a homelessness crisis, there is
an affordable housing emergency, and the rent is too damn high
in many places across America. And so, what does HUD do? What
does this administration propose? A 51 percent cut on basic
services for housing.
Now, building housing is not a cheap endeavor. It is a
deep-pocket challenge anywhere in America. It is not cheap to
build housing. It costs money. And so, you are cutting 51
percent of the budget while you recognize that there is a
homelessness crisis, there is an affordable housing emergency,
and the rent is too damn high in America.
Now, I represent the district that has probably the biggest
concentration of NYCHA apartments, that is the New York City
Housing Authority apartments, in the city. Now there is 570,000
people live in the city of New York under NYCHA.
Now, you were born in Richardson, Texas. That town has
119,000 people. So NYCHA is five times the size of the city
that you were born in. And they have a $78 billion deficit, a
deep hole for capital needs: boilers, roof work, pointing work,
faulty elevators, flooding, mold in the apartments, lead paint
in the apartment. These are the conditions in NYCHA, a $78
billion hole for capital needs, and you are cutting the budget
51 percent. Now I know that you are familiar----
Secretary Turner. Sir, can I add--can I ask something?
Mr. Espaillat. I will ask you a question in a minute.
Secretary Turner. Okay, good. Thank you.
Mr. Espaillat. I know that you are familiar with some
football terms. You said so in your testimony. So I am going to
just highlight some of the cuts: $27.2 billion or 40 percent
cut to rental and homeless assistance program. To me that
sounds like roughing the passer. A $2.2 billion or 71 percent
cut to housing construction, supply, and preservation. That
sounds to me like pass interference. A $3.4 billion or 100
percent cut to economic development programs. To me that sounds
very much like a delay of game. A $254 million or 100 percent
cut to self-sufficiency and pathways to home ownership
programs. That is seems that it is a false start.
Mr. Secretary, you have engaged in personal foul on the
American people. These cuts are severe and they are going to
exacerbate the homeless crisis. They are going to further throw
into crisis the affordable housing emergency and the rent is
going to continue to be too damn high. You are cutting 51
percent of the budget. Housing is an expensive endeavor. It is
no longer a cheap endeavor anywhere in America. Anywhere in the
world it is a deep pocket issue and people are sleeping on the
street. And you are doing these cuts so that you can give money
to people that sleep in mansions, that sleep in Fifth Avenue
multimillion dollar condos, that have lakeside houses and
beachfront properties. That is what you are doing.
You are not doing God's work. That is not God's work.
Fifty-one percent cut, that is devastating. That is a personal
foul, Mr. Chairman--Madam Chair. And I yield back. I reclaim my
time.
Mrs. Bice. The referee may have to call a timeout moving
forward.
Secretary Turner. Ma'am, can I answer? Can I answer this?
Mrs. Bice. The gentleman has yielded his time.
The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Joyce, is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good morning.
I am sorry I was at another hearing, but I am trying to, like
the chairman, I am trying to work between two of them.
Secretary Turner, I recognize the administration's efforts
to make tough but thoughtful budget decisions aimed at
promoting efficiency and accountability across Federal
programs. I also appreciate HUD's critical role in long-term
disaster recovery and their partnership with other agencies in
helping communities transition from emergency response to
sustainable rebuilding.
As you are aware, both FEMA and HUD specifically work in
tandem to assist communities in recovering and rebuilding after
natural disasters: FEMA by providing temporary housing, and HUD
by facilitating the transition to permanent housing solutions.
In light of the proposed changes to the Community Development
Block Grant Disaster Recovery program and the fiscal year 2026
budget, how does HUD plan to uphold its mission in this space,
particularly as it relates to supporting disaster affected
families and communities?
Further, could you share how HUD's plans to maintain its
critical role in ensuring disaster survivors are successfully
transitioned from costly temporary FEMA housing into more
stable long-term housing solutions, even with the proposed
reductions?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And thank you, Congressman.
Great to meet you.
You know, HUD is very focused on our critical mission. We
are very focused on disaster recovery, we are focused on
housing, we are focused on homelessness. And that has not been
lost on us. We understand that this is a different way of the
distribution of the funds. This is a different paradigm that we
are speaking about in the budget that the President and myself
are proposing today. We will not allow disaster recovery and
those that need assistance in disaster recovery to be lost on
us. Working with the states, working with our nonprofits,
working with the faith-based organizations, and obviously, sir,
you and your colleagues on the committee, it is not that it
will be lost, it is just that it is a different way of
distributing these funds. And sir, we believe that this will
help us to more effectively and efficiently serve those that
are in need in our country.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, sir. It was a great answer, but it
didn't demonstrate a plan.
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Joyce. Do you have a plan?
Secretary Turner. Yes. And so in the budget, there is money
in our budget to make sure that HUD works with states to
develop these strategies and develop a plan. The conversations
have begun. And so we do recognize that it is a new way of
doing it. We are focused on making sure that the strategy is
not just implemented but executed in every state and working
with this committee and with states and stakeholders in those
states. The money is in our budget to do so. And so that plan
has begun and is forthcoming. And I do, I look forward to your
input and how we can best do this new strategy.
Mr. Joyce. One thing I know is you are right, disasters
come. All over the country disasters come and you need to be
ready for them.
Secretary, the administration has highlighted the
underutilized lands as one of the strategies to deliver on the
promise of more affordable housing, including ongoing
coordination between HUD and the Department of Interior under
Secretary Burgum's leadership. Can you provide an update on how
this interagency effort is being implemented and what outcomes
HUD anticipates in terms of expanding access to affordable
housing?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. So Secretary Burgum and I, we
signed an MOU, as you have stated, to create a joint task force
to identify underutilized Federal lands around our country.
Department of Interior has about 500 million acres that are
available to be used to build affordable housing, workforce
housing, all types of housing around our country. And so HUD's
priority in this is to identify where housing is needed. DOI,
their priority is to identify the lands that can be used and
then work with local states and stakeholders to say what type
of housing is needed in this particular area.
So I just--Secretary Burgum and I were in Nevada meeting
with the governor and stakeholders there as it pertains to
affordable housing in that state and working with the
leadership there, with BLM and others. And so, sir, we are well
underway on the task force. There is much work to be done, but
the identification of the land and identification of the
housing needs is underway. And so we look forward to working
with states and localities on this strategy.
Mr. Joyce. Can you elaborate where in your 2026 budget you
request the department intends to leverage support for that
effort, in particular as it relates to infrastructure planning
or technical assistance needed to make these underutilized
lands viable?
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And so that is why a joint
partnership with DOI will come in from HUD's budget, obviously,
and from DOI, but also technical assistance. HUD still has
technical assistance where we can help with these development
of housing and how we implement this around the country as we
move forward.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
Mrs. Bice. The chair recognizes the ranking member of the
full committee, Ms. DeLauro, for 5 minutes.
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I just would
like to follow up for one second with my colleague.
This is the Appropriations Committee. We deal in amounts of
money. A program, what is the amount, what is it going to do,
how is it going to accomplish that? So far we can't seem to get
any information about budget detail, about what it is you all
are doing. It is a lot of great words, but what are dollars and
cents?
So I think you just have to keep in mind that we
appropriate money based on needs and what the programs are, and
then we make a decision as to whether or not we ought to be
doing that or not. So please get us information on the plan,
the dollar amount, what you plan to do.
Listen, your budget request, quite honestly, unleashes a
catastrophe of evictions, homelessness at an unbelievable
scale. Three-quarters of a million of Americans experience
homeless on any given night. Cost of housing is out of control.
Middle-class families, working families are being suffocated.
Folks in this country today work paycheck to paycheck, one
emergency or layoff from financial ruin. Yet your budget
eliminates critical lifelines that keep that help to keep a
roof over most people's heads in this Nation.
Let me just say with regard to a question here, we have
Ansonia, Connecticut, which I represent. Housing authority is
smaller, public housing authority. They want to expand
programs, services especially for seniors. Residents have lived
in this Naugatuck Valley their whole lives. They don't have
income to sustain their homes, but they lack affordable housing
options. Based on recent National data, it is becoming clear
that homelessness among seniors is rising. Some experts expect
the trend will continue. People over age 50 used to make up 10
percent of the homeless population. Now it is close to half, a
particularly vulnerable population with its own set of
challenges.
Over 2 million seniors rely on Federal rental assistance to
age in place. You are cutting HUD rental assistance by 43
percent. You propose to eliminate dedicated Section 202 housing
for the elderly program, pushing more responsibility to states.
Everyone on this committee knows the states don't have the
wherewithal to be able to do this. There is no assessment of
whether or not they have the capacity to manage.
You propose completely upending homelessness programs. You
are shifting to short-and medium-term assistance with no
funding for the type of permanent supportive housing that could
chronically homeless people with age-related infirmities need
to achieve. We have a program in my district in Connecticut. It
is called--it is a senior housing program called the Towers.
And you have frozen their grant and not giving them the
opportunity to deal with critical renovations to a 55-year-old
building.
Given housing affordability, homelessness crisis facing our
seniors who already live on a fixed income, how are you
justifying eliminating dedicated programs that support housing
developments with onsite supportive services tailored to
seniors' needs?
Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am. Madam DeLauro, so great to
meet you, ma'am. And as I said in my opening statement, with
this new budget proposal under the President's leadership, this
will help us to more effectively serve----
Ms. DeLauro. How?
Secretary Turner [continuing]. The most vulnerable----
Ms. DeLauro. How?
Secretary Turner [continuing]. Effectively serve----
Ms. DeLauro. How?
Secretary Turner [continuing]. Elderly and disabled.
Ms. DeLauro. Answer my question.
Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. DeLauro. How? What is the way in which you are going to
deal and justify eliminating dedicated programs that support
onsite supportive services tailored to seniors' needs? How are
you doing that?
Secretary Turner. Working with the states, ma'am. And when
I say working with the states, if I may, states understand
their unique needs as it pertains to the elderly, as pertains
to the disabled----
Ms. DeLauro. What is the program that will address that?
Secretary Turner [continuing]. As it pertains to the most
vulnerable.
Ms. DeLauro. What is the amount of money that is going to
be required to do this? What portion of it will be Federal?
What portion will be state? What is the program?
Secretary Turner. Well, as you said, ma'am, you all are
appropriators. You control the purse strings. My job is to
maximize the budget that you do give me. And with maximize this
budget, we will work with the states to identify, if you will,
maam, where those needs are.
Ms. DeLauro. You can't have a budget, with all due
respect----
Secretary Turner. Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. DeLauro [continuing]. You cannot have a budget that
doesn't have any numbers, that doesn't have any programmatic
direction----
Secretary Turner. Ma'am, you have the budget in front of
you.
Ms. DeLauro [continuing]. That doesn't tell us what we are
doing. But what is this specific program on seniors? What are
you doing? You are eliminating elderly housing, Section 202,
which has been in place for years. I worked for a city many
years ago and it was Section 202 in which we worked with
providers to do this.
You know, my time has run out. But no, zero. Zero
programmatic information, zero details on the budget.
Secretary Turner. Ma'am, status quo is done.
Mrs. Bice. The ranking member is----
Secretary Turner. We will do it a different way.
Ms. Delauro. I would like to ask unanimous consent to put
my opening statement into the record because I couldn't be
here.
Mrs. Bice. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you.
Mrs. Bice. I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Bice. Mr. Secretary, first let me start out by saying
there is a famous quote that I think all of us here know well,
and that is the definition of insanity is doing the same thing
over and over and over and expecting a different outcome. And
based on your opening statement, you are looking to do
something different. You are looking to try to find a different
path to make sure that we are addressing homelessness in our
country.
Mr. Secretary, when were you confirmed?
Secretary Turner. February the 5th.
Mrs. Bice. So we are talking about 120-plus days ago. Is
that correct?
Secretary Turner. Yes.
Mrs. Bice. Is it safe to say that you have a framework for
a plan that you want to move forward, but maybe not all of the
nuts and bolts that you need to be able to present that--those
details today?
Secretary Turner. Indeed, the framework is there and we are
working on the nuts and bolts. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Bice. I want to give you the opportunity to address
some of the concerns that have been raised here today. But I
also want to bring up one other point, and that is I was
surprised to find out that there are approximately 3,000 public
housing authorities across the country. Do you feel like that
those housing authorities are working efficiently for HUD?
Secretary Turner. No, ma'am. And we do have over 3,000
public housing authorities around our country, many of which
are not operating appropriately, some are. I have traveled
extensively in just 120 days that I have been in this
assignment around our country and visited public housing
authorities.
I was just at NYCHA to address the congressman who was
asking me about NYCHA. NYCHA is $200 million in arrears and
that is with a $2.3 billion appropriation from the
appropriators, $2.3 billion in fiscal year 2024. And yet they
are $200 million in arrears. They have 250,000 people on the
waiting list.
Just while I was there last Wednesday, a 21-year-old was
shot in the neck and killed at a public barbecue. And no arrest
has been made. So, tell me, how are the residents there safe?
They are living in deplorable conditions. It is not safe. The
New York NYPD is not responding the way they should. And so
that is just one example of a public housing authority not
being efficient, but yet we want to continue the status quo.
I am not interested in doing business as usual. The
President is not interested. And so, the answer is, this is a
new culture. It is a new paradigm.
And another housing authority that I visit, the residents
were even afraid to tell me what was going on in fear of
repercussions by the board of directors there. There was one
lady there that has been living there since 1973. That means
she has been living there her entire life. Her mother, her, and
now her children, three generational, multiple generations
living in public housing authority. That is not what it is
meant for. It is meant for temporary assistance, but then to be
raised out of public assistance to a life of self-
sustainability.
And so no, ma'am, public housing authorities as a whole are
not operating efficiently.
Mrs. Bice. The budget proposes charging--I am sorry,
changing five programs into a singular block grant program. It
is been mentioned earlier, called the State Rental Assistance
Program. How can we trust that states with governors, including
Gavin Newsom, who spent $18.5 billion on affordable housing in
the past year, or 42.5 percent of HUD's fiscal year 2026 budget
request, will use the block grant funding appropriately?
Because they clearly have not been successful in addressing the
homelessness issue.
Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am. And that is a great question
and it is what I think we should talk about, because, you know,
this is a new shift, and we have to work with the appropriate
leaders in the appropriate states. And some states, as you
know, ma'am, are better than others. Leadership in some states
is greater than others. We see right now what is going on in
L.A., you know, with the agitators and the riots and the attack
on our law enforcement. And so, you know, California is not a
good example of proper leadership, but there are many around
our country that do have proper leadership. And so I am looking
forward to working with them as they implement, you know, the
funding and distribute it appropriately to take care of the
needs in their particular state.
Mrs. Bice. Mr. Secretary, let me wrap up by saying, first
of all, we appreciate you being here today. Homelessness is an
issue. It is an issue across this country, and we want to make
sure that your organization is addressing it in a thoughtful,
responsible way. Certainly, you have heard today from members
of this committee the concerns around foster children aging out
of the system, veterans' homelessness, which is something that
I am passionate about as a member of the MilCon-VA Subcommittee
as well on Appropriations.
So we all look forward to working with you to make sure
that we are using taxpayer dollars judiciously, wisely, but
also trying to find solutions to the problems that we face as
it relates to homelessness.
With that, my time has now expired.
Mr. Quigley. Madam Chair?
Mrs. Bice. And at this----
Mr. Quigley. I know we are going to----
Mrs. Bice. For what purpose does the gentleman seek
recognition?
Mr. Quigley. I really appreciate that. I thought we were
going to have a second round. Just ask unanimous consent to
submit for the record four pages of stories from women in
Chicago, who are currently using these vouchers to keep
themselves and their children safe.
Mrs. Bice. Without objection----
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Quigley. Thank you.
Mrs. Bice [continuing]. That will be entered into the
record.
And with that, I would like to give the ranking member, Mr.
Clyburn, the ability to offer a closing statement. Mr. Clyburn,
you are recognized.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you,
Mr. Secretary, for being here.
Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Clyburn. Mr. Secretary, I grew up in a parsonage and
when I told my dad that I had decided against going to the
seminary, he said to me, well, son, I suspect the world would
much rather see a sermon than to hear one. I have never
forgotten that. And I try to conduct myself here in such a way
that people will see in my work a good, productive sermon.
Now, I have listened to your testimony. I have looked at
some comments you have made in the past, especially as it
relates to DEI. You said that DEI is inexcusable propaganda.
Well, Mr. Secretary, I beg to differ. I grew up in South
Carolina. I still live in South Carolina. My parents all are
South Carolinians--were South Carolinians. And what you propose
today, though, you have been using the word ``refocus,''
refocus means to change directions. What you have been
testifying to is retrogression. It means to return to something
of former, usually something that is worse. And cutting 51
percent out of a budget will not refocus the budget. It will
return to what that budget and those plans were when you had
that 51 percent less.
So I would say to you today that when you look at States'
rights, I am not going to be concerned about this if you give
the right to South Carolina because you are looking at that guy
that wrote the South Carolina Fair Housing Law and we implement
that law. I ran it. The guy that wrote the South Carolina Bill
of Rights for Handicapped Citizens. I was not in the--I have
never been in the state legislature, so I know how to manage
stuff. That is all I have ever been in. And the budget you are
proposing, you cannot possibly meet the needs of the American
people with that budget.
We all talk about race and sex discrimination. But the big
problem, if you look at all of the protected classes in
housing, you know which one gets the most discrimination? The
disabled. The disabled. And that is sinful for us to sit here
and cut the budget for the disabled.
I want to close with this. I represent North Charleston.
According to the Princeton study, North Charleston led the
Nation in evictions. I represent Columbia, South Carolina, and
I live in Columbia, number six in evictions. There is something
those two communities got in common that I want you to focus on
and I want this committee to think about. Those two, Fort
Jackson is in Columbia, the Charleston Air Force Base in North
Charleston. The communities that house most of our servicemen
and -women are leading the Nation in evictions.
During the coronavirus, I led the investigation into these
evictions. Servicemen and -women, people serving abroad while
their children and spouses are back home getting evicted, and
here we are cutting the money to address those needs.
Mr. Secretary, I look forward to playing a round of golf
with you so that we can really discuss this when we have more
time. So I will close.
Secretary Turner. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Clyburn. If I may, Madam Vice Chair, I once read the
story of a man who played at a country club and he came upon
the hole and there was a pond between him and the green. And he
turned to his caddy, he said, Caddy, what do the members of
this club use when they are faced with this shot? And the caddy
says, well, most of them use a six iron for this. So he pulled
out of the six iron, addressed the ball, hit it perfectly in
the water. The ball fell in the water. He turned to his caddy
and said, Caddy, I thought you said that most of the people
playing from this point use a six iron. He said, most of them
do. Well, I will just hit this six iron about as sweet as I
could hit it and the ball is in the water. Most of them do.
So we have to learn, we can't follow what most people do.
What we have to do is size up the situation, think about your
capabilities, and then address the ball. Use the right
equipment and we might get to the green. Don't do what most of
them do.
I yield back.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Ranking Member Clyburn.
Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir.
Mrs. Bice. And we have had a lot of sports analogies today.
We talked about baseball, University of Arkansas, we talked
football, we talked golf. We did not talk about Thunder
basketball, so I feel obligated as the Member from Oklahoma
representing the Oklahoma City Thunder to give a plug to them.
So, Mr. Secretary, we appreciate your time today. Thank you
for this robust conversation. We look forward, as I mentioned,
to working with you in the future to make sure that we are
addressing the homeless population across this country.
And with that, we are adjourned.
Secretary Turner. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:34 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
W I T N E S S E S
----------
Page
Rocheleau, Chris, Federal Aviation Administration................ 5
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Answers to submitted questions............................... 42
Turner, Hon. Scott, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development.................................................... 64
Prepared statement........................................... 67
Answers to submitted questions............................... 106
[all]