[Senate Hearing 119-072]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-072
TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVEL-
OPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPRO-
PRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
H.R. 4552/S. 2465
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION,
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2026, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
Department of Transportation
Department of Housing and Urban Development
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
60-282 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chair
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Vice
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska Chair
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
JERRY MORAN, Kansas JACK REED, Rhode Island
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
KATIE BOYD BRITT, Alabama CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
JON OSSOFF, Georgia
Elizabeth McDonnell, Staff Director
Evan Schatz, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi, Chairman
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine (ex KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York,
officio) Ranking
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas PATTY MURRAY, Washington (ex
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia officio)
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota JACK REED, Rhode Island
JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
KATIE BOYD BRITT, Alabama CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
Professional Staff
Michael Clarke
Jake Lynch
Cameron O'Brien
Jason Woolwine
Josephine Eckert (Minority)
Kelsey Daniels (Minority)
Rajat Mathur (Minority)
Jessica Sun (Minority)
Administrative Support
Teddy Coes
C O N T E N T S
----------
HEARINGS
Thursday, May 15, 2025
Page
Department of Transportation..................................... 1
Wednesday, June 11, 2025
Department of Housing and Urban Development...................... 53
----------
back matter
List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements....... 93
TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 15, 2025
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met at 10:02 a.m. in Room 192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Cindy Hyde-Smith (chairwoman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Hyde-Smith, Collins, Boozman, Hoeven,
Kennedy, Moran, Britt, Gillibrand, Murray, Durbin, Reed, Coons,
Schatz, and Van Hollen.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
STATEMENT OF HON. SEAN DUFFY, SECRETARY
opening statement of senator cindy hyde-smith
Senator Hyde-Smith. Good morning. The Secretary of
Transportation, Mr. Sean Duffy, who will testify on the
President's fiscal budget of 2026 request for the department.
And I'm delighted to be joined by our new Ranking Member,
Senator Gillibrand.
And starting off this morning, I want to recognize the
Lilley family. I just found out that you were here, and we're
so honored that you were here and grateful to have you with us
today. I look forward to crafting our fiscal year of 2026 bill,
with the same collaborative spirit that former Chairman Schatz
and I shared in recent years, and the programs and projects
that all of our bill support have a direct impact on the lives
of all Americans every day. We're thrilled to have our Chairman
here with us today, Susan Collins, of the overall Committee.
And we will get started.
While the priorities in Mississippi may differ from those
in New York State, we can all agree on the underlying mission
of enduring a safe and reliable transportation system. Last
year, our Subcommittee produced an appropriation bill that had
strong bipartisan support and was passed nearly unanimously
coming out of committee.
That was a lot of hard work to get there, but as a result,
our former majority leader chose not to bring any of the 12
appropriation bills to the floor last year, and we were forced
into a continuing resolution, which seriously undermines
Congress's ability to fulfill its most fundamental duties. I
know that Chairman Collins and Vice-Chair Murray are once again
committed to making sure that all of the fiscal year 2026
appropriation bills are marked up in committee and considered
in the full Senate.
Secretary Duffy, thank you for being here today to testify
on the budget request from the Department of Transportation. I
have enjoyed our recent conversations and appreciate our mutual
admiration of rural America. While we recently received the
skinny budget, as we call it, we look forward to a more
detailed breakdown of a proposed budget funding. Our bill
simply cannot be written without it.
I look forward to hearing more about Department of
Transportation (DOT) priorities. Our Subcommittee is very
interested in better understanding the magnitude of staffing
reductions throughout the Department in order to ensure that
the Transportation Department has the workforce necessary to
carry out its mission.
We all know that just days into your tenure as Secretary,
you were faced with a tragedy that underscores the critical
role of USDOT plays in transportation safety. We continue to
mourn those who were lost during the horrifying incident over
the Potomac, and we recognize that the status quo is not
sustainable. We must take bold action to prevent future
aviation disasters.
As I mentioned to you in our call together last week, I'm
truly thankful to have you at the helm of the Department during
this critical period for aviation safety and transportation
writ large. Your sincerity and determination in wanting to
solve the problem of modernizing our nation's air traffic
system is a welcome change.
And I know you inherited a lot. You've got a tall drink of
water in front of you. Getting this proposal right is
critically important to the traveling public, so we look
forward to receiving more details of your recently announced
plan. I am very supportive of the additional funding requested
for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to hire more air
traffic controllers to manage the increased traffic in our
national airspace systems, and to bring on more critical safety
staff to help address the ongoing FAA aircraft certification
reform and oversight efforts.
While there's a lot to talk about the Department's budget
request, I was disappointed to see that the Administration
proposes drastic cuts to the Essential Air Service (EAS)
program. As we have discussed, the EAS program connects our
nation's rural communities to the broader transportation
network by facilitating safe air travel for customers,
traveling to and from smaller markets like in Greenville,
Mississippi, Tupelo, and Hattiesburg, Mississippi.
I know you understand the importance of this program from
your time as a Congressman when you had multiple EAS-supported
airports in your district. Drastically cutting this program
will have a severe impact on rural communities and regions that
rely on having access to the broader transportation network.
Additionally, new businesses rarely locate in areas without
dependable commercial air service. So, supporting these rural
airports is vital for future economic development.
I'm very pleased to see the significant investment this
Administration is proposing in rail safety, nearly doubling the
funding for the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
Improvements Program. In contrast, the last Administration
proposed slashing funding for this program by more than 50
percent. I have also been encouraged by your strong statements
of support in our nation's ship building industry and for
improving the pipeline of qualified merchant mariners.
Our bill encompasses the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in
Kings Point, New York, which you recently visited, as well as
six state maritime academies. These institutions are absolutely
essential for facilitating commerce, and strengthening our
national security by educating training the next generation of
American Mariners.
The Administration's support for the maritime industry is
further demonstrated by the funding proposed for the Port
Infrastructure Development Program, otherwise known as PIDP.
The request recommends $550 million in Port Infrastructure
Development Program (PIDP), the request is $500 million above
the current spending level. It's also worth noting that the
previous Administration sought just 80 million for PIDP in its
fiscal year 2025 budget request.
In addition, the increased funding requested for the
Assistance to Small Shipyards grants totaling $105 million is
another strong signal of support for American ship building,
which is important to Senator Collins and myself for sure.
As we approach the final year of the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) funding, and our authorization
counterparts work toward a surface transportation
reauthorization bill, we need to make sure that our
appropriations bill strikes a balance to meet the needs of all
Americans, especially those in rural communities which face
unique transportation and economic development challenges.
To conclude, I believe that our funding decision should be
guided by fiscal responsibility and with the taxpayers in mind.
Secretary Duffy, I look forward to hearing from you, and
working together for the American people to ensure that we have
the safest, most reliable transportation network in the entire
world.
Now, I turn to Senator Gillibrand for her opening
statements.
statement of senator kirsten gillibrand
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Chair Hyde Smith. I'm
honored to be serving alongside you at the THUD Subcommittee. I
first want to acknowledge the family that is here. No one
understands the need to improve air traffic safety and aviation
safety than Tim and Sherri Lilley, we mourn with you at the
tragic loss of your son, Sam.
I've met with many families who have lost loved ones to air
crashes, particularly the Colgan Air Flight that crashed in
Buffalo. But I can tell you from experience, the most effective
advocates for reform and change are parents such as you who
have lost such a dear loved one. So, your presence alone is
extremely meaningful, and we're very grateful that you're here.
Thank you.
The Subcommittee has a very longstanding reputation as
being one of the most bipartisan subcommittees, so I'm very
excited to be part of it. It's also bipartisan because every
state has enormous transportation and housing needs, and the
only way to address them is for us to work together. The
transportation needs of New York may be different from
Mississippi, but we all want safe and efficient transportation,
and I know that we can work together for our local communities.
In New York, every single mode of transportation matters.
Transit and rail service are the backbone of New York City, and
provides the most efficient way to get around. New York's
airports serve as a gateway to travelers from across the world,
and we've seen how critically important this is to our air
traffic control system. Over the last week, we saw what
happened at Newark that was frightening, terrifying, in fact
not to mention the challenges that we faced at all airports
across New York.
The maritime needs in New York are significant with the
Merchant Marine Academy and the SUNY Maritime College. I look
forward to working with you on those two projects specifically,
to really show what America can do. Highways and bridges are a
lifeline for connecting the cities and suburbs in every New
York community. We really do need the Federal government to
fund all modes of transportation, and so picking and choosing
is unwise.
Secretary Duffy, welcome to the Subcommittee and thank you
for your energy and enthusiasm in rebuilding America's
infrastructure. I'm particularly excited about your focus on
aviation modernization and safety. Your budget request for
fiscal year 2026 includes a lot of good news for
transportation, particularly for FAA's air traffic controller
hiring and training, highways and rail grant programs, and ship
building revitalization. The budget request also cuts $1.1
billion from DOT, but does not specify which programs have been
cut.
So, I hope that you'll be more specific about these cuts
because we know both the good news and the bad news. Cuts to
Amtrak and public transportation will be very harmful to New
York and to the Eastern Seaboard. As I've said before, an all
of the above strategy is what's appropriate for New York State.
Aviation safety will also remain a top priority.
I also look forward to hearing about your modernization
proposal for the air traffic control system. Everyone agrees
that modernization is urgently needed. We all experience flight
delays and cancellations, but nothing is more terrifying than
what happened at Newark. So, we really have to focus on that.
The Administration's overall budget includes a lot of cuts
and savings. In fact, there's $163 billion in savings from non-
defense discretionary programs. So, we know the Administration
has money on the table. So far, we have not seen a budget
proposal that would put any of these savings towards air
traffic control modernization. So, we're hopeful that that will
be done.
Aside from the budget, I'm worried that the Department has
buried itself in red tape by reviewing 3,200 competitive grants
that have been previously awarded eligible and met all other
criteria. I think you might need to hire two dozen lawyers to
get that done if you want to do that on a timely basis. There's
no doubt that the months-long effort to re-review grants is
slowing down transportation projects in every single state.
The Department's also struggling because it's lost
thousands of employees through the Deferred Resignation
Program. It simply makes no sense to create more unnecessary,
duplicative work on grants when you have fewer people to re-
review them. Despite these challenges, I'm very confident that
you want to help rebuild American infrastructure with the
traditional bipartisan cooperation that this subcommittee will
afford.
So, thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your testimony today. And
thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. We're going to begin with
the questions.
Mr. Secretary, at last year's budget hearing, I asked your
predecessor about private-public partnerships with the FAA
through the Federal Contract Tower Program. Specifically, I
asked about how the Trent Lott International Airport in
Pascagoula can become the eighth Mississippi airport to join
this important program. I was told then that the Department
through the FAA was making significant progress with the
airport and bringing this tower into the Federal program.
Yet, today, the Pascagoula Tower has still not been
admitted. I do not understand what is causing the delay, but it
is troubling that it has taken so long for this transfer to
occur. Mr. Secretary, what is the most recent update on this
project, and will you commit to working with me and my staff to
help the Trent Lott International Airport finally join the
Federal Contract Tower Program this year?
Secretary Duffy. Madam Chair, I appreciate the question. I
don't have an update for you at this point right now, but I
will be happy to go to the FAA and get an update, and give it
to you as quickly as possible.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Great. All right. I am going to pause
my questions. I think we have everyone that we need here, and
we will go with your opening statement.
summary statement of hon. sean duffy
Secretary Duffy. Oh, thank you. Chair Hyde-Smith, Ranking
Member Gillibrand, Chair Collins, Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for having me today. I appreciate it. It's good to
elevate from the House and come over here to see you all in the
Senate. It's great to be here.
My aim over the course of this hearing is to provide you a
sense of how building big, beautiful infrastructure is at the
top of President Trump's priorities, and how we can all work
together to build the infrastructure that connects our people
and moves our products across this country. That is the aim.
Our Department has already saved taxpayers more than $9.5
billion in the President's first 100-plus days in office. Those
savings include money pulled from projects tied to social
justice, to climate requirements. There's been some boondoggle
projects and inefficiencies at the Department that we've
focused on to garner these savings.
Now, a lot of you have reached out to me and have concerns
about grants. I get a lot of calls from you and your staff.
Just to note, we've inherited an unprecedented backlog of 3,200
awarded projects without signed grant agreements. Many of these
projects date back to 2022. The last administration, I would
argue, were unorganized and they were unfocused as projects
around the country were stalled by inaction and by
inefficiencies.
No one is more frustrated with the inefficiencies of the
process more so than I am. Currently, get this, there are 10 to
14 different systems at DOT to track the grants at DOT. There's
not one system. There's 10 to 14. So, I'm looking to streamline
that process so we have one process to track grants. I would
like to put a dashboard out so all of you and your constituents
can actually look in real time and see where grants are at and
how they're moving through the process.
I think that kind of transparency is critical for this
body, but also for the American people and your constituents
who look to see where they're at in the grant-making process. I
want to give you some radical transparency if we can make this
system work. It's under development right now.
The Department of Transportation, on the budget front, is
one of the few non-defense Federal agencies to receive an
increase in Federal funding under the President's budget for
fiscal year 2026. The reason is pretty simple; the President,
he likes to build. He's a builder. He spent his career
building, and he sees what we do at DOT as an agency, a
Department that builds things, and he cares about that.
Our budget carefully focuses taxpayers' resources on items
critical to our most fundamental mission of safety and
investing in transportation infrastructure. We have pushed
forward with the approval of over 400 grants totaling $4.9
billion in the President's first 100-plus days. In total, the
President's budget request of $26.7 billion in new
discretionary funding for fiscal year 2026 is a $1.5 billion
increase from fiscal year 2025, or simply put, a 5.8 percent
increase.
And I know my time is about to expire, but I would be happy
to take your questions on what's been happening at Newark, what
systematic problems existed at Newark that caused the outages
with air traffic control, and also our ideas on how we have to
build a brand-new air traffic control system. The system we
currently use, it truly is 25, 35, 40 years old in some places.
We should have paid way more attention to it as a country.
We've let it age, and now we're seeing the cracks of that age
play out in real time for us.
I believe the system is safe. There are multiple
redundancies throughout the system that keep people safe. Even
the frustrations in Newark when we've slowed traffic down, the
key is not efficiency, the key is safety. And so, when we slow
traffic, it's about keeping people safe. When they take off, we
want them to land at their destination, and so we'll make sure
that we have a flight load that matches the system and the
number of controllers that we have on duty.
But with that said, I agree with America's frustration. No
one likes delays. No one likes cancellations. Love airports,
but I don't want to spend four hours in an airport waiting to
see if my flight's going to take off. And I think that's the
feeling of so many Americans. And I think this is a moment in
time that we can all work together to make the critical
investments and execute on those investments safely but in a
really fast timeframe.
We can't wait 5, 10, 15 years to do this. The build can't
take 10 or 15 years. We have to do this at an expedited speed.
And if we do that, I think this is a moment in time we're going
to be able to pay these investments forward, not just for
everyone here, but we're going to pay it forward for future
generations, and we can build an air traffic control system.
I use the example of my iPhone. I think I'm over my time,
but if I could just say that, you can update your iPhone,
right? It's a device that if Apple develops new software, they
send me a notice and I can upgrade this. I just put AI on my
phone as an upgrade from Apple. I can't update my flip phone.
Remember the Razr? Old school. You can't update that, but
you can update this. I want to build a system that's like the
iPhone that we can continue to build upon as new technology
becomes available and we can improve the efficiency of our
airspace and the safety of airspace. And I'd be happy to talk
more about that and today's hearing, but also as we look to
future conversations about what's necessary and what's needed
with that.
I'm happy to take your questions. I'm sorry for going over,
that's a critical mistake on my part. I understand the
frustration of someone testifying going over. But happy to take
your questions and thank you for having me here today.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sean P. Duffy
Chairman Hyde-Smith, Ranking Member Gillibrand, and Members of the
subcommittee--thank you for inviting me to testify before you today. My
aim over the course of this hearing is to provide you a sense of how
building big, beautiful infrastructure is at the top of the President's
priorities, and how we can work together on this bipartisan effort.
Our Department has already saved taxpayers more than $9.5 billion
in the President's first 100 days. Those savings include money pulled
from projects tied up by wasteful DEI and climate requirements. We
inherited an unprecedented backlog of over 3,200 awarded projects
without signed grant agreements. Many of these projects dated back to
2022. The last administration was unorganized and unfocused as projects
around the country were stalled by inaction, and inefficiency. No one
is more frustrated with the inefficiencies of this process than I am.
Currently there are 10-14 different systems to track the status of
grants across the Department. Under my leadership, I am committed to
consolidating all of this information into one dashboard so grantees
and can see how our money is spent. I promise to ensure radical
transparency to you all as well as the American people.
The Department of Transportation is one of the few non-Defense
Federal agencies to receive an increase in funding under the
President's Budget for the FY 2026. The reason is simple: the president
wants to build. Our budget carefully focuses taxpayer resources on
items critical to our most fundamental mission of safety and investing
in transportation infrastructure. We have pushed forward with the
approval of 405 grants totaling $4.9 billion in the President's first
100 days. In total, the President's Budget requests $26.7 billion in
new discretionary funding for FY 2026, or $1.5 billion more than FY
2025 enacted, about a 5.8 percent increase.
We do not take additional funds from hard-working taxpayers for
granted in an era where government has become too big, too inefficient,
and too wasteful. We have carefully planned for these dollars to fund
urgent projects that once built, will serve future generations for
decades.
Our budget requests $18 billion in discretionary appropriations for
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), $1 billion more than FY 2025
enacted. Recent tragedies such as the mid- air collision above DCA have
demonstrated the need to refocus our agency on the core mission of
safety. That's why we are increasing funding for the FAA. Specifically,
the budget supports hiring and training 2,500 new air traffic
controllers, revamping key air traffic facilities, and replacing
antiquated radar systems with the latest technology.
The President has also expressed the revitalization of American
shipbuilding as a central pillar of his Administration's plan to make
America great again. Our budget provides the Maritime Administration
(MARAD) $596 million more than FY 2025 enacted. These funds will enable
MARAD to carry out the President's historic executive order for the
creation of a golden age in shipbuilding. The request includes $550
million to reinforce port infrastructure and $105 million to resurrect
neglected shipyards. The budget also boosts the President's
infrastructure focus by providing an additional $770 million for INFRA-
the Nationally Significant Multimodal Freight & Highways Projects
program. Finally, our budget makes a five-fold investment in rail
safety and infrastructure by providing $500 million in additional
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program
(CRISI) funds.
There's so much more we can do together, and I look forward to
working with Congress on unlocking what's possible through these
historic investments to American infrastructure.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Well, we thank you for your opening
statement, and now we're going to go to Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. First,
before I begin my comments, let me salute you for your
leadership of this subcommittee. I once had the position that
you now hold, and I know how important it is, and I want to
welcome the new Vice-Chair as well. And I know that you'll work
together and continue your great work.
Mr. Secretary, I want to begin by thanking you for
recognizing so swiftly the need for replacement and
modernization of our air traffic control system. And the
presence of the Lilleys here today reminds us all of what is at
stake. So, thank you for being here as well.
For years, this committee has put money into modernizing
the air traffic control system, and we just never have seen
real results. A radar would be fixed here or there, but what we
really need to do is completely modernize the entire system.
And I know that that is your goal. That's going to cost
significant money, but it is an investment that we must make.
We are facing a crisis. When I learned from you that we were
still using copper rather than fiber, it is stunning.
So, my question to you is, will you work with the Committee
on the concept of having emergency funding that would cover the
entire cost of this much needed replacement?
Secretary Duffy. I appreciate the question, Senator, and
I'm grateful for the conversations you've had with me on this
topic. Yeah, I'm happy to work with this committee and the
whole body. I think what one of the mistakes of the past is we
did do piecemeal funding without a big vision. And sometimes we
were trying to deploy high-tech ideas where the system that we
were operating off of was not ready for those high-tech ideas.
And so, I would--what I'm going to ask, and I don't know
what vehicle you want to use, I don't know what the approach
will be from this body, but I would like this body to give the
DOT and the FAA the money upfront, advance appropriations. And
with that, I will be happy myself, or for the FAA, to come back
I think on a quarterly basis and give you updates on the
progress- good, bad, and ugly. Are we hitting our timelines?
Are we behind? Are we on budget? I think America and the body,
if you buy into this idea, deserve that.
I also think we're going to have to think about can we get
permitting reform? This can be slowed down by the permitting
process, but if we're laying fiber and we're not building, you
know, four lane highways, we're not building skyscrapers. It's
a pretty streamlined approach. But if we're going to build
fast, which is necessary, I do think we'll need permitting
reform as well from this body. And I think--I'm committed to
working with all of you on however you can envision us doing
this together. I would welcome the opportunity. Thank you,
Senator.
Senator Collins. Thank you. I also want to echo the Chair's
concerns about the Administration's budget cuts for the
Essential Air Service program. This program is a lifeline to
rural communities, not only in Maine, but across America. In
Maine, we have five airports that would not have commercial air
service but for the Essential Air Service program. They include
Augusta, Waterville, Hancock County, Bar Harbor, Rockland, and
Presque Isle, Maine. Just last weekend, I participated in a
groundbreaking for a new terminal at the Presque Isle Airport.
So, this is really important for economic development, for
getting to medical treatment, for tourism. It's so important to
rural America to have this program. How would you plan to
support air service to rural communities who rely on this
program absent a sufficiently funded EAS program?
Secretary Duffy. I anticipated I was going to get a number
of questions from virtually everyone on this panel about this
program. I understand your concern. I am going to work on
trying to bring efficiencies to the program, bring costs down
on the program. As I dig into that, I'd be happy to partner and
communicate with all of you on the Committee as we go through
that process.
Again, I do understand how meaningful Essential Air Service
is for so many communities across the country. And I need to do
some work in the coming weeks. And as I do that, I'd be happy
to have a conversation with you about how we're seeing it, and
how we think we can do more with less.
Senator Collins. Thank you. I think you're going to need to
do more with more but I appreciate your commitment to work with
the Committee.
[Laughter.]
Maine is home of the Maine Maritime Academy, which has a
well-earned reputation for educating some of the best mariners
anywhere in the world. And, fortunately, the faculty and the
midshipmen are eagerly awaiting the completion of the Academy's
new state of the art training vessel, which is going to greatly
enhance mariner training and preparedness.
I understand that you recently saw, made Maritime's
training vessel during a trip to the Philadelphia Shipyard, and
I welcome you to come see it again when it--after it has
completed its voyage to the beautiful coast of Maine. Could you
talk just briefly, because we're out of time, almost about the
emphasis that the Administration is placing on better preparing
our maritime workforce?
Secretary Duffy. Yeah. I appreciate the question, and I'll
be quick. The ship is beautiful. By the way, the Maritime
Administration (MARAD) is building ships on budget and on time.
The Maine is one of them. But again, I think we have to invest
in shipbuilding in America. The seas are so important for
defense, for moving products, and we have ceded this territory
to Japan, South Korea, to China specifically, and we have to
revitalize American shipbuilding.
It's going to take vision, and it's going to take help from
this body and presidential leadership, but I do think it's
important. And then when we have those ships, we need mariners
to sail those ships, and our academies across the country are
critical to bring out those young men and women who can who can
operate the great vessels for this country.
Senator Collins. We look forward to your visit.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Senator Collins. And Mr.
Secretary, as someone who represents dozens of airports in my
state, and we all frequently fly every week so we can get to DC
and back. We're all very troubled by the mishaps and challenges
within our nation's air traffic control systems.
But the staffing shortages and the technological issues,
particularly in the Newark airspace, they're not isolated
incidents. And these have been happening across the country,
and they highlight a system that is under tremendous strain.
But in many cases, the technology is outdated and simply cannot
meet the demands of the aviation system.
A perfect example is the use of the radar systems from the
'70s and the times that you've held up the floppy disc, and
said, ``we have to order things off of eBay to repair.'' It's
pretty alarming. Congress has a clear opportunity and a
responsibility to act, and I commend you and President Trump
for the recent commitment to invest in upgrading this critical
infrastructure and to reinforce the air traffic workforce. It
is certainly much needed and a step in the right direction.
But as you are aware, the Committee has a long bipartisan
history of directing more funding to the FAA for modernization
and for hiring critical safety staff, including air traffic
controllers, and then the safety inspectors. Will you explain
how the additional funds requested in your budget will serve as
a down payment to jumpstart the FAA's new modernization
efforts, and how this effort enhances existing next generation
activities for which the committee has previously appropriated
tens of billions of dollars throughout the years? Could you
explain that?
Secretary Duffy. Yes. So, if I could just make one
clarification. We do try to buy replacement parts on eBay for
this really old equipment. Sometimes, we can't even find it on
eBay. So, we're trying to use 3D printing to craft replacement
parts for the system that we use.
And just one other point, we do see cracks in the system.
We'll see those cracks to the tune of multiple hundreds per
week. Now, again, systems aren't going down, but if you look at
how the system is operating, it should be troubling for
everybody, and a warning sign that time is not on our side, and
it's important that we make the investments.
What we're doing right now, and I think the air traffic
control shortage is critical. We're 3,000 short. We've been
3,000 short for some time. And so, by the way, you'd think it's
not that hard to think through, just get more controllers into
the system and through the system. It actually is more
complicated. What we've done is we're trying to get the best
air traffic controllers who score on the test into the academy
first. So, we've made a best qualified category. If you score
in the 90-plus percentile, we're going to streamline you
quicker into the academy. If you're 80 to 90, you take a
different path. That's important.
The medical part of this was really challenging. It was
taking way too long, months. We've worked to get our academy
prospects getting the medicals done sooner, and then getting
the results from those tests back quicker. We're paying bonuses
to make that happen to the doctors who do the test, but we
don't have another choice. We have to move up our academy
grads.
We've offered counseling. I was at Oklahoma City, and a lot
of the students were saying, ``Listen, if we could just get
some extra help, I mean, we can make it, but a few of us are
having a little bit of issues in this little space, and instead
of washing out, we'll get those controllers to make it, but
could you give us a little bit of extra counseling, if we need
it--tutoring if we need it.''
And so, we've implemented that for those controllers who
are just on the edge to make sure they can make it through the
program because we have a 35 percent washout rate at the
academy. 35 percent. If we could just move that to 25 percent,
we're going to make up a real difference in the number of
controllers that we get through the academy, passing the test,
and then training up.
And then I think what's also important is we have great air
traffic controllers on the job. They can retire per the rules
of Congress after 25 years of service. Well, these are the most
experienced, so we're offering them a 20 percent bonus upfront
to stay in the job. ``Please don't retire, stay and provide a
service to your country and your community.'' And I think we're
going to get a good take up rate on that as well to keep more
of those experience controllers on the job.
And so, it's increasing the pipeline, and that's one part.
And then keeping those controllers on the job is the second
part. And I think those two taken together are going to--again,
it's going to take some time.
Can I just make one of the last point on this, and I just
want--I think it's important to note, I can't take a 20-year
experienced air traffic controller from Denver and move them to
the Philly TRACON for Senator Gillibrand and say, ``Let's just
use this controller to control the airspace.'' Because that
really great controller from Denver has to get trained up on
the Newark airspace, and it can take them upwards of a year to
get trained specifically on that airspace. So, I just can't
move controllers around and address the shortfalls that we have
in certain TRACONs or towers. It takes time.
And even, you know, training up more controllers once
you're out of the academy, it takes a year to 3 years to get
them fully trained. And so, this is going to be a longer
process, and all of us working together to have some vision is
going to be what's key to resolving this in the next, you know,
one, two, and 3 years.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. And thank you for that
forward thinking in the ways that we can extend that. I want to
talk briefly about the Air Traffic Collegiate Training
Initiative since we were talking about that. And you know, I've
spoken to you several times about my work in Mississippi to
help boost aviation workforce. So, critically important.
And the need in this field is obviously, as you're just
describing, endless, but the FAA Air Traffic Collegiate
Training Initiative in partnership with select colleges and
universities, has successfully taught the basics of the air
traffic control to qualified students, which allow them to
quickly progress through the FAA Academy.
What can this committee do to help the additional schools
into the Air Traffic Collegiate Training Initiative (ATC-TI)
program to help increase the number of the ATC staff, and would
that require also expanding capacity for the FAA Academy?
Secretary Duffy. That's a great question. So, I do think if
this committee wanted to consider a competitive grant program,
the simulators are expensive for air traffic controllers. And a
lot of these schools, it is challenging to make the $1 million-
plus investment in those simulators. And so, if there was a
competitive grant program that you all wanted to consider to go
to some of the--I think there's five schools around the country
that want to be involved in training up those air traffic
controllers--I think that would be welcome.
What's also at the--it's been hard. We have air traffic
controllers at Oklahoma City who are doing the training, and
the former air traffic controllers were teaching all of the
classes. What we've done is some of the classes, you don't need
an air traffic controller. You know, if we're doing some math
classes, we can take just a professor to teach the math class.
I don't need an air traffic controller.
So, we're going to bring in professors to teach classes
that professors can teach. And that means we have more air
traffic controllers to teach air traffic control classes, which
means we can expand the capacity of Oklahoma City, getting more
young people in and through the academy. And so, again, because
this--it's the chicken or the egg, but we weren't getting
enough air traffic controllers to come in and teach at the
academy. This is allowing us to use the ones that we have to
stretch them further. And again, that means I think we can--
next year we're at 2,000 right now, I think we can get to 2,300
in the next fiscal year in through the Academy.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. And briefly, because I'm way
over my time, would you speak to the importance of supporting
our small shipyards, especially in the wake of decreases in the
dedicated funding in recent years?
Secretary Duffy. 100 percent. Again, I think this is an
all-of-America approach to shipbuilding. Larger, smaller yards
have to be supported. And again, I think it's going to take all
shipyards and all of government if we're going to be successful
in ramping up American shipbuilding.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Well, the funding, the Administration's
proposal to fund these grants at $105 million is a
demonstration, certainly, that you're directing the support
there. And we certainly appreciate that.
I am going to, ask Senator Gillibrand, to state her
questions.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Mr.
Secretary, the Department of Defense is required to consult
with the Department of Transportation prior to deploying
counter-UAS systems. You and I have talked about this. I've
partnered with Senator Cotton on the COUNTER Act to update
DOD's counter-UAS authorities and ensure that all bases in
particular are covered.
Our bill will lead to an increase in the volume of requests
to the Department of Transportation for real time execution and
pre-coordination of counter-UAS packages. Unfortunately, DOT
has lost numerous staff who focus on the Spectrum Engineering
Office. Will you commit to increasing staffing for the Spectrum
Engineering Office so the DOT is not holding up DOD's counter-
UAS missions, and if not, what's your plan?
Secretary Duffy. So, what we're--I think we can be more
efficient. I think we can do more with less. But we are
mission-driven. And so, if I see staffing shortages that will
prohibit us from meeting the mission--and too many people have
taken a deferred resignation program--I'm going to no doubt
hire more people.
Senator Gillibrand. So, just so you understand, the
legislation, what Senator Cotton and I are trying to do, is
give authority to the Department of Defense for the four
corners of any military site, to be able to take them down
immediately so that we can actually assess who they are, why
are they hovering? Because the incursions over Langley, you
should brief yourself, you should get a classified briefing,
highly concerning.
Second, we then want to be able to track and trace that
drone when they leave the base, so that we know who's launching
them from what field, who owns the field, from what ship, who
owns the ship, that's where we need your coordination. But it
has to be instantaneously. Like, within the 30-minute window,
or we will lose that opportunity to arguably take down or get
information about an adversary.
Secretary Duffy. First of all, I appreciate your work on
this. This gets to be very complicated, but this is incredibly
important.
Senator Gillibrand. Yes.
Secretary Duffy. If we just look at what's happening in
Ukraine and Russia, what's happening with drones is probably a
wave of the future. I do think we have to think through how do
we allow the commercial side of drone use to expand, and how do
we still protect critical infrastructure with no-fly zones,
restricting airspace? And the department has--the FAA has been
working on that now to think through how we do both of those
missions as part of the equities of FAA.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. I want to ask you also about
the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. We've talked briefly about
this. What is your plan to modernize it. Are you prepared to
ask for the funding that you need, and are you committed to
making sure our Merchant Marine Academy is on par with any
other service academy in the United States?
Secretary Duffy. I appreciate the question. This is in
Kings Point, New York. It's a beautiful place with rotting
infrastructure. I was talking about this with you earlier. The
midshipmen went 4 months without hot water, taking cold showers
at the Academy. They eat off paper plates because their
dishwasher was broken. They have mold in their dorms. This is
not a facility that deserves to have the name America
associated with it.
And there, we would ask for some flexibility with how we
use the money that's been given. But I think we have $170
million that's been appropriated by this committee that I don't
think has been effectively used. There's been roadblocks, I
think, at MARAD and at the Academy. We're going to work with
the Army Corps of Engineers to develop a plan on how we use the
money that's been given.
Senator Gillibrand. Yeah. I'd be grateful if you would
submit the plan to me in writing and the committee so we can
study it and be helpful.
Secretary Duffy. Absolutely.
Senator Gillibrand. And then, one point of interest is DOD
has these annual reports on the incidents of sexual assault in
the military. And it's been a useful barometer of are we
providing oversight and accountability? Is the military justice
system worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women? You are
due a report within the next couple of weeks to have the Annual
Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Report. Will you commit to
making sure that gets to us?
Secretary Duffy. Yes. I'll see where the status of that
report is, and we'll no doubt try to be timely on that to the
Senate.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. Capital Investment Grants in
the fiscal year 2025 Continuing Resolution and the bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, we provided $3.8 billion for Capital
Investment Grant programs for new transit projects. There are
six of these projects that are national in scope of
significance. They are already signed full funding grant
agreements. Do I have your commitment that you will move
forward on these projects?
Secretary Duffy. Are these announced grants or are these--
--
Senator Gillibrand. Yes. So, Los Angeles, the West Side
Subway, Section 3, Illinois, the Red Line Extension,
Minneapolis, the Southwest LRT, New York, the Second Avenue
Subway Phase 2, New York, New Jersey, the Hudson Tunnel
Gateway, and Washington State Lynnwood Link Extension.
Secretary Duffy. Okay. If you're asking me if I plan on
canceling those grant agreements, I do not.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Now, we go to Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, welcome.
Secretary Duffy. It's good to be with you, Senator.
Senator Kennedy. Do you know what the Center of Excellence
for Liquified Natural Gas is?
Secretary Duffy. Why, I do.
Senator Kennedy. Where are you going to put it?
Secretary Duffy. I think it's going to go in your state,
Senator.
Senator Kennedy. When you going to announce it?
Secretary Duffy. Very soon. I know our teams have been
working together on that. If you want to front run it here, we
could, but I know that we are working on an announcement
together, and our teams have been working.
Senator Kennedy. I want to front run the hell out it.
Secretary Duffy. All right.
[Laughter.]
Senator Kennedy. Where's it going to be put? Is it in
Louisiana?
Secretary Duffy. Is it Lake----
Senator Kennedy. McNeese?
Secretary Duffy. Lake Charles, McNeese.
Senator Kennedy. Yes. And you're going to make an
announcement, Sean, the next few days?
Secretary Duffy. Yes. I know we've been working on some
finer points and details, but yes, that's where it's going to
go. And I think if my memory serves me, I think we were trying
to get this stood up and moving by this summer.
Senator Kennedy. Well, I want to get it announced first.
Secretary Duffy. Sure.
Senator Kennedy. So your colleagues can't take it back.
Secretary Duffy. No one's taking anything from you,
Senator. It's coming your way.
Senator Kennedy. I see my old friend, Mr. Plotkin, here.
Watch him like a hawk, by the way.
Secretary Duffy. He said, ``You do not want to make Senator
Kennedy upset on this project.''
Senator Kennedy. Well, your predecessor told me a number of
times that it was about to be announced, and it was never
announced. I don't mean any disrespect. I just finally didn't
believe him anymore. I don't think Elvis is alive either, so I
learned. But if you could go ahead and announce it, it would it
sure would--I'll buy you a soda and a nice hat.
Secretary Duffy. I would appreciate that.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. When you got to the Department and
became Secretary, did you fire a bunch of air traffic
controllers?
Secretary Duffy. I did not, Senator.
Senator Kennedy. Did Mr. Musk do that?
Secretary Duffy. He did not.
Senator Kennedy. Where did all this stuff come from?
Secretary Duffy. So, there were about 350 probationary
employees at the FAA that were let go, and we're trying to
stream--there's 46,000 people that work at the FAA, so this was
a minuscule percentage, but even air traffic controllers who
were probationary employees were excluded. All safety positions
were preserved at the FAA, including air traffic controllers,
and so, I think it's a narrative that some in media and in
politics have tried to drive as if we're not focused on safety.
But I have been crystal clear, and I think I've said this until
my face is blue, though it's not today, but it could be because
we did not actually fire any air traffic controllers, Senator.
We've been hiring air traffic controllers as quickly as we can.
And so, I don't know how many times I have to say it.
Senator Kennedy. Let's say it one more time.
Secretary Duffy. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. When you became Secretary, look me in the
eye, did you fire any air traffic controllers?
Secretary Duffy. I did not. And I did hire air traffic
controllers.
Senator Kennedy. Did Mr. Musk?
Secretary Duffy. So, by the way, Mr. Musk doesn't fire or
hire anybody at the Department. I do. And so, no, he didn't
fire anybody, including air traffic controllers.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. You probably don't have to, but when
most people go through TSA, they take your picture, they have a
little camera there, and they say, ``Look in the camera. We
want to take your picture.'' Now, underneath it is this little
bitty sign that you can barely see. And I think it's written in
Sanskrit that says, this is optional. I won't let them take my
picture.
Secretary Duffy. I won't either, Senator.
Senator Kennedy. And they promised us that they destroy the
data. Once again, I don't believe that Elvis is alive either.
Senator Merkley and I have a bill--there's been no evidence
that this has prevented any acts of terrorism, and I just don't
know why the Federal government has to collect this huge
database of every American who flies' picture.
Secretary Duffy. I thank you for that. I couldn't agree
with you more. I actually try to turn my head away from the
camera when I go through and they're taking pictures. There's
no need. I think Americans have a right to privacy. And I don't
think you need a digital scan of my face to allow me to have
the right to fly on airplane. I think it's absolutely wrong.
And what does it do to security? I don't think it breeds any
more security in our airspace, on our airplanes. And so, thank
you for doing that work. I couldn't agree with you more.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. And we go to Senator Murray.
Senator Murray. Well, thank you very much, Chair Hyde
Smith, and welcome to the Committee Ranking Member Gillibrand.
Look forward to working with both of you on this extremely
important committee. And I do want to say that I am really
honored to have Tim and Sherri Lilley with us today. I know how
hard this must be for you, and I also know how important it is
that you are here today. We all want to fix this air traffic
system to make sure this never happens again. So, your presence
means a lot to all of us. Thank you for being here.
Secretary Duffy, let me turn to you. As you know, every
day, billions of dollars in commerce, countless lives depend on
your agency to keep our roads, our rails, our skies, and ports
running safely and smoothly. You're responsible for getting
hundreds of billions of dollars provided by Congress out the
door to build thousands of infrastructure projects across our
country.
Yet, since January 20th, virtually every dollar and
transportation project has been held up at some point. And you
are causing a traffic jam, from freezing funding for projects,
to creating new hurdles by reevaluating grants that had already
been approved, adding red tape by forcing unacceptable
political demands on state and local transportation agencies,
and outright actually canceling and cutting grants.
You know, this is not normal. No prior Transportation
Secretary has cut funding for previously awarded grants in this
manner. It is really, to me, a political and partisan approach
that really actually sets a terrible precedent. I know at the
House Appropriations hearing yesterday, you blamed the previous
administration for absolutely everything.
But I just want to say this today, the last administration
did not make the decision to hold up thousands of grants. Had
nothing to do with the new red tape that you have created, and
certainly did not let go of hundreds of staff to help get those
grants out the door. In fact, the last administration increased
the number of grants signed from 330 in its first year to over
1,500 last year, executing more than 3,350 projects. So, you
can't blame Secretary Buttigieg or President Biden. It simply
doesn't pass master.
All the while we know you have pushed out nearly 5,000
Department of Transportation employees, firings, buyouts, and
you have actually said you will fire thousands more. You know,
we just don't need fewer people keeping trains on the track, or
making sure that the airbags work, or rebuilding our roads and
public transit systems. We actually need more of them. And in
as recent months, as we have heard already, we've seen
unacceptable chaos at the Newark Airport, the devastating crash
at DCA, and a lot of other close calls.
And while you talk about modernizing the air traffic
control system, you have forced out more than 2,000 FAA
employees who support those air traffic controllers, the
technicians, the mechanics, the engineers, the IT specialists
at the FAA who were working on modernization, which I think is
a huge mistake and you just can't paper over it.
Now, regarding your recent FAA proposal, I stand ready to
work with Chair Collins along with Chair Hyde-Smith and Ranking
Member Gillibrand to make sure that Congress does provide the
resources FAA needs in our fiscal year 2026 funding bill and
across future years in order to address the glaring issues and
failures we've seen, and to do so without short-changing other
priorities.
So, Mr. Secretary, let me start with aviation safety.
You've, as you know, proposed to modernize the air traffic
control system. This committee does have jurisdiction over the
FAA facilities and equipment funding, but your proposal was not
included in the President's 2026 budget. We need the actual
dollars and cents plans.
So, let me ask you, how many of the over 2,000 FAA
employees that have been pushed out over the last few months
will be needed to be brought back in order to modernize the
system?
Secretary Duffy. I don't think any of them will be--need to
be brought back. And I would just say there's, in the
characterization of the last three minutes, I would disagree
with much of what you said. The DOT and the FAA, were not jobs
programs. This is about a mission, and I'm committed to you and
this body to accomplish that mission. And can we do more with
less? Of course we can do more with less. And if some people
who want to retire, we should let them retire. Let's bring in
people who are hungry then that want to do the mission.
Senator Murray. I don't disagree with that.
Secretary Duffy. I appreciate that. That's what we're
doing.
Senator Murray. But what we have seen is really critical
employees to the mission are now gone. As I said, technicians
and mechanics. You can have all your air traffic controllers
there, but if they don't have the support staff, we can't know
that they're doing the job. That's what I was referring to.
Secretary Duffy. But I would say that we don't have a
support staff issue with FAA. We don't have enough controllers
for the skies that we have in America. That is the issue that
I'm addressing.
Senator Murray. Okay. Well, let me just say that since you
became Secretary, air traffic controllers have twice received
``Fork in the Road'' emails encouraging them to resign, which
you have sent, I know sent mistakenly.
Secretary Duffy. None of them have taken it. They can't
take it because they're not included.
Senator Murray. They received the mail. You're an employee,
you got the same email. And I just think it's really callous to
send to controllers these emails saying your work is not
valued. So, do you know who sent those emails to our air
traffic controllers?
Secretary Duffy. So, you can talk about the system that we
have to send emails out. I think it's antiquated, old, and----
Senator Murray. I just asked who.
Secretary Duffy. I don't know. No, I don't know how they
would've gotten those emails.
Senator Murray. You don't know who sent them. Nobody's been
fired for sending those, out?
Secretary Duffy. That they would've had the wrong email for
an air traffic controller versus someone else in the FAA. No,
I'm not going to fire someone over that. But what I'm going to
do is we in lightning speed, we've developed a plan to fully
rebuild the air traffic control system.
And so, the tech team that I have in place at the FAA,
they've been doing a remarkable job because it happened very
quickly. And, oftentimes, government doesn't work that fast.
And they also saw the problem that all of you have seen. And we
have been working really quickly to develop a plan and present
a plan.
You mentioned money. I do think this is--the money that
we're going to need for this new air traffic control system,
it's not in this budget, because I don't think we can wait
until October 1st to get the resources to begin the process.
Senator Murray. I recognize that, and I am concerned as
Vice-Chair working with Senator Collins, how we're going to
provide that funding. This is a question we're going to have to
pursue.
I do want to say, you and I have talked about the
importance of the FAA's oversight of Boeing, and I know you
visited there in March. I'm going to be tracking carefully to
make sure that the more than 50 new staff needed to support
Boeing oversight are hired and if you backfilled any employees.
And, Madam Chair, I know my time is limited, but I did just
want to mention budget cuts because the skinny budget that you
sent to us proposes about a $3 billion increase to specific DOT
programs. But overall, your top line only increases $1.5
billion. So, you spell out about $300 million in cuts directly,
you leave $1 billion in cuts that this budget implies and are
not there. So, we need the details of that in order for us to
do that. Do you know when we will get that?
Secretary Duffy. I don't have an exact date for the exact
budget, but I look forward to getting it to you as quickly as
possible. Obviously, we work with the OMB on budget.
Senator Murray. You do realize the discrepancy in the
numbers, and we need to see where it's----
Secretary Duffy. Yes. But they'll all match up when we give
you the complete details.
Senator Murray. Full budget.
Secretary Duffy. Yes.
Senator Murray. And do you know when that will be to us?
Secretary Duffy. I don't have a date from OMB yet when
that's going to be completed.
Senator Murray. Okay. Thank you.
Secretary Duffy. And Senator, I would love to work with you
on I-5. I do think that's an issue that I know that the
delegation cares about. And I think there are some simple,
maybe not simple, but easy things that we could do to think
through how we could move that forward more quickly. And again,
there's some certain laws in place that are prohibiting the
advancement of the project, and I would love to have an
additional conversation. I think it's a project that's worthy
and should be done.
Senator Murray. Happy to get in touch with you on that.
Okay. Thank you.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Thank you very much. Mr. Secretary, thank
you for your presence here. More importantly, thank you for
your presence in the air safety world that you are now
operating in. After your confirmation, you became the
Secretary. The first time I ever met you was on January the
29th at Reagan National Airport. And I appreciate the manner in
which you conducted yourself, and the things that you have done
every day thereafter to make the skies safer and to honor the
Lilley's son and every other tragic loss that occurred that
night on that flight from Wichita, Kansas. I appreciate you.
I want to talk a little bit about some of these things that
are related to that event, that tragedy. First of all, prior to
the Army Aviation Brigade resuming helicopter operations at the
national capital region in late April, did the Army or
Department of Defense coordinate with you or the FAA? Did you
then review and approve their reentry into the field of
operations?
Secretary Duffy. So, what we did after, I think it was 36
hours after.
Senator Moran. You said no, they came back. Did they
consult with you?
Secretary Duffy. When they came back? Well, I was talking
about--are we talking about the off of Runway 33 the restricted
airspace?
Senator Moran. Yes.
Secretary Duffy. They still can't fly through that
airspace. We have no fixed wing helo cross traffic.
Senator Moran. And other airspace at Reagan?
Secretary Duffy. There's still no cross traffic. But what
you have seen is some helos at the Pentagon taking off
sometimes carrying VIPs and sometimes doing training missions.
And that has been a concern.
Senator Moran. And nothing has changed in your order to
prevent them--to allow them to return. True.
Secretary Duffy. Well, I hadn't prohibited them.
Senator Moran. They did it on their own.
Secretary Duffy. They do, yes.
Senator Moran. But the problem is they could change their
mind. And I want to know whether there's consultation between
the Army and the Transportation Department, you or the FAA.
Secretary Duffy. So, Secretary Hegseth paused any
helocopter traffic out of the Pentagon, which I commend him for
that. But we are going to continue that pause at the FAA at our
discretion. And our teams are working together. I'm very
concerned about the amount of traffic that's coming out of the
Pentagon. And I do think if there's training missions, those
training missions can be done at certain times of the day when
we have less traffic into DCA-number one.
And if there's VIP travel, I would like to know, who are
the VIPs? Who is traveling on these helos, who classifies--I
don't think any of you here get helicopter travel anywhere, and
I would consider you all VIPs. Who's traveling, Senator.
Senator Moran. Its one of the questions I intend to ask in
Appropriation hearings as we have Defense Appropriation
Subcommittee hearings.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you.
Senator Moran. I would like to know the answer to that
question.
Secretary Duffy. If you'd share that with me, too, I'd
appreciate it.
Senator Moran. And I've introduced legislation that I think
is of value. In 2000 fiscal year 2019--I said that wrong. In
fiscal year 2019 NDAA, allowed prevention of DOT to require
installation of ADS-B equipment on those army helicopters. It
didn't stipulate in or out, but it allowed legislation that was
passed by Congress allowing the Army to operate without ADS-B.
I've introduced legislation that would eliminate that NDAA
provision, which I guess would put more back in your court to
make decisions. Is that something that you would support or do
support?
Secretary Duffy. It is. And I think in regard to the ADS-B,
it's not simple to turn it on and off. It's a little more
complicated than that on the aircraft. And if they're doing
training missions or flying through busy airspace, ADS-B out
should be on.
However, if there is an actual national security mission at
play, true national security, how do they quickly turn it off?
Because we don't want enemies to see our aircraft, but the way
this has been operated, I would support the idea that, yes, all
of them should have ADS-B out activated.
Senator Moran. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, I want to
highlight so that you're not disappointed that I also care
about Essential Air Service along with my colleagues, and let
your stereotype of this committee, this subcommittee be firmly
implanted. Hugely important to Kansas.
We also have issues related to air traffic control, in this
case separate from kind of the normal air traffic control
towers. We utilize contract air traffic control towers at some
of our smaller airports. I'd love to hear from you that that's
a program that you're aware of and supportive of.
Secretary Duffy. I'm aware and supportive of.
Senator Moran. Thank you. And then highlight--well, I want
to highlight the importance of CRISI Grants. Your department
has significant opportunities to increase railroad and traffic
highway safety. And, finally, in regard to tariffs, 1979
agreement on trade civil aircraft has been a great benefit to
this country. We have trade surpluses in the aviation aerospace
world. We certainly export more than we import.
And we are hoping that you will be a voice in discussions
within the administration, within the cabinet, about the value
of allowing this trade agreement since 1979 to work its course
and let it continue to do the good things that we have been
able to accomplish with an integrated supply chain that makes
America number one and allows Wichita, Kansas, to be the air
capital of the world.
Secretary Duffy. I support the President's efforts to
actually bring more manufacturing and more fair trade to this
country, to our people. I've also brought up the 1979
agreement. I think on net, it's an $80 billion export benefit
to the U.S. aviation. So, the point is well made, and I've
communicated that to the powers that be in the administration.
Senator Moran. Mr. Secretary, thank you for using your
position for good.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Mr. Secretary,
welcome. And let me first begin by thanking you for your
assistance to expediting the release of $220 million for the
Washington Bridge. That is very critical to our state. It
really is the linkage between one side of our capital city,
Providence, and the other. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Duffy. I would love to come up in the summer and
check that bridge out.
Senator Reed. I think you should come up. And by the way, I
think you should also check out our restaurants. We have the
best restaurants in America.
Secretary Duffy. I was there for the first time with my
wife this last September, and we're shocked at how beautiful
your great state is.
Senator Reed. Thank you, sir. But let me pose a question
that I think all my colleagues have, that is there's still
significant amounts of DOT money that have not been released.
It was properly awarded, authorized, appropriated, et cetera.
Can you give us an idea of when and will all of these funds be
forthcoming?
Secretary Duffy. Yes, so I do think it's important to know
what was left for me. And I know that all of you, when you get
an announcement, you want the grant agreement so you can build
a project. But under between Obama and Donald Trump, and from
an Election Day to Inauguration Day, Obama team announced 48
grants. And then from Trump to Biden, the Donald Trump team
announced 100 grants. And Pete Buttigieg, between Election Day
and Inauguration Day, announced almost 1,000 grants.
I told that to Senator Schatz as well before, but this is a
lot of grants that were announced. And so, the workload is
real. And if I could show you a chart, I have a chart here that
will indicate how many grants we have, have grant agreements
on.
Secretary Duffy. And these are fiscal years from Secretary
Buttigieg. But you can see at the start of even the last
administration, they weren't moving as fast as we're moving.
So, I'm committed to getting through this as quickly as
possible. We're at a pretty good clip, and I think it's going
to continue to pick up as we work through the process. And I
think there's technology that we can deploy to make this go
even faster.
Senator Reed. There are some concerns that these projects
not be being evaluated on engineering and other aspects, of
course, benefits, but there is issues of climate change and
social issues more than economic issues or transportation
issues. Are you including DEI in these evaluations and climate
change?
Secretary Duffy. Yes. In regard to the grant agreements
that we have out now and the announcements, I am. And some of
the requirements--if you want, I'll share them with you, and I
can read some of them to you if you want.
Senator Reed. No. I just I think this is very realist
question. Most people don't consider infrastructure, well,
bridges, et cetera, to be DEI qualities, nor do they, after all
the work that's done by DOT, by EPA as something that would be
challenging to the environment. In fact, most of these
projects, I would suggest, are designed to cope with changes.
And you can call in with them if you want.
Secretary Duffy. So, there were a lot of requirements in
the grant agreements in regard to DEI and in regard to climate
change. And there was adding a lot of costs in time out of the
projects. So, what I've done is tried to pull those out and say
those requirements are no longer necessary for you to do your
project. And I think I'm going to save you money and allow you
to move quicker on your projects that are so meaningful to your
communities.
Senator Reed. So, what you're saying is you will eventually
release the funds, but you will modify the arrangements so that
they don't have to do certain things. Is that accurate?
Secretary Duffy. So, in regard to the announcements, for
which we don't have grant agreements, we're drafting grant
agreements that don't include these issues.
Senator Reed. But you're committed to fulfilling the grant?
Secretary Duffy. Oh, listen, yeah.
Senator Reed. Another way to say this is that you're not
going to defund projects because you object to language you
consider to be DEI or informed?
Secretary Duffy. No, no, we're just trying to pull out that
language unless it could not be re-scoped or pulled out, and
it's just fundamentally something different. No, this is easy
to pull this language out and save you money and time.
Senator Reed. Well, again, I think the faster--and you do
have a challenge before you, the faster you can get these funds
to the states, the better off.
Secretary Duffy. I've gotten a couple to your state pretty
quickly.
Senator Reed. And you have my thanks for that.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you.
Senator Reed. My time is dwindling to seconds, but look
forward to working with you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you.
Secretary Duffy. You as well. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Britt.
Senator Britt. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to just start
by saying, Secretary Duffy, we appreciate the way that you
handled January 29th and the tragedy and all that unfolded
afterwards. And just want to welcome the Lilley family here,
and express our deepest condolences for the loss of your son,
Sam. Watching you over the last few months, your grit, your
tenacity, you're willing to speak up to make change in the face
of the unimaginable.
As a mom who is sitting here with my daughter watching
right over there, thank you for fighting for your son's legacy
and making sure that, as you said, and I've heard you say that
it's synonymous with air safety, with upgrading our system and
making sure that others are better as a result of this. Thank
you.
I'd like to start by highlighting a few projects in the
great state of Alabama, and want to thank you for talking with
me before your confirmation, allowing me to talk to you about
the importance of so many things. But in particular one of my
very top priorities is Alabama's I-10 Mobile Bay River Bridge
Project. It's a significant investment, and it is critical to
helping the state bring this to fruition to be able to partner,
obviously, with the Federal government.
As you know, the Mobile River Bridge is a critical piece of
transportation infrastructure, not just for the State of
Alabama, not just for the region, but literally the entire
nation. I mean, it connects from California to Florida. You
can't get there without coming right across this bridge. And
so, whether it is moving people or moving commerce, it is a
primary transportation artery that we must take a look at, and
we've got to upgrade.
So, obviously, we've made a lot of progress in this area,
but the one thing that we are waiting on is the TIFIA loan for
the project. And I want to stress how absolutely important that
is to completing this project. And we'd love to ask you for
your commitment to, you know, expeditiously taking a look and
reviewing ALDOT's application so that we can get this moving.
Because the longer that this goes on, the more it costs, and
then, obviously, the more challenges that we have from both a
safety and a commerce perspective.
Secretary Duffy. Time is money. And by the way, it's a
great program. I'll look and see what the status is, and I'll
get back to you as quickly as possible.
Senator Britt. And will you'll commit to taking a look at
it, and looking at the overarching impact and the need for it
in order to carry this to fruition.
Secretary Duffy. 100 percent. I'd just say that these are
the kind of projects that also the President cares about, the
big beautiful roads and bridges that connect to our country and
move products, the important infrastructure.
Senator Britt. Absolutely. And on that, too, I mean, it's a
vital financing tool. So, we are going to have--you're going to
be meeting with ALDOT later this year, and so I'd love to
follow-up with you additionally after this on that as well.
I also want to mention the CRISI Grant, which I understand
is now in its final review. The grant will provide the
essential infrastructure improvements. It's going to allow the
freight rail to continue to meet the growing demands of the
Mobile port.
So, the Mobile port has been the fastest growing port the
last 6 years in a row. I think this is an excellent opportunity
to see how when we utilize all forms of transportation; land
and rail, and sea and air. We've got an airport project that
we're doing there that is going to be transformative. I would
love--I know you have a lot of things on your plate, but as you
are moving across the country, I think this is an excellent
example of how transportation can come together for the greater
good, not just for the region, of the nation. And I'd love an
opportunity to visit that with you.
Secretary Duffy. I would welcome that.
Senator Britt. Excellent. And when we're talking about big,
beautiful transportation projects that you mentioned, President
Trump has made it a priority. He has said publicly that he
wants to see I-65 widened. He wants to see it to be a four-lane
road there on each side. He said he was committed to making
that happen.
Look, we know how important that is for our state. Anyone
who wants to travel in Alabama get stuck on I-65. However, all
of these great people who during the spring and summer want to
come to Alabama's beautiful white sand Gulf Coast, or maybe
even the Florida Panhandle, come right down 65.
And so, would just like your commitment to continuing to
take a look at that. There's no way that project happens
without a partnership with the Federal government, and want
your commitment to making sure that we take a look at what
President Trump has promised, and we figure out how to make
that happen.
Secretary Duffy. I would just say the President's
priorities are also my priorities. So, yes, I'll definitely
take a look at that.
Senator Britt. Okay. Excellent. Excellent. We are glad to
hear it. I want to associate myself with the comments from
almost all of the members here when it comes to rural
transportation services. The Essential Air Service is critical
for a state like Alabama. We have 55 out of 67, our counties
are rural in nature. Making sure that they're connected, and
vibrant, and have the ability to move across places is
important.
I mean, Alabama is home to many small airports, and they
truly play a vital role in those areas being able to continue
to grow and thrive. And so, in the broader context of FAA
modernization, how are you going to ensure that these rural
areas are included in the efforts that you have? And how do
they continue to have access to both safe and reliable air
transportation?
Secretary Duffy. You know, I also had a district that was
very rural, northern Wisconsin. I understand rural America.
We're a little colder than you are in Alabama up north.
Senator Britt. Just a little. But you're going to have a
good football game, by the way, coming this fall.
Secretary Duffy. Yes, we will. But, listen, I want to work
through that. I completely understand everyone's questions on
Essential Air Service. I knew you were all going to ask me
questions about Essential Air Service. And I get it. If you
give me some space to work through what I think we can do, I'll
partner with all of you and we're going to figure out a pathway
forward.
Senator Britt. Well, thank you for your service. My time is
up, but I also want to say thank you for putting family first.
Your example with your family, obviously having my daughter
here, though, just shows that that's the most important thing
as we serve this nation and try to leave it better for the next
generation. So, thank you.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you for your example, Senator.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Chair Hyde-Smith, and Ranking
Member Gillibrand. Thank you, Secretary Duffy, for appearing
before us today. I do hope we will get your actual, full budget
soon and have the chance to review that with you. And when we
do get it, I hope we will see sustained investment in Amtrak.
I regularly take Amtrak back and forth from Wilmington to
Washington. They hit record ridership and record profitability
just this past year. It also employs 1,500 people in Delaware,
which is the midpoint of the Northeast Corridor. The Northeast
Corridor is just really, frankly, the only aspect of Amtrak
that has been financially stable for a long, long time. So, if
the NEC experiences cuts, or some attempted privatization, or
sharp change in direction, the impact will really harm the
mostly heartland states and rural part of Amtrak's national
network.
Elon Musk has called for privatizing Amtrak. It's made
steady positive progress in recent years. I'd be interested in
whether you'd commit to us to maintaining strong investments in
Amtrak when we finally receive your full budget.
Secretary Duffy. So, listen, I take Amtrak as well. I ride
the Northeast Corridor. I'll tell you this. Do I think we could
do better? Yes. Could we be better? Yes, I think we could be
better. It's faster than driving through the traffic when
you're going up north. I've experienced that more recently.
So, again, I would love us to think through together, how
can we make this better? How can we make it faster? I mean, the
rest of the world has high speed rail. Why can't we think
through a different way to do it? So, I'm committed to the idea
that we want to be able to move people along the Northeast
Corridor. We don't have enough room for people to all take
cars. So, let's figure out a better way to do it. So, yeah, I'm
committed to the idea that we're going to have great rail
transportation.
We have Amtrak. Could there be ways that we could allow for
other competition in with Amtrak on the rails? Possibly. But
this is in your control. These are--so, I'm not trying to kill
it. I'm trying to go, ``How can we make it better?''
Senator Coons. Thank you. These are complex questions.
Secretary Duffy. Very complex.
Senator Coons. And consultation with this committee will
help sustain our national rail network.
Shipbuilding is an area where I suspect we have strong
agreement. I recently visited Philly's Hanwha Shipyard, as did
you. Senator McCormick and I have talked regularly about this.
My community is just 20 to 30 minutes from that shipyard, and
we'd like to contribute some of the folks who will work at the
expanded Hanwha Shipyard.
I am the Ranking Appropriator on Defense. And I think the
shot in the arm that MARAD has given to the shipyard by
purchasing five DOT ships has been critically vital. Just if
you would briefly speak to DOT's plans to invest in and
reinvigorate our nation shipyards. This is one that is right on
the edge of being able to come into the family of naval
shipyards.
Secretary Duffy. Yeah. So, I love the President's vision. I
couldn't share it. I think most people would agree that the
vision of building ships again in America is important. Working
through the components of how we fund it, how we are able to
give a shot in the arm to the industry, because it's going to
need support. And thinking through how we do that is what's
happening right now.
I think all of us working together is going to be what's
necessary to revitalize these ports. But, again, you look
around the country and you see how we used to be a powerhouse,
and they've just--many of them have been mothballed. Again,
it's going to be a bipartisan effort for all this.
Senator Coons. Well, this is one that's back in production
thanks to DOT. And I know Senator Collins has expressed a very
strong interest in it. A number of members have maritime
academies in their home states, and would like to see this
shipyard also become productive. I look forward to working with
you on that as well.
In the last two minutes, if I could, just a theme across a
number of questions. You've frozen 3,000 Federal grants for
review, and have released several hundred. Just to compare,
there was a bipartisan effort at infrastructure investment
under the last administration, and that produced a lot of new
programs, more than 40 new programs, more than $300 billion in
funding.
The DOT under the previous administration signed grant
agreements for more than 3,300 projects. And under the first
Trump Administration, because there wasn't a bipartisan
commitment to dramatic increases in infrastructure, just 900.
So, to say that, you know, they hadn't managed to execute
enough agreements, and that's why you've got such a backlog,
Biden's DOT increased its pace of grant agreement execution
from 330 in its first year to 1,500. Its last year.
There's a reason that there was a dramatic increase in the
volume of grant agreements. It's because we came together in a
bipartisan way to significantly increase our infrastructure
investment. To me, the grants that are being reviewed that were
appropriated and authorized by Congress ought to be moving more
quickly than they are. And I hope you will speed up that
process going forward.
Secretary Duffy. So, I haven't frozen anything. So, if you
have a grant agreement that money's flowing, that has not been
stopped. And what we've done is asked to repurpose some of the
requirements inside of those grant agreements. We're not going
to enforce the climate or the social justice, but if you have a
grant agreement and you have a project that's moving the money,
the money's going on those projects, they haven't been stopped,
they haven't been frozen.
And even on the announced projects that don't have grant
agreements, we're moving again quickly. I'll show you that.
I've got a month-by-month chart, I'll share it with you, if you
want, and you can look at how we've done compared to the last
administration. And you're not going to say we're wildly
slower. We're actually doing pretty well. And I think it's
going to speed up as well.
So, we're not trying to hold anything up. We're not trying
to slow down or freeze. But I'm trying to pull out some things
I think are going to cost you and your projects more money. And
if we can build quicker and we can build with smarter
requirements, I think that we have more money then to build
more of your projects, which everyone wants more projects.
Senator Coons. I'd welcome a quick call about that outcome,
which as you describe it, is something I would embrace and
support. I'd like to see the projects move forward, obviously
in my state. I think literally every Senator has said the same
about that.
Secretary Duffy. And I'll send over the month-by-month
analysis to your office.
Senator Coons. And forgive me, Tim and Sherri Lilley. We
are sorry for your loss. And we are sorry for the ways in which
air safety and tragic air accidents have impacted so many
families, principally yours. And we appreciate not just your
presence here, but what it means that you continue to advocate
for FAA reform. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and thank you both.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Yes, I'd like to extend my condolences to
the Lilley family as well, and all the families that have lost
people in these accidents, and why it's so important that we
take action to prevent that every way we can.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. And you
mentioned this natural gas project in Louisiana, and that it
hasn't been officially announced yet. And Kennedy's gone now,
so, I'm wondering, is there any chance we could move that to
North Dakota maybe?
Secretary Duffy. Yes. I don't think so.
Senator Hoeven. We've got energy up there
Secretary Duffy. A lot of energy.
Senator Hoeven. I know your staff's going to want to
consider that carefully.
Secretary Duffy. I think that cake is baked. Senator
Kennedy gets it.
Senator Hoeven. Well, it hadn't been out, so, you know,
just checking.
Secretary Duffy. He's watching right now, though, I think.
Senator Hoeven. Yeah, I'm sure he is. Thanks for being
here. Air traffic controllers we're down about 3,500 less than
what we want. You talked about that. But really, we need to do
more, not just at the academy, but outside the academy. And as
you know, we have the largest flight training school at the
University of North Dakota in the country. And do a lot of air
traffic control training there as well. And the key is to train
to the test, not to train to the academy. And that helps the
academy from being a bottleneck.
And so, the Air Traffic Control Workforce Development Act
that I've put forward with Jeanne Shaheen, as well as Senator
Moran, and Senator Duckworth, allows schools that you certify,
that FAA certifies, to train to the test to help you reduce
that backlog and get these air traffic controllers trained. Are
you supportive of that legislation?
Secretary Duffy. I'm supportive of expanding our capacity
to get more young people trained up as air traffic controllers,
getting them through training and, and being able to pass the
test. And by the way, my brother-in-law went to UND, and went
to flight school, and thoroughly enjoyed it. You guys have a
great facility. And again, I think there's five in the country.
I might be getting that number wrong.
I do think there's an opportunity for you all to do
competitive grants where--because it's expensive, and you don't
have a ton of kids coming through. So, the economics might be
more challenging for the schools if there's a competitive grant
to get really great equipment in some of these other places
that would be probably helpful.
Senator Hoeven. And we'll include that. And you mentioned,
you referenced it, but also for equipment in the tower that
lets these air traffic controllers train on the job, that would
enable you to move them around more, too, because you'd have
some of that training equipment as well as retention bonuses
and recruitment bonuses. So, it's all designed to help you get
air traffic controllers faster.
We're going to do something in reconciliation, as you're
aware, to kickstart at a very significant level, the equipment.
This will help you with the actual air traffic controllers.
Secretary Duffy. I would welcome the help.
Senator Hoeven. Yeah. Thanks, Secretary. And then, speaking
of the University of North Dakota, we also have up there, it
was the first unmanned aviation UAS test site in the country,
in part because it helped write that legislation, but mostly
because we have such a tremendous school up there. And then at
the Grand Forks Air Force Base, we have the Grand Sky
Technology part.
The FAA has agreed to provide us with the unfiltered raw
data feed, which we need to develop drone and counter-drone
traffic in the NAS. Are you aware of that? And we still have
some final details as far as the handoff, even though it's been
formally agreed to. But this is going to enable us to continue
all the work we're doing with drones, but also really develop
counter-drone technology.
So, Senator Gillibrand talked about some of the legislative
authorities. This is what actually enables you to detect and
take down drones in the NAS. And we have 900 miles of border
responsibility up there. And CBP co-located with all of this
flying manned and unmanned aircraft. You need to come see it.
Will you come out and see it, and will you support what we're
doing there and help us finish getting this raw data feed so we
can keep it moving?
Secretary Duffy. Yeah. So, I may not have known about this,
but I think Secretary Burgum has mentioned this to me like 10
times. So, I'm well aware of what you're doing, and I believe--
I just checked on this before the hearing. I believe that we're
actually waiting for some information to come from North Dakota
to the FAA, but we are committed.
This is going to be a great program. I think this is
important. You're the right state to do it. So, you'll have--
and again, if I can maybe coordinate with you after, to let you
know what we need. But we are going to go forward quickly, and
I'd love to come and see it in North Dakota.
Senator Hoeven. Great.
Secretary Duffy. After I go see Senator Schatz in Hawaii.
Senator Hoeven. Oh, sure. Okay. Well, that's all time of
year. Time of the year is a big factor in that.
Secretary Duffy. Yeah, true. That's true.
Senator Hoeven. And we're not competing on the same. We
want you in the summer, and he can have you in the winter.
Appreciate your support on that. And I'll double-check, too, if
there's something on our end.
Last thing is, we have a program that Tammy Baldwin,
bipartisan, she and I were able to pass in the Reauthorization
Act for FAA 2024. It's the Vets to Wings Act. We actually
passed it. It was called the American Aviator Act. It allows
some of the schools, on a pilot basis like ours, again, through
2028, to take for veterans when they leave the service and they
want to go through flight training. The GI bill and the tuition
assistance doesn't cover the full cost of the flight training.
This program makes up that difference. So, it's a twofer. You
get those veterans into their next career, and it helps us with
the pilot shortage.
So, we want to actually expand that beyond just the pilot
schools like ours that are doing it. Again, it's authorized
through 2028, but it's something we want to work on as a
permanent program to help our great vets. So, would like your
input, help, and support on that?
Secretary Duffy. Yeah, I would love to work with you and
learn more about the program.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. Again, thanks for the way you've
grabbed this task with both hands, and you're going at it the
right way, and your ability to communicate is tremendous. And
it's very helpful in terms of getting this huge, huge, and very
important project done. So, thank you for that.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Durbin.
Senator Durbin. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you, Mr.
Secretary for being here. I want to say to the Lilley family,
my sympathies go to you and your family for what you've gone
through. And my gratitude goes to you for continuing the cause
of air safety in memory of your loss.
Senator Duckworth, my colleague, being a helicopter pilot
and knowing aviation inside and out, has briefed me on what
happened that terrible evening. But I've flown that
configuration a thousand times as a passenger. We've got to do
something. And thank you for reminding us of our
responsibility.
Secretary Duffy, when we met, we talked about Chicago and
aspects of Illinois that I'm representing and concerned about.
And Chicago, of course, is the rail hub of North America, more
track rating, 80 and more directions than any other city. 25
percent of all freight trains, 50 percent of all intermodal
trains go through that city. And we need help.
We talked about commitments that have been made, work that
is being done. It's all good. But the next aspect of it is the
continuation of a grant, a $93 million grant, which for some
reason has been held up. So, I'll ask you to please have your
staff put it on the list and try to figure out what we can do
to get this moving forward. It is critical for efficient train
operation in our country. Are you familiar with it?
Secretary Duffy. So, not specifically, Senator. I know that
we have approved 13 grant agreements over the last several
months for $270 million. When we came into office, there were
89 awards without grant agreements. So, we're moving through
the backlog in your state, but the backlog is real in Illinois.
Senator Durbin. Got it.
Secretary Duffy. By the way, I was also--I'm aware there's
a lot of infrastructure. Again, you have the Great Lakes, you
have rail. You are a central hub, especially in Chicago. I know
that in Wisconsin, we do appreciate your support of the
Packers. We know you're a fan.
[Laughter.]
Senator Durbin. Take those words down.
Let me raise another issue. With all the time that I spend
on airplanes, millions of miles, not as much as Brian Schatz,
but close to it, you come to really appreciate not only the
pilots, the professional crew, but certainly the flight
attendants and the important work that they're engaged in.
Secretary Duffy. That's right.
Senator Durbin. And so, I found it kind of interesting
recently when I observed that there is a growing trend on the
planes that I fly on after the safety announcements, after we
are all seat belts on, then the advertising of credit cards and
frequent flyer programs begins.
And you wonder why, of all the things that they could talk
about, and I wish most of the time they talked about none of
it. Why would they pick that? Well, it's because sadly, some of
the major airlines make more money on their credit cards and
frequent flyer programs than on air operations. I didn't
believe that until I saw it in print. It's a fact.
And you have to ask yourself, who is at least making sure
that the passenger gets fair treatment in the frequent flyer
programs. I've introduced legislation to do that. So, we could
work together, I hope, and make certain that there's honesty in
terms of dealing with these frequent flyer miles. They mean an
awful lot to many people. Do you have any thoughts on that?
Secretary Duffy. I do, Senator. There's going to be a lot
of things we agree on. That is one we will not agree on. When I
was in the House, this was--I was on the opposite side of this
issue than you were. I do think a lot of people in America
aren't able to afford a trip. They oftentimes will use their
points whether it's for a hotel or for an airline ticket. And I
think that's a value for folks.
What I would support, though, is I think that if--and we're
seeing this more and more--if there's an extra fee that you
want to charge for using a credit card with merchants, I think
that's appropriate. So, the consumer's paying for the cost of
the card.
Senator Durbin. This is a separate issue. Senator Marshall
and I are keeping this separate.
Secretary Duffy. You are. Okay.
Senator Durbin. What we're trying to do?
Secretary Duffy. What is this issue?
Senator Durbin. We're trying to make sure that when they
say that you have so many points, and it equals so many
benefits that you can use on that airline, that there be
disclosures so the customer knows when they change the rules.
Secretary Duffy. I'd like to learn more about that. I'm
very astute at--I think I have a credit card for all the
airlines, and I know which ones are better than others and all
hotels, too. I guess I would love to partner with you and look
at what you're considering on the transparency side.
Senator Durbin. Just to make sure there's fairness to the
passengers and disclosures, if there are changes in policy.
Secretary Duffy. I'm all about transparency and fairness.
Senator Durbin. On the other issue I've given up on you
long ago. So, thank you.
[Laughter.]
Secretary Duffy. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Durbin. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Boozman.
Senator Boozman. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for
being here. I apologize for running back and forth. It's so
busy here, and visiting with people in the hall. One of the
people that I was visiting with is a mutual friend, Ambassador
Mark Green.
Secretary Duffy. Good Wisconsinite.
Senator Boozman. He reminded me that he was so proud of you
as being our Secretary of Transportation now, and yet your real
claim to fame in his part of the country was being a world
champion lumberjack. So, you're a renaissance guy.
Secretary Duffy. Very kind of him to mention. He was a
wonderful congressman. A great ambassador.
Senator Boozman. Yeah. He's just a wonderful person. Let me
just--and you don't have to respond to this, but I also want to
express my thoughts also about how important the Essential Air
Service is and the contract towers. I know you know that coming
from the part of the country that you represented also, I know
that you understand that the most recent census revealed that
more than half of the counties across the nation saw a
population decline. In Arkansas, 53 of our 75 counties
experienced the same. About 53 percent nationwide.
While rural America's population is declining, its
infrastructure remains just as vital in our interconnected
communities. As urban and suburban projects are often given
priority and rural bases are shrinking, how can we ensure that
rural infrastructure gets the necessary support that it needs?
Secretary Duffy. Well, I think it's that you have to pay
attention to it. You have to understand it. And it's having
people from rural America fight for it. I think that's
critical. And I come from rural America.
On the discretionary grants, and there's tools and help
that's offered to smaller communities to try to access
additional resources. But it goes to the point that this has
become so complicated. What we're working on, and hopefully we
can do it, is how can we make this process simpler? So, you
just can't be a big institution that can apply and access
competitive money. It's accessible for smaller communities
where resources truly are just as needed.
Senator Boozman. And I'm glad you bring that up. That was
really my next question. We see this a lot in USDA grants and
things. We're in a situation now where these--you know, the
ability to apply is so complex, so complicated. You're talking
about spending thousands of dollars for grant writers, and
again, the bigger communities can do that. That's simply
something that we've got to concentrate on and across
government, particularly I think with transportation, USDA,
those kinds of grants, because it does make it very, very
difficult for our smaller communities, really, for anybody in
order to access those grants. And that's not a cost driver,
that's a cost saver.
Secretary Duffy. And I don't mean to offend anybody, but I
do think if you--with the expansion of high-speed Internet and
after and during Covid, you saw a lot of people who want to
move to rural America. They actually like it. It's a beautiful
place. And so maybe we're going to see those numbers change,
but with that is you need the infrastructure to go along with
it. And again, I think it's been interesting to see how people
have gone back to the rural part of this country.
Senator Boozman. There's been a lot of bipartisan support
in Congress to modernize how we plan, build, and maintain
infrastructure with emerging technologies. From advanced
digital construction management systems to automated inspection
tools like drones, remote sensing these innovations can help
address workforce shortages, improve project delivery times,
and enhance safety across our transportation network. How do
you envision the department accelerating the adoption of
digital technologies across all modes of transportation?
Secretary Duffy. I think that we are--sometimes we're
thought of as, you know, hard hats and light reflecting vests.
I think we're in the most innovative space in government,
whether it is autonomous vehicles, and drones, and these
eVOTLs, also with the technology that can be deployed in
construction.
So, I am in favor of exploring all options that can reduce
our costs, increase safety, and so, if you have ideas on things
that I should be looking at, I'm happy to do that. But I do
think we are at the cusp of a technological revolution in
regard to the way that people move and the way that our
products move in this country, which is, and again, I mean, we
have to get it right.
You can't go too fast with some of this stuff, but you
can't go too slow either. And so, getting the right pace on the
rules and regulations is going to be critical for the
department over the course of the next three and a half years.
Senator Boozman. Very good. Thank you. Appreciate you.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Schatz.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Secretary. Thank you, Chair and
Vice-chair. And to the Lilley family, thank you for your
presence, and I'm sorry for your loss.
I want to follow-up on the 3,200 or so grants frozen. I
understand that if the grant had--if the award has been made
and the money has been obligated, that you're not freezing
those dollars, you are pausing for review. I'm trying to get
the terminology right. Post announcement, pre-obligation to
kind of pull out those things that you considered to be
extraneous to transportation. Am I characterizing that about
right?
Secretary Duffy. Well, there's no freeze, but yes, we're
talking.
Senator Schatz. Pausing for review.
Secretary Duffy. I'm not pausing with this. So, what I'm
doing is, as I'm crafting the grant agreement, some of the
language that was required in the NOFO, it's easy. We just
don't put it in the grant agreement. So, it's not a pause, it's
not a freeze, it's just we've taken the language out for the
grant agreement.
Senator Schatz. Sure. Good news, bad news, right? You are
characterizing this as easy, not terribly controversial. It's a
new administration. You are within your rights to modify grant
criteria, certainly before the money is obligated. I understand
all that. The problem is time, right? We are about 4 months
into this, or a little less than 4 months into this. And there
are a bunch of things that are just like plainly, not climate,
right? Evacuation routes, like hillside stabilization.
And so, my more basic question is, I know you care about
metrics. I know your team is trying to metabolize all of these.
What's the throughput capacity of the department to get these
3,200 grants reviewed, and obligated, and out? Is it 300 a
month--I mean, excuse me, 300 a week? Do you think you're going
to be done by June? What's the timeframe? Because it's a little
bit of a black box.
This is information--this hearing's useful because it gives
us some reassurance that, you know, they're not actually
stopped. But I think it's fair for our state departments of
transportation to kind of know it's going to be June before
it's done. It's going to be next week. It could be later this
year. Can you give us a sense for timing?
Secretary Duffy. So, I appreciate the question, and I think
that's a really good question. So, I've told you we've done
over 400 at this pace, which I'm proud of the pace that we have
done thus far. It is not fast enough. If, again, this is going
to take us multiple years at this pace to get it done. So, that
is unacceptable. And I have countless meetings every week about
how we can speed up the process to get more money out the door,
more grant agreements done. So, I take your point, I'm proud of
the work we've done so far, but the mission is to pick it up
dramatically.
Senator Schatz. Yes. And at some point, you run into a
potential, even if it's inadvertent, you run into an
impoundment issue, right, you have to spend these dollars. And
especially since the grant awards were given and the state
departments of transportation, sometimes county departments of
transportation, they have to spend money to gear up for
contract management. You've got staging costs. So, this is not
free to do. So, I just really do encourage you not just to pick
up the pace as a sort of generic proposition, but to get back
to members of the House and the Senate, on a bipartisan basis,
to say this is where we're going to get and buy when.
So, speaking of which, I want to cover one other thing in
the kind of I call it de-wokefying stuff.
Secretary Duffy. Can I ask on the impounding.
Senator Schatz. Sure.
Secretary Duffy. I'm not trying to impound anything.
Senator Schatz. I know you're not.
Secretary Duffy. But I'm trying--so if there's money that's
about to run out, I'm trying to move that. I'm trying to
elevate that and move that more quickly so you don't lose
dollars.
Senator Schatz. Sure. And you and I had a brief
conversation about bikes.
Secretary Duffy. Yes.
Senator Schatz. And then you had--the department issued
additional guidance on bike infrastructure, and I just--this is
like my--I don't even ride a bike particularly often, but I
just think it's a little nuts that bikes have become some sort
of climate priority. And therefore, people who are right of
center are like, bikes are a climate thing.
Bicycles are bicycles. Everybody rides a bike. Kids ride
bikes, families ride bikes. Every community, rural, red,
purple, blue, you know, should have a safe way for people to
ride bikes. Can we please take the question of utilizing bikes
safely out of whatever fight we're going to have on a partisan
basis about climate policy?
Secretary Duffy. So, I don't see bikes and climate
together, but I like bikes, too. Bikes are wonderful. My kids
ride them.
Senator Schatz. Okay. Can you review the additional sort of
restrictions or scrutiny that some of these bike projects have
gotten?
Secretary Duffy. So, one of my--so can I explain my concern
about--some of the requirements in the last administration were
are you adding, you know, bike lanes and walking paths to your
construction project? That's what they wanted to see. And if
there's some places across this country where we don't need
bike lanes, why are we adding bike lanes onto what should be
just roadways.
Senator Schatz. No one wants to ride a bike, right? But
hold on, because I am out of time, and there's a vote, and some
other members who want to talk. But the problem here, right, is
everybody understands how this was done, which is you have so
many thousands of contracts, people ``controlled'' for certain
words. And so, some bike projects are just bike projects. Some
projects are adding criteria to a rail, or pedestrian, or car
project to say and also there's this new requirement, but it's
such a blunt instrument that you're blocking stuff that think
you and I, on a common-sense basis, would say, yes, we should
do it.
I just have one more question, which I'll get out and take
for the record. But again, on timeframes, and let's get some
specificity. You got to do a bunch of things to upgrade the air
traffic control system including and especially the
telecommunications upgrades. If you could give us both some
fidelity on costs, what you anticipate asking the Congress for,
and also specifically the timeframe for resolving the Newark
issues; whether that's weeks, or months, or whatever. I just
think the traveling public needs to know exactly what that's
going to be. Thank you.
Secretary Duffy. If you want to call, I'd be happy to talk
more about bikes. I don't think we're that far away on bike and
bike usage.
Senator Schatz. I don't think we are. I just think in the
execution of some of these procedures that we're talking past
each other
Secretary Duffy. Very well. Thank you.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Secretary,
welcome. And let me start by thanking you for reaching out to
Governor Moore and Maryland early in your tenure to discuss
Maryland infrastructure priorities, and especially your
commitment to making sure that we rebuild the Key Bridge. I
just want to thank you for that.
Secretary Duffy. I had a great conversation with the
governor and his team that came to DOT, which was very nice of
them.
Senator Van Hollen. It's a big project, and we are glad to
have your support. Now, let me turn to an area of disagreement.
On Monday, Maryland joined 19 other states to sue you in your
capacity as Secretary of Transportation and DOT for what they
describe as illegally withholding or threatening to withhold
critical transportation funds to try to require those states to
enforce Federal immigration law.
Mr. Secretary, I'm not--I don't want to get into the merits
of this right now. I think the states will prevail. I think
that's an appropriate use of your effort to leverage
transportation funds. But my question is this does that
decision, that conditionality, apply to previously awarded
multi-year grants? In other words, there are grants that have
been awarded that take place, they spend out over period of
time. So, my question is, are you intending to retroactively
apply that condition?
Secretary Duffy. No.
Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to get
that clarification. Let me now also thank the Lilley family for
all your efforts to make sure we prevent future tragedies like
the one that took the life of your son.
And I do want to talk about the situation at DCA. Because I
know that just yesterday in the Commerce Committee, we heard
testimony from folks at FAA that there had been over, I think,
15,000 concerning incidents at DCA since October, 2021. And the
response from the FAA official there was that they, ``missed
something.'' That's scary. That's very scary.
And it's especially scary because we should have had that
information, in my view, when the Congress considered the FAA
reauthorization bill and there were a number of us at the time,
it was mostly the Senators from this region, the two Virginia
Senators, myself and then Senator Cardin, who were very
concerned about adding additional airline routes.
Secretary Duffy. Slots, right?
Senator Van Hollen. Slots, yes. There were five slots,
there were five pairs that were added. And I remember talking
to then Secretary Buttigieg, who I think was probably in this
room, sitting right there. And he expressed concern as well
about additional pressures that would be put on the already
most congested airport in the country if we added those slots.
This information was not available then, but there was lots
of reason for concern. Those slots have since been added, I
think early this year. Those additional slots were added to the
most congested airport in the country. And I know you put
safety first, right?
So, my question to you, Mr. Secretary, is will you work
with us to reexamine that decision? Because the four of us
voted against the entire FAA reauthorization at that time
because of our concern about safety. And given all the
information that's now available, I hope we will go back to see
if that will aggravate an already very difficult problem.
Secretary Duffy. I think it would be appropriate for this
body to have a conversation about what is appropriate and what
is the capacity that DCA can handle. I think you all should
discuss that.
Senator Van Hollen. No doubt.
Secretary Duffy. No doubt. By the way, there was 1500 you.
Senator Van Hollen. 15,000.
Secretary Duffy. But 85 were critically close in that time
period. And so what--and I take your point on that. We're
trying to at the FAA now say, what else should we see that
we're not seeing? Because that should have been seen, that
cross traffic should have been stopped. So, we're doing that
work right now. We're using some AI tools. But also, I think
it's my responsibility to talk about the air traffic control
system and say that is a foreseeable danger. And that's why we
have to have conversations about safety, and that's all of us
doing our jobs together.
Senator Van Hollen. Yeah. No, I appreciate your efforts on
that. And let me just say, I listened carefully to your answer
with respect to the additional slots. And I agree it's a
conversation we need to have here. But my question to you, Mr.
Secretary, is given your important role, will you engage with
us in that discussion and a determination about whether or not
we now need to roll back some of those slots?
Secretary Duffy. I would welcome the opportunity to engage
with all of you on that conversation. Thank you.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Duffy. Thank you, Senator.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. And if there are no further
questions, Senators have seven days to submit any additional
questions for the subcommittee's official hearing record. We
request the DOT's responses within 30 days of that.
Questions Submitted to Hon. Sean Duffy
Questions Submitted by Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith
Question. Mr. Secretary, many of my constituents are concerned
about commercial truck drivers who lack English language proficiency.
As a matter of safety, existing regulations state that commercial
drivers must be able to speak, read, and write the English language
sufficiently: to converse with the general public; to understand
highway traffic signs and signals; to respond to official inquiries;
and to make entries on reports and records. Unfortunately, previous
Administrations have sought to minimize or ignore this law, which has
likely contributed to unsafe roadway conditions for the traveling
public. I applaud President Trump's recent Executive Order to enforce
English proficiency requirements for commercial drivers, repeal
previous regulations that diluted these standards, and strengthen
enforcement of existing laws.
Mr. Secretary, how do you propose to enforce this existing common-
sense law with the resources requested in your budget, how will that
improve public safety?
Answer. Proficiency in English is a non-negotiable safety
requirement for commercial drivers. Under 49 CFR Sec. 391.11(b)(2), a
person is qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in
interstate commerce if they can read and speak the English language
sufficiently to converse with the general public, to understand highway
traffic signs and signals in the English language, to respond to
official inquiries, and to make entries on reports and records. A
driver who does not meet the requirements in 49 CFR Sec. 391.11(b)(2)
is not qualified to operate a CMV. The failure to adequately enforce
driver qualification standards poses serious safety concerns and
increases the likelihood for a crash. As part of the driver
qualification standard, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA) believes a driver's failure to comply with the driver
qualification requirements in 49 CFR Sec. 391.11(b)(2) constitutes a
safety risk and that this risk was underestimated in previous agency
enforcement discretion. Increased enforcement and the consequence of
placing a driver out of service, instead of simply citing a driver for
the violation, will lead to increased safety.
Acting on the President's Executive Order, I directed FMCSA to
rescind the 2016 policy guidance that diminished ELP (English language
proficiency) enforcement and issue new guidance to ensure the necessary
enforcement of the ELP standard as prescribed by regulation in 49
C.F.R. 391.11(b)(2). Under the new guidance, CMV drivers who fail to
comply with the FMCSA's longstanding ELP requirements will be placed
out-of-service. The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Alliance voted to
incorporate violations of 49 C.F.R. Sec. 391.11(b)(2) into its out-of-
service criteria beginning June 25, 2025. Therefore, as of June 25,
2025, ELP violations will once again be included in the out-of-service
criteria-ensuring consistent, nationwide enforcement and reaffirming
the Department's unwavering commitment to roadway safety. Our State
partners, funded through the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program
formula funding, will use part of their funding to enforce the
requirements of 49 C.F.R. Sec. 391.11(b)(2) at roadside inspections to
ensure uniform enforcement throughout the country.
Question. Mr. Secretary, as you know, the trucking industry has
estimated that the United States needs more than 80,000 additional
drivers to meet the current demand. Achieving that goal requires world-
class commercial driving schools that properly train the workforce. The
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is responsible for
maintaining a registry of approved commercial driving schools. The
purpose of the registry is simple: schools in good standing remain on
the list while bad actors get removed. Unfortunately, I have heard from
my constituents that the registry isn't doing its job, allowing
unqualified schools to keep operating, misleading students, and
compromising road safety.
How does the budget request support DOT efforts to effectively
maintain the registry and remove bad actors?
Answer. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA)
commitment is to ensure that only qualified and properly vetted
training providers are listed on the Training Provider Registry (TPR)
and are allowed to train commercial drivers. The FMCSA has made
significant progress in strengthening oversight of the Entry Level
Driver Training (ELDT) program, but recognizes that more work remains.
FMCSA is examining its complaint procedures to ensure consistency
and reliability in addressing stakeholder concerns. The Agency is also
streamlining the process for submitting concerns related to training
providers and ensuring timely review and action on these complaints.
Approximately 75% of the training provider related complaints FMCSA
receives involve training providers failing to meet State based
licensure and registration requirements. The Agency has partnered with,
and is actively engaged with States to proactively require training
providers to register with a State, submit applicable filing fees, and
take any necessary steps to comply with State based licensure and
registration requirements.
To promote transparency and improve information sharing, FMCSA is
updating its website to accurately reflect the number of providers
currently under review or removed from the TPR due to noncompliance in
a more timely manner. To ensure consistent oversight, FMCSA is
allocating resources to support routine audits and investigations of
training providers. In addition, FMCSA has drafted standard operating
procedures to guide enforcement actions and ensure legal sufficiency.
All of these efforts are on track for completion by Fall 2025.
Question. Under the Biden Administration, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration has taken requirements in the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and expanded them beyond the
Congressional intent. An example of this is the significant emphasis
being placed on equity and public participation and engagement in
through the highway safety grant program. While it's important to
involve communities in safety planning, the regulations established by
the Biden Administration have gone well beyond statute and placed a
significant burden on States. The requirements are diverting resources
from the implementation of safety programs.
How will you work with the States to find ways to reduce
administrative red tape so that more of the money intended for safety
programs can be put to work improving safety on our roadways?
Answer. IIJA requires that State highway safety programs funded by
NHTSA highway safety grants ``provide for a comprehensive, data-driven
traffic safety program that results from meaningful public
participation and engagement from affected communities, particularly
those most significantly impacted by traffic crashes resulting in
injuries and fatalities.'' 23 U.S.C. Sec. 402. NHTSA implemented the
public participation and engagement requirement through notice and
comment rulemaking and extensive outreach.
After 2 years of experience administering the grant program with
these requirements and listening to feedback from some State grant
recipients, NHTSA recognizes the need to align the public participation
and engagement requirement with the varying resources and needs of the
different State highway safety offices. NHTSA is in the process of
considering ways to reduce administrative burden on States while
ensuring that they meet the statutory requirement.
Question. Under the Biden Administration, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration has taken requirements in the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and expanded them beyond the
Congressional intent. An example of this is the regulatory requirements
that were put in place that require law enforcement agencies that are
partnering with States to conduct traffic enforcement, to conduct
community collaboration efforts and collect demographic data on traffic
stops. Burdensome regulations like these have diverted resources from
the underlying safety mission and created roadblocks for law
enforcement to conduct traffic enforcement to stop unsafe driving
behavior.
How will you work to streamline the requirements to remove these
barriers?
Answer. IIJA requires that State highway safety programs funded by
NHTSA highway safety grants support ``data-driven traffic safety
enforcement programs that foster effective community collaboration to
increase public safety; and data collection and analysis to ensure
transparency, identify disparities in traffic enforcement, and inform
traffic enforcement policies, procedures, and activities.'' 23 U.S.C.
Sec. 402. NHTSA implemented this requirement through notice and comment
rulemaking. The agency does not prescribe specific activities to meet
the evidence-based enforcement program requirements. States meet this
statutory requirement by providing a ``description of the State's
evidence-based enforcement program activities'' in the IIJA annual
report. 23 C.F.R. Sec. 1300.35.
After receiving requests from States, NHTSA provided significant
technical assistance and shared best practices from State and local law
enforcement on potential ways to meet the requirements. NHTSA will
continue to provide technical assistance and flexibility to States to
implement this statutory requirement in a manner that best fits the
resources and needs of the respective/individual States.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
Question. As you know, the FAA has awarded the Hector International
Airport nearly $40 million for its Terminal Expansion Project through
the Airport Infrastructure Grant (AIG) program. This past March was the
12th consecutive month of all-time high passenger activity at the
airport. There is still much work to be done and another $31 million in
Federal funding is needed to complete the project. With increasing
demand for travel options created by continuous growth in the area,
it's vital that North Dakotans are able to travel safely and
efficiently throughout the country.
Will you work with us to advance this project?
Answer. The FAA will continue to work collaboratively with Hector
International Airport to help prepare it for future funding
opportunities, as appropriate.
Question. As I'm sure you'll agree, it is of critical importance to
make sure pilots and air traffic controllers have access to the mental
health services they need, both for their own well-being and to ensure
the safety of our skies for the American public. According to a survey
conducted by Pilot Mental Health Campaign, 12.6 percent of pilots met
the depression threshold, 4.1 percent reported suicidal thoughts, 78.6
percent felt worried about seeking health care, and 56 percent
exhibited some form of ``health care avoidant behavior.'' I will soon
introduce legislation that would increase transparency, authorize funds
to address the Federal Air Surgeon shortage and bring FAA regulations
relating to mental health treatment and medication up to date to match
current research and best practices.
Can I have your commitment to work with us to address this
important issue?
Answer. The Department is committed to continuing to work with
Congress to prioritize the mental health and well-being of pilots and
air traffic controllers. The FAA currently provides resources to pilots
and air traffic controllers to ensure their understanding of the
requirements for obtaining a medical clearance or an airman medical
certificate and offers appropriate care for mental health conditions.
In accordance with the requirements established in section 411 of
the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, the FAA has formed a Mental Health
Task Force, which is actively exploring innovative ways to expand and
update medical-related policy and procedures. In addition, the FAA
strongly supports and advocates for Peer Support Networks in the
aviation industry, and provides mental health training to peer support
volunteers.
Question. Development of key infrastructure in Tribal and rural
communities plays a key role in providing access to health care,
medical supplies, economic development, and commerce. Department of
Transportation (DOT) grants like Strengthening Mobility and
Revolutionizing Transportation, or SMART, have an important role
supporting innovation in these communities. The SMART program is
currently funding joint research by the University of North Dakota and
Nueta Hidatsa Sahnish College's MHA Nation Drone Project. Under the MHA
Nation Drone Project, both schools were able to successfully complete a
series of proof-of-concept flights transporting medical supplies across
Lake Sakakawea between Elbowoods Memorial Health Center in New Town,
N.D., and Twin Buttes, N.D. Typically, people living in New Town would
have to make a nearly two-hour drive to the health center to receive
medication; however, the drone flights successfully demonstrated that
medication can be delivered to remote communities in about 25 minutes.
In addition to technological infrastructure, DOT also funds critical
traditional infrastructure like roads, bridges, and airports. In North
Dakota, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is administering a DOT planning
grant for a proposed bridge over the Missouri River and celebrating the
expansion of the Standing Rock Airport in Fort Yates.
Can you discuss how the department is supporting these types of
innovative and important infrastructure projects through the FY26
budget?
Answer. On July 17--18, 2025, the Director of the SMART Grants
Program visited the MHA Nation for a demonstration of the Mandan,
Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation (MHA) Drone Project, a community
stakeholder meeting, and an educational Drone Camp with local students.
The MHA Nation has been invited to the third annual SMART Grantee
Summit, on July 30--31, 2025 in Washington, D.C. for technical
assistance from USDOT subject matter experts and peer support from a
cluster of grantees deploying similar technology. The FY26 budget will
provide continued technical assistance to Stage One grantees, and an
opportunity for them to apply for up to $15 million per project in
SMART Stage Two full scale implementation grants.
Question. One of the FAA's most successful government/industry
partnerships is the contract tower program. 265 smaller airports
participate in this important air traffic safety program, including in
Minot International Airport in North Dakota. These towers support
Department of Defense flight training operations and military
readiness, rural air service, general aviation, and flight schools all
across the country. It's also important to note that contract towers
account for approximately 30 percent of all tower operations in the
Nation, and that about 70 percent of contract controllers are veterans.
The program also continues to get high marks from the DOT Inspector
General.
Will contract towers remain a high priority for the administration?
Answer. The Federal Contract Tower Program continues to be a high
priority for the Administration. The FAA recognizes the critical role
that contract towers play in ensuring the safety, efficiency, and
continuity of air traffic operations across the National airspace
system, particularly at smaller and regional airports like Minot
International Airport. The FAA remains committed to maintaining and
strengthening this successful government-industry partnership.
Question. Staffing shortages continue to be a challenge throughout
the industry, including at contract towers.
What measures can DOT/FAA and the industry undertake
collaboratively to address staffing challenges at these towers?
Answer. To address controller staffing challenges, including at
contract towers, the FAA is actively working with industry partners and
contract tower stakeholders to explore and implement targeted
solutions. To expand the pipeline of qualified candidates, the FAA has
increased and enhanced recruitment and outreach, particularly to
veteran communities, and expanded our collaboration with educational
institutions and aviation programs. We look forward to continued
engagement with industry partners, educational institutions, and local
communities to ensure the long-term sustainability and success of the
contract tower program.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
Question. Secretary Duffy, in your written testimony you claim to
have saved taxpayers $9.5 billion in President Trump's first 100 days.
This Committee asked your staff for the details on these supposed
savings more than two weeks ago, but has received no response. I'm
deeply concerned by the lack of transparency and accountability on what
you are cutting and how it is impacting the communities in our States.
Please provide the full details in writing to the Committee on what
makes up the $9.5 billion in cuts?
Answer. The $9.5 billion is comprised of the projected future
savings from termination of certain University Transportation Center
Program Grants; savings from DOT assuming control of MTA's Penn Station
Overhaul Project; reduced project scope of the Dock Bridge Project
under the Federal State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail
Program; and termination of a Corridor Identification and Development
Program grant supporting the Texas High Speed Rail Corridor project,
which on the low end was expected to require $10 to 20 billion in
Federal investment over several years.
Question. Secretary Duffy, in your testimony you spoke of approving
405 grants totaling $4.9 billion in President Trump's first 100 days. I
understand that as part of these approvals your Department has re-
evaluated each grant award announced under the previous Administration,
and in some cases ``de-scoped'' the grant award, meaning you removed
previously eligible activities that the recipient intended to use the
funding for. If you are removing parts of a project, that leads me to
assume you are also reducing the amount of funding a city, State,
Tribe, or another entity was previously awarded. This Committee has
asked your staff repeatedly for the details on the Department's ``de-
scoping'', but again has received no response.
Please provide a list of all competitive grant awards that were
announced under the prior Administration but not yet obligated by
January 20, 2025 that includes the following information for each
award:
--Modal administration,
--Competitive grant program,
--Project name,
--Recipient name,
--Amount originally awarded,
--Amount approved for obligation,
--If/how the scope of work has changed compared to the original
announced award, and
--Rationale for changing the scope of work.
--This detailed list should cover all competitive grants approved for
obligation by the Department between January 20, 2025 and the
date of receipt of this question.
Answer. Please visit this link for the latest DOT approved
projects: https://www.transportation.gov/infrastructure-investment-and-
jobs-act/dot-approved-projects-july-16-2025.
Question. Each year when the Committee writes our appropriations
bill we re-examine the staffing needs at each modal administration. We
work to understand the needs and to provide sufficient funding to
support critical safety missions and the day-to-day operations of the
Department through specific salaries and expenses directed in our
appropriations bill. However, to do this, we need cooperation from the
Department on current staffing levels, as well as transparency on the
needs. While I was heartened to hear your response to my colleague that
you would hire more staff if you find a need, I'm concerned we do not
know that the gaps are as a result of two rounds of the deferred
resignation program, firing probationary employees, and more. This
Committee has asked your staff numerous times for staffing details and
to date you have only provided extremely high-level figures that
provide no insight into how it is affecting one office or another,
headquarters, or regional and local offices.
Please provide the total number of people employed by the
Department of Transportation as of the last pay period under the prior
Administration and as of the date of receipt of this question. Please
also break this total number of staff down by modal administration,
office, headquarters, and regional/local offices.
Answer. See ``Attachment 1--DOT Staff Breakdown'' for a breakdown
of DOT staff in Pay Period 3 of 2025, the last pay period under the
last administration, and Pay Period 12, the most recent Pay Period
prior to June 2.
Question. The FY 2025 Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and
Extensions Act (Public Law 119-4) provides $280 million for the FAA's
Research, Engineering, and Development (RED) account. Funds within the
RED account are authorized to be eligible for research to reduce noise
and emissions from aircraft, and improve the efficiency of engines.
Within the RED account, how much fund will you allocate for the
FAA's Aviation Sustainability Center of Excellence on Sustainable
Aviation Fuels (ASCENT) and the Center of Excellence for Joint Advanced
Materials and Structures (JAMS)?
Answer. In FY 2025, the FAA plans to allocate $29.9 million for
ASCENT. We are still in the process of finalizing the projects for
JAMS, but we anticipate allocating funding in FY 2025 at similar levels
to FY 2024, which was $11.85 million.
Question. Enforcement of pipeline safety rules has dropped to
unprecedented lows under this Administration. Since January 20, 2025,
according to PHMSA's Enforcement Transparency webpage, PHMSA has only
initiated five cases against potential violators, which is a more than
90 percent drop from both the 91 cases PHMSA opened during the same
period of time under the Biden Administration and the 68 cases PHMSA
opened during the same period of time under the first Trump
Administration. Meanwhile, the last 2 years have been the deadliest 2-
year period for pipelines in nearly 15 years.
How does the Department explain the sudden drop in cases initiated
by PHMSA?
Answer. The number and type of enforcement cases that PHMSA
initiates during a particular period of time varies and depends on a
variety of factors, including the findings made in previous inspections
and investigations, the judgement of the Regional Directors and other
staff responsible for evaluating the merits of a case and determining
whether to initiate a proceeding, and the enforcement priorities of the
current administration. PHMSA issued two high-profile enforcement
actions during the time period referenced--a safety order to Sunoco
L.P. in response to a jet fuel leak on a pipeline in Upper Makefield,
Pennsylvania and a corrective action order to South Bow following a
crude oil release on the Keystone Pipeline in Ransom County, North
Dakota--demonstrating the Administration's commitment to ensuring the
safety of our pipeline network. PHMSA also filed a civil action in
Federal district court against Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company for
alleged violations committed in connection with a fatal gas pipeline
incident that occurred several years ago near Meade, Kansas.
Question. In addition, PHMSA recently announced long overdue
updates to its policies and procedures for pipeline safety enforcement
proceedings. Those updates include changes to the policy that PHMSA
uses to calculate proposed civil penalties and the procedure that PHMSA
follows in determining the agency records that should be included in
the case file. PHMSA notes that the updates to the latter procedure
respond directly to a bipartisan mandate that Congress included in the
Protecting Our Infrastructure of Pipelines and Enhancing Safety (PIPES)
Act of 2020, currently codified at 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60117(b)(1)(C). PHMSA
has issued 20 new pipeline safety enforcement actions since adopting
these critical due process changes and expects to issue more in the
coming months.
On January 23, 2025, PHMSA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on
requirements for carbon dioxide and hazardous liquid pipelines was
withdrawn as a result of President Trump's Presidential Memorandum
titled ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review''. What is the Department's
plan to reissue this proposed rulemaking?
Answer. In accordance with the Executive Order issued by the
President on January 20, 2025, the proposed rule for carbon dioxide
pipelines was withdrawn prior to publication and is currently under
review. PHMSA will work to advance the Administration's regulatory
priorities for pipeline safety as quickly as possible.
Question. On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued a
Presidential Memorandum titled ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review''
which directed agencies to immediately withdraw rules that had been
sent to the Office of the Federal Register but not published in the
Federal Register and to consider postponing rules that had been
published in the Federal Register or issued in any manner but had not
taken effect.
Please list all DOT rulemakings impacted by this Presidential
Memorandum, and their status as of the date of receipt of this
question.
Answer. The following documents were sent to the Office of the
Federal Register before January 20, 2025, but withdrawn prior to the
publication:
Federal Railroad Administration
--A notice titled, ``Program Approval: Georgia Central Railway, L.P.
and Heart of Georgia Railroad, Inc. `` This document was
initially scheduled for publication on January 22, 2025. The
notice was revised and published on February 5, 2025 (90 Fed.
Reg. 9053).
--A notice titled, ``Notice of Final Nonavailability Waiver for the
Alabama State Port Authority to Purchase Two Rubber-Tired
Gantry Cranes.'' This notice was scheduled for publication on
January 22, 2025. FRA published a substantively identical
notice on June 20, 2025.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
--A notice and request for comments on a revision of a currently
approved information collection titled, ``Automated Driving
Systems 2.0: A Vision for Safety.'' This notice was initially
scheduled for publication on January 22, 2025. It was published
on February 20, 2025 (90 Fed. Reg. 10033).
--A notification titled, ``Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards;
Plain Language and Small Business Impacts of Motor Vehicle
Safety; Section 610FRN--YEARS 1 THRU 7 2024-12.'' This
notification has not been published. The Department continues
to review its rulemakings for impacts to small businesses
pursuant to section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Federal Highway Administration
--A notice extending a comment period titled, ``Asset Management
Plans; Management and Monitoring Systems--Notice of Extension
of Comment Period'' (RIN: 2125-AG00). A final rule was
published on May 30, 2025 (90 Fed. Reg. 22854).
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
--A notice of proposed rulemaking titled, ``Unified Registration
System Enhancements and Updates'' (RIN 2126-AB56). This notice
has not been published. The Department is considering its next
action.
Federal Transit Administration
--A notice of proposed rulemaking titled, ``Bus Testing'' (RIN 2132-
AB40). This notice has not been published. The Department is
considering its next action.
--A notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) titled, ``Transportation
Equity Research.'' This NOFO has not been published. The
Department is considering its next action.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
--A final rule titled, ``Pipeline Safety: Leak Detection and Repair''
(RIN 2137-AF51). This final rule has not been published. The
Department is considering its next action.
--A notice of proposed rulemaking titled, ``Pipeline Safety: Safety
of Carbon Dioxide and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines'' (RIN 2137-
AF60). This final rule has not been published. The Department
is considering its next action.
The following documents were published in the Federal Register
before January 20, 2025, with effective dates after January 25, 2025,
but before March 20, 2025. The Presidential Memorandum directed DOT to
consider extending those effective dates to March 20 and to exercise
enforcement discretion until at least March 20.
FAA
--A final rule title, ``Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and
Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures;
Miscellaneous Amendments'' (RIN 2120-AA84). In consideration of
its safety impacts, this rule took effect without delay on
February 20, 2025.
FHWA
--A final rule titled, ``Buy America Requirements for Manufactured
Products'' (RIN 2125-AG13). The effective date of this rule was
extended until March 20, 2025, after which it took effect.
NHTSA
--A final rule titled, ``Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards;
FMVSS No. 305a Electric-Powered Vehicles: Electric Powertrain
Integrity Global Technical Regulation No. 20 Incorporation by
Reference'' (RIN 2127-AM43). The effective date of this rule
was extended until March 20, 2025, after which it took effect.
--A final rule titled, ``Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards;
Occupant Crash Protection, Seat Belt Reminder Systems, Controls
and Displays'' (RIN 2127-AL37). The effective date of this rule
was extended until March 20, 2025, after which it took effect.
--A final rule titled, ``Anthropomorphic Test Devices, HIII 5TH
Percentile Female Test Dummy; Incorporation by Reference'' (RIN
2127-AM13). The effective date of this rule was extended until
March 20, 2025, after which it took effect.
--A final rule titled, ``Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards;
Child Restraint Systems, Child Restraint Anchorage Systems,
Incorporation by Reference'' (RIN 2127-AL20). Effective March
10, 2025.The effective date of this rule was extended until
March 20, 2025, after which it took effect.
FTA
--``Third Party Contracting Guidance; Notice of Availability of Final
Circular and Response to Comments.'' The effective date of this
rule was extended until March 20, 2025, after which it took
effect.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
Question. On May 2, 2025, the Department of Transportation
terminated the 5-year UTC grant agreements for seven UTCs. This
included UTCs led by the University of California, Davis, the City
College of New York, the University of Southern California, New York
University, San Jose State University, the University of New Orleans,
and Johns Hopkins University. The Department has claimed these UTCs
were terminated because the awards no longer effectuate the program
goals or agency priorities.
Please provide a list of all research conducted by each of the
seven UTCs, and identify which research activities were found to no
longer effectuate the program goals or agency priorities.
Answer. Specific project lists were not used to determine
inconsistency with DOT priorities. The universities' grant
applications, which serve as the grants' Statements of Work (SOW), were
used to determine that the grants were inconsistent with the priorities
of the Department. Details of each grant's inconsistency with DOT
priorities, as stated in each university's termination letter, are
provided below.
University of California, Davis
The National Center for Sustainable Transportation (NCST) addresses
``accelerating reductions in greenhouse gas emissions while
simultaneously enhancing transportation equity.'' NCST's objectives
``to prioritize disadvantaged communities,'' ``reduce impacts
associated with infrastructure...for disadvantaged populations,'' and
``support a Transportation Equity and Environmental Justice Advisory
Group'' are inconsistent the DOT's priority to cease promoting DEI
initiatives that discriminate on the basis of race, national origin, or
another protected characteristic.
City University of New York
CUNY's language ``to empower economically disadvantaged
populations, including minorities, women, veterans...by improving
equity of opportunity in an unequal infrastructure labor market''
directly conflicts with agency priorities by targeting specific groups
on the basis of discriminatory criteria, for enhanced opportunity.
Likewise, CUNY's ``model for Transforming Minority Doctoral Students
into Academia ...to Increase Diversity of Faculty Across the
University'' and multiple references to ``Equity'' (``Our work will
address...Equity...,'' ``to promote equity and accessibility,'' and
``equity-based project selection'') all prescribe race- or sex-specific
initiatives. The SOW's cited work is inconsistent with DOT's
priorities.
University of Southern California
The Pacific Southwest Region (PSR) UTC promotes equitable access
and furthers research themes regarding ``uneven transportation access
across PSR's enormously diverse region, particularly among
transportation-disadvantaged travelers and communities.'' PSRUTC's
research priorities that ``deepen commitments to diversifying the
transportation workforce; draw a more diverse pool of students; and
focuses on Equity'' are inconsistent with DOT's priority to cease
promoting DEI initiatives that discriminate on the basis of race,
national origin, or another protected characteristic. Furthermore,
PSRUTC's EV statement (``perspective on equity in the transition to
electric vehicles'') and environmental justice themes (``addressing EJ
problems in the goods movement system'') promote discriminatory
consideration and ``green new deal'' principles that are inconsistent
with DOT's priorities.
New York University
NYU repeatedly commits to ``engag[ing] with the community of
disadvantaged travelers,'' ``developing equity measures based on travel
time by mode and cost,'' and ``Equity-Based ITS Project Selection.'' It
also includes a ``Diversity and inclusion portal,'' mandatory diversity
metrics, and plans to ``hold diversity and inclusion talks.'' The SOW's
cited work is inconsistent with DOT's priorities. The Connected
Communities for Smart Mobility Toward Accessible and Resilient
Transportation for Equitable Reducing Congestion Center's (C2SMARTER)
promise to ``investigate MBUF long-term equity impacts,'' ``adopt a
quantitative equity screening component,'' and ``build interactive
workshops on transportation equity'' is similarly inconsistent with
this priority. Its EV work (``equity of access to electric vehicles and
charging infrastructure'') promotes discriminatory considerations and
``green new deal'' principles.
San Jose State University
The SOW focuses on reducing the impact of transportation on climate
change and on promoting climate justice and environmental justice, as
well as activities to ensure that equity considerations are at the
forefront in transportation policy making and planning. Examples of the
SOW's Research Program include Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation
Strategies: Implications for Equity and Sustainability Across the
Urban-rural Continuum; Path to Economy-Wide Net Zero Emissions by 2020;
and Climate Justice & Environmental Justice. These examples are
inconsistent with DOT's priorities.
University of New Orleans
The Center for Equitable Transit-Oriented Communities' (CETOC)
stated mission, per the SOW, ``is to cultivate transit-centered,
equitable, and resilient communities....'' The Extreme Heat Exposure
study assesses transit riders' climate vulnerability, which conflicts
with the agency's priority of maximizing traditional forms of energy
and natural resources to the greatest extent possible. Similarly
inconsistent with DOT's priorities is the statement in the SOW that
CETOC will educate students and the workforce in transportation ``with
the climate benefits of transit-oriented and multimodal transportation
systems.''
The Johns Hopkins University
The SOW's strong focus on climate change mitigation,
electrification, greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction strategies, and
``making climate change the center of transportation decisions'' is
inconsistent with DOT's priority to promote traditional forms of energy
and natural resources. For example, the SOW promotes the development of
solar-powered vehicles, lithium-sulfur batteries, GHG emission
reduction strategies, and autonomous delivery systems intended to
reduce or replace emissions from traditional trucking operations. In
addition, the SOW places repeated emphasis on diversity, equity, and
inclusion (DEI), including targeted support for minority-serving
institutions and underrepresented student populations, which is
inconsistent DOT's priority to cease initiatives that discriminate on
the basis of race, national origin, or another protected
characteristic. For instance, the SOW States that ``Every CST
leadership and educational program will include active partnerships
with our minority institution members and prioritize underrepresented
students and transportation workforce,'' and further notes that
``Scholarships, fellowships, and mentorships are reserved for
underrepresented students,'' with several K-12 outreach initiatives
(e.g., the COMTO Minority Initiative and the Transportation YOU Summit)
aimed exclusively at minority students.
Question. What does the Department intend to do with the remaining
funds for these seven UTCs?
Answer. The Department intends to recompete and reissue the
remaining funding.
Question. Will these seven UTCs be given the opportunity to re-
apply under a new NOFO?
Answer. Yes, these seven UTCs will have the opportunity to re-apply
under the new NOFO.
Question. The Department recently released an Air Traffic Control
modernization plan, which is particularly important for the congested
airspace around JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark.
--How much funding are you requesting for this Modernization Plan?
--Why was the Modernization Plan not included in the FY 2026 skinny
budget?
--What is the FAA doing to improve the telecommunications
infrastructure at these airports which has caused tremendous
delays in recent weeks?
--What other specific improvements does the Air Traffic Control
Modernization Plan envision to reduce flight cancellations and
delays for New Yorkers?
Answer. The FAA is collaborating with industry to develop
innovative ideas, new technologies, and new procurement strategies to
expedite the building of a brand new, state of-the-art air traffic
control system. As a first step, the FAA is seeking information about
how best to implement this new air traffic system. On June 3, 2025, the
agency issued a Request for Information for an integrator to play a key
role in managing this effort, including acquiring capabilities, and
deploying the new technologies. The FAA looks forward to working with
the Congress to secure the funding needed to execute the
Administration's vision for building the air traffic system of the
future.
In the near term, FAA is actively modernizing telecommunications
infrastructure at major New York-area airports to address recent
delays. This includes replacing outdated copper lines with fiber optics
and installing a new fiber optic cable between Philadelphia and New
York to improve controller-pilot communications.
The FAA will leverage new technologies like satellite-based
tracking, digital communications, and real-time surface management to
reduce delays and cancellations at New York's congested airports. These
upgrades, along with airspace redesign and improved infrastructure, aim
to enhance efficiency, safety, and reliability for travelers.
Question. On May 20, 2025, the FAA issued an interim order reducing
flight arrivals and departures at Newark Liberty International Airport
(EWR). The FAA proposed a limit of 28 arrivals and 28 departures per
hour (total 56 operations per hour) during the ongoing construction
period. The construction period is defined as the daily closure of
Runway 4L/22R until June 15, 2025, and weekends from September 1, 2025,
through December 31, 2025 from Friday at 11:00 p.m. through 5:00 a.m.
on Sunday. Outside of the construction period, through the end of
Summer 2025 scheduling season ending October 25, 2025, FAA proposes
limit of 34 arrivals and 34 departures per hour (total 68 operations
per hour).
What information or analysis did the FAA use to determine the limit
of 56 total operations per hour during the construction period and 68
total operations per hour outside of the construction period?
Answer. The FAA established the rates of 28 arrivals/departures
during construction, and 34 arrivals/departures after runway
construction is completed, using prior operational experience with
single runway configurations at EWR. The FAA recognizes that airport
construction, runway/taxiway closures, weather (wind, IFR conditions,
etc.), and staffing dictates the number of sectors that can be open at
one time. To safely manage aircraft in and out of EWR and surrounding
airports, arrival rates were modified based on the number of sectors
that could be opened, taking into consideration critical controller
training needs. Rates are dynamic based on runway configurations and
daily weather and staffing constraints.
Question. What stakeholders did the FAA speak with during the delay
reduction meetings?
Answer. The FAA met with key stakeholders including Alaska
Airlines, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, JetBlue, Spirit Airlines,
United Airlines, and Allegiant Air, and the Port Authority of New York
and New Jersey.
Question. Will you commit to providing the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations monthly briefings on the impact of these
delay reductions on flight cancellations and delays as well as level of
service and number of communities served by flights to EWR?
Answer. The FAA will brief the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations upon request.
Question. The FY 2026 skinny budget makes no mention of funding for
Amtrak, yet Amtrak funding has been a priority for members on both
sides of the aisle. In New York, the Northeast Corridor and our State-
Supported Routes are extremely important.
Will you support the funding levels necessary to ensure Amtrak can
operate all existing service lines on both the Northeast Corridor and
National Network and not cut any service?
In response to my colleague's earlier question on Amtrak, you
contemplated how we could make the Northeast Corridor ``faster'' and
pointed out that ``the rest of the world has high-speed rail''. In
order to increase the speed of trains along the Northeast Corridor,
significant investments in replacing infrastructure are required along
with coordination between Amtrak, DOT, States, and commuter rail lines
that also operate on the track. This work is underway thanks to the
historic rail investments provided by Congress in the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law. Will you commit to DOT continuing the investments
and coordinated support necessary to bring faster, more reliant Amtrak
service to the Northeast Corridor?
Answer. The FY 2026 President's Budget maintains Amtrak's annual
grant funding at the $2.4 billion level appropriated in FY 2024 and FY
2025 to cover Amtrak's base operating, capital, and debt service
requirements. These funds will (1) sustain the operations of the
Northeast Corridor, State-Supported, and Long Distance services; (2)
enable Amtrak to fulfill its ongoing maintenance and capital renewal
programs; and (3) support the Department's oversight efforts to drive
Amtrak ridership and revenue growth, contain operating costs, and
deliver capital projects more efficiently.
The FY 2026 President's Budget also supports the final year of
advance appropriations provided by the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (IIJA). To date, these funds are advancing more than $22
billion awarded for projects on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) to reduce
the corridor's state-of-good-repair backlog, replace or rehabilitate
the 15 major bridges and tunnels that are each over 100 years old and
cause significant delays, and modernize Amtrak's rolling stock and
facilities. The Trump Administration is working to ensure that taxpayer
dollars are spent on only the most meritorious projects that enhance
the transportation system, improve safety, and lower costs to consumers
and the traveling public.
Question. Building infrastructure in America already costs more
than any other country. I am concerned by President Trump's reckless
tariff policies and the impact it will have on construction materials
and parts, which will only make this problem worse.
Mr. Secretary, will the Administration's tariff policy make
transportation projects more expensive or less expensive?
Answer. The Department expects that the tariffs will have a minimal
impact on the cost of transportation projects. Transportation projects
that receive Federal funding and include Buy American provisions
already rely on American-made steel and aluminum rather than imported
products, and therefore would not be directly impacted by the tariffs.
Estimates of the effect of earlier tariffs showed an increase in steel
prices of just 2.4 percent between 2018 and 2021, and recent steel
prices in the U.S. have been below 2021 levels.
Question. I am glad to see you rightly focused on air traffic
controller hiring, and I am optimistic the improvements to the training
academy will help flight delays in New York. However, hundreds of air
traffic controllers are raising red flags about a provision in the
House reconciliation bill, which could force them to retire early.
House Republicans have voted to gut the supplemental annuity in the
Federal Employees Retirement System for air traffic controllers who are
eligible to retire but cannot collect Social Security. Controllers are
already overstressed and they shouldn't have to worry about losing out
on their pensions.
Mr. Secretary, will you work to defeat this ill-conceived proposal
to eliminate the supplemental annuity for air traffic controllers?
Answer. The Department is supportive of any measures to recruit and
retain air traffic controllers, particularly as we make further
progress on addressing the controller shortage. Recently, we provided
an incentive package to increase retention of experienced controllers
in the field. The FAA offered controllers who are eligible for early
retirement but remain on the job as part of the controller workforce a
lump sum payment of 20% of their basic pay for each year they continue
to work. As we continue to improve controller staffing levels, the
Department is committed to working with Congress on any legislative
proposals that may impact the recruitment and retention of air traffic
controllers.
Question. According to the DOGE website, the Department has
terminated or cancelled at least 26 leases for office space across 20
States and Puerto Rico that was used by the Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Federal
Transit Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, Maritime
Administration, and Pipelines and Hazardous Safety Administration.
--Please provide a detailed list of all leases that have been
terminated or cancelled by the Department between January 20,
2025 and the date of receipt of this question. This list should
include:
--the modal administration;
--the location (including address) of the leased building or office
space;
--the date on which the existing lease was to expire prior to the
termination or cancellation;
--the date on which the existing lease will end as a result of the
termination or cancellation (i.e. when it will no longer be
used by the Department);
--the amount of any early termination or cancellation fees;
--the number of staff whose duty station was the leased building or
office space as of January 20, 2025;
--where the staff whose duty station was the leased building or
office space will report to following the termination or
cancellation;
--and whether the Department will consolidate or co-locate the
staff whose duty station was the leased building or office
space in building or office space currently leased or owned
by other modal administrations.
Answer. See ``Attachment 2--Leases'' for the requested information
on leases. Currently, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, MARAD, and PHMSA are the
modes impacted by GSA action to exercise the soft-term termination. GSA
rescinded some leases impacted by the soft-term lease termination, and
FAA and OIG are no longer impacted. DOT is identifying alternate
locations that are within 50-miles of the facilities impacted by GSA's
soft-term termination action. Currently, we are still evaluating these
alternate locations to verify capacity and existing program functions
that are performed at these locations.
In addition, DOT has submitted space requirements of these impacted
facilities to GSA's space match program. DOT, with the support of GSA,
is looking at options to relocate staff to GSA identified locations
that have an excess of space.
Note that the impacted locations are under the control and custody
of GSA, and DOT is an occupant. GSA has rescinded some of the leases it
intended to terminate. GSA would have better information on why some
leases have been rescinded and why some leases continue with the soft-
term termination action, as well as potential monetary benefits.
Question. According to the DOGE website, the Department has
terminated or cancelled countless contracts. In response to previous
inquiries from this Committee, your staff shared the following on March
4, 2025: ``DOT is reviewing existing contracts to identify
opportunities for achieving efficiencies and ensuring that spending is
alignment with Administration priorities.''
Please provide a detailed list of all contracts that have been
terminated or cancelled by the Department between January 20, 2025 and
the date of receipt of this question. This list should include the
modal administration, source of funding for the contract, the purpose
of the contract, and the rationale for why the contract was no longer
necessary.
Answer. See ``Attachment 3--Contracts'' for the requested
information on contracts.
Question. Please provide a list of all advisory committees, panels,
task forces, and commissions that were funded and operational in fiscal
year 2024.
Indicate those that are mandated by law and those that are
discretionary; the funding level of each; and the expiration date of
the most recent charter.
Also list each advisory committee, panel, task force, and
commission that have been terminated or cancelled by the Department
between January 20, 2025 and the date of receipt of this question, as
well as those the Department proposes to operate in fiscal year 2026,
with the proposed budget for each.
Answer. See ``Attachment 4--Advisory Committees'' for the requested
information on Advisory Committees.
Question. Please provide an update on any plans or planning the
Department has to reorganize the Department or its modal
administrations.
Answer. The FY 2026 Budget proposes consolidation of common support
services across DOT Operating Administrations into OST. These functions
include Procurement, Human Resources (HR), Information Technology (IT),
Civil Rights, Public Affairs, and Governmental Affairs. The proposal
assumes all modal IT spending, including commodity and program
spending, will be consolidated under OST. The consolidation excludes
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Office of Inspector
General, and some functions of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway
Corporation (GLS).
Question. Please provide a list of all political and Presidential
appointees employed by the Department as of the date of receipt of this
question.
This list should include the name and title for each political and
Presidential appointee and the modal administration in which such staff
is employed.
If the total number is less than the 125 political and Presidential
appointees allowed under section 183 of the Transportation, Housing and
Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024
(Public Law 118-42), which remains in effect under the Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2025 (Public Law 118-158), please
provide the total number of political and Presidential appointees
expected by September 30, 2025 based upon vacancies, hiring plans,
pending appointments by the President, and pending confirmations by the
U.S. Senate.
Answer. See ``Attachment 5--Noncareer Appointees'' for the
requested information. At this time, the Department expects 110
appointees onboard by September 30, 2025.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
Question. The tragic collision at National Airport on January 29th
caused the death of 67 people, including two Rhode Islanders, Christine
Lane and her son, Spencer. I've met with Doug Lane, Christine's husband
and Spencer's dad. I've also met with Tim and Sherri Lilley, whose son
Sam was killed in the collision. Mr. Lane and the Lilley family have
joined the families of other American Eagle Flight 5342 passengers to
an advocate for safety reforms following this tragedy. I know you've
also spent time meeting with these families and heard their stories.
One of the items that Mr. Lane and this group of families are
calling for is an independent review of operations at National Airport.
Have you taken steps to initiate this a review?
Answer. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), an
independent Federal agency, continues to investigate the causal and
contributing factors of the tragic accident at DCA, including the
airport operations. Furthermore, in early June, the Department
announced its support for an independent review by the DOT Inspector
General of airspace operations and safety oversight in the National
Capital Region.
In addition to supporting the NTSB investigation, the FAA initiated
several safety reviews of the operations at DCA and has already
implemented a comprehensive series of safety measures to enhance
aviation safety in the National Capital Region, including:
--Permanently restricted mixed traffic in the immediate vicinity of
the airport
--Rescinded the authority to operate without broadcasting an ADS-B
Out signal in the National Capital Region and Washington D.C.,
with exceptions limited to active national security missions,
continuity operations, and presidential transport
--Added lateral widths to the charted helicopter routes
--Eliminated the use of visual separation within 5 miles of DCA
--Increased the number of certified professional controllers at DCA
tower from 28 to 30
--Increased the number of operational supervisors at DCA tower from
six to eight
--Updated helicopter routes to ensure helicopters have proper
procedural radar separation from other aircraft in accordance
with the NTSB's recommendations
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question. You published a plan to modernize our Nation's air
traffic control (ATC) system.
Please provide detailed requests for funding required to implement
your plan over the project's proposed time frame.
Answer. The FAA is collaborating with industry to develop
innovative ideas, new technologies, and new procurement strategies to
expedite the building of a brand new, state of-the-art air traffic
control system. As a first step, the FAA is seeking information about
how best to implement this new air traffic system. On June 3, 2025, the
agency issued a Request for Information for an integrator to play a key
role in managing this effort, including acquiring capabilities, and
deploying the new technologies. The FAA looks forward to working with
the Congress to secure the funding needed to execute the
Administration's vision for building the air traffic system of the
future.
Question. President Trump stated that the entire ATC modernization
project will be executed under ``one big, beautiful contract''. Your
modernization plan calls for improvements to telecommunications
systems, air traffic management software, tower facilities, and much
more. These diverse upgrades are not best served by one contract.
Do you intend to execute a single contract for this modernization
project? Do you commit to executing a fair, open, and ethical bid
process for the contracts issued in implementing this modernization
project?
Answer. On June 3, 2025, the agency issued a Request for
Information for an integrator to play a key role in managing this
effort, including acquiring capabilities, and deploying the new
technologies. The FAA will work collaboratively with the integrator to
develop the overall acquisition strategy, systems modernization, and
execution of the work. The FAA is committed to executing a fair, open,
and ethical bid process for any contracts issued.
Question. Over 4,000 DOT employees accepted deferred resignation
program offers and you have stated intent to execute a mass layoff
later this month. In your appearance before the Senate Appropriations
subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, you
stated that the pace of executing grant agreements must quicken.
How do you plan to accomplish this while simultaneously cutting
department capacity?
Answer. In the near term, the Department stood up a Grants Review
Task Force that is prioritizing the clearance of the unprecedented
backlog of unobligated selections. Moving forward as part of
Departmental efforts to improve efficiency, DOT is prioritizing work to
unify competitive grants processes and systems. This initiative will
identify opportunities to improve and expedite the execution of
competitive grant agreements.
Question. Deputy Secretary Bradbury made a personal commitment in
his confirmation hearing to maintain the Office of Tribal Government
Affairs at DOT, which is the central body responsible for fostering
government-to-government relations between the agency and Tribes and
supports Tribal self-governance. It was funded at $1.53 million in
FY24.
Will the President's Budget Request maintain and fund this office
at DOT?
Answer. The funding levels for the Office of Tribal Government
Affairs in the President's Budget for FY 2026 are commensurate with the
FY 2024 levels.
Question. Tribal governments rely heavily on consistent and
predictable transportation funding, particularly from the Tribal
Transportation Program and the Rural and Tribal Assistance Pilot
Program.
Can you commit today that the Department will not reduce or
redirect funding for Tribal transportation without prior Tribal
consultation, and can you detail how your Department intends to protect
Tribal transportation programs in your FY26 budget request?
Answer. The Rural and Tribal Assistance Pilot Program received
limited funding through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA) and subsequently obtained funding in the FY 2024 Consolidated
Appropriations and the Full Year Continuing Resolution for FY 2025.
This funding was not part of prior Budget proposals but was
appropriated by Congress. If Congress decides to continue funding this
program, the Department will continue to implement.
Question. Executive Order 13175 and the U.S. Department of
Transportation's own Tribal Consultation Plan under Departmental Order
5301.1 require that your agency engage in meaningful consultation with
Tribal Nations before implementing policies or actions that have direct
effects on Tribes.
Did you comply with DOT's Order 5301.1 before implementing
reorganization efforts?
Answer. The Department accepted all meeting requests based on DOT
Order 5301.1. As such, the Office of Tribal Government Affairs has met
with all Tribes that requested meetings and has facilitated all
incoming questions.
Will you commit to pausing any programmatic changes that could
affect Tribes until full consultation is completed?
Answer. Currently there are no programmatic changes affecting the
Office of Tribal Government Affairs.
Question. Successful implementation of the Tribal Transportation
Self-Governance Program depends on close coordination with the Bureau
of Indian Affairs and Tribes. Under recent reorganization efforts and
funding reductions, Tribes are concerned about negative impacts to this
program and their ability to secure funding agreements and technical
support.
Will you commit to working with this me to implement the Self-
Governance Program as Congress intended to avoid service disruptions to
Tribes?
Answer. Yes. As challenges arise, please have your staff contact
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tribal Government Affairs, James A.
Crawford, at [email protected].
Will you commit to expanding this program to support Tribal self-
governance at DOT?
Answer. The Department's Tribal Transportation Self Governance
Program (TTSGP) is expanding, with an increasing number of Tribes
participating in the program.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
Question. Congress will be putting together a new surface
reauthorization bill over the next year. I have several priorities for
the bill including the Sarah Debbink Langenkamp Active Transportation
Safety Act. Sarah was a constituent of mine, and she was killed while
riding her bicycle in Bethesda. This is a bipartisan bill that I
introduced with Senators Baldwin, Hagerty and Johnson. The bill makes
it easier for States and local governments to use Highway Safety
Improvement program dollars as a local match for safe bicycling and
pedestrian infrastructure.
Will you support the inclusion of this legislation in the next
surface reauthorization bill and once passed, will you commit to
implementing the requirements?
Answer. Safety is the Department's number one priority. DOT will
work with Congress as it considers ideas, including this act, for the
next reauthorization bill. If this legislation is enacted into law, the
Department will implement its requirements.
Question. Earlier this month you terminated grants for seven
University Transportation Centers over concerns related to advancing a
so-called ``woke agenda.''
These grants required a dollar-for-dollar match, meaning the
universities made significant financial and institutional commitments
based on the promise of a 5-year Federal partnership. I'm concerned not
just about the termination itself, but about how it was handled, the
justification provided, and what this says about the Federal
Government's willingness to honor its commitments.
Given that some of the universities have already revised their work
plans and others have expressed a willingness to do so, can you commit
today to working with these institutions to reverse the terminations
and instead pursue a path that allows these UTCs to fulfill their
mission under revised, mutually agreeable terms?
Answer. U.S. DOT does not intend to reverse the terminations, nor
to rescope the terminated grants. The Department plans to recompete the
UTC grants to support research into advanced transportation
technologies that enhance American competitiveness and innovation.
Importantly, the universities whose grants were terminated will be
eligible to participate in the re-competition process, without regard
to the termination action.
Question. On March 12, 2025 it was reported that one of your modal
agencies, the Federal Railroad Administration, has been meeting with
representatives from Elon Musk's Boring Company about doing work on the
Frederick Douglass Tunnel Amtrak project in Baltimore.
This appears to be another example of a clear conflict of interest
between the President, his benefactors and the American taxpayers.
In the interests of transparency, please tell me who else the FRA
has been ``consulting with'' ahead of awarding a new contract for the
project?
Do any of the other firms have a direct line to the President?
Are any others owned by the same person who already has several
billion dollars in other Federal contracts? ($38 billion as of February
2025)
Answer. In November 2023, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
awarded more than $4.7 billion in funding under the Federal-State
Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail program to Amtrak to replace
the Baltimore and Potomac (B&P) Tunnel. The tunnel was built in 1873,
is one of the oldest structures on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) and
serves as a bottleneck for both Amtrak and MARC commuter trains.
However, cost estimates under the project continue to balloon, with
Amtrak claiming the project would now cost more than $8.5 billion when
the Trump Administration began in January.
The Department of Transportation is committed to protecting
taxpayer dollars and delivering major capital projects on-budget and
on-schedule. Recognizing the escalating costs for the B&P Tunnel, the
Department has met with several stakeholders to seek input on
innovative approaches to reduce costs and more efficiently deliver the
B&P Tunnel project. This includes Amtrak, the Maryland Department of
Transportation, the Boring Company, DB E.C.O. North America, Dr. Sauer
& Partners, and the Coalition for the Northeast Corridor, whose members
include several prominent transportation engineering firms. The
Department continues to engage Amtrak, urging the application of value
engineering to achieve significant savings and uncover further
opportunities to reduce costs. The Department will also continue to
engage with experts within and outside of government to maximize the
finite resources available to build the transformative infrastructure
projects the country requires to maintain our economic competitiveness.
Question. During the DOT budget hearing on May 15, 2025 I asked you
about re-examining the decision to add the five additional slot pairs
that were authorized for DCA in the FAA Reauthorization bill given the
recent events and data showing the unacceptable frequency of proximity
incidents over the last few years. You responded that you ``would
welcome the opportunity to engage'' with the Committee on these
matters.
Will you commit to reviewing the impacts of these additional
flights on overall safety at DCA and, if they are determined to reduce
the safety of the flying public, roll back the operation of these
additional flights using the current authorities at your disposal and
also work with Congress for a more permanent solution to reduce slots
to improve safety at the airport?
Answer. The U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) share your concerns and continue to
support the ongoing NTSB investigations. Our work with the NTSB will
help us understand the factors that contributed to recent accidents,
and we will use the data to inform future FAA actions. I will continue
to monitor capacity in view of the top priority of safety and will not
hesitate to take appropriate action working with the FAA.
Immediately following the accident at DCA, I requested FAA restrict
helicopter operations around the airport. Following NTSB's preliminary
recommendations, I made these restrictions permanent. Additionally, all
aircraft operating in DCA Class B airspace are now required to
broadcast their position and identification using ADS-B Out, with very
limited exceptions. We will take further immediate action if needed to
mitigate any subsequently identified safety risks.
Safety in the U.S. transportation system, especially in aviation,
is my number one priority. While flying remains the safest mode of
transportation, aviation safety is not static. We must identify trends,
use data more effectively, and immediately implement any corrective
actions.
Question. On May 22, 2025, the Government Accountability Office
released a decision (file # B-337137) finding that the Department of
Transportation violated the Impoundment Control Act by delaying
expenditures for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI)
program, which was passed into law in 2021 as part of the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The NEVI program supports build
out of a national network of fast chargers for electric vehicles,
thereby strengthening the ability of the American automobile industry
to compete in the rapidly growing electric vehicle market, while
bolstering American manufacturing and competitiveness through its Buy
America requirements.
Given GAO's finding that DOT is illegally withholding NEVI program
funding from States, when will DOT comply with the law and release the
NEVI program funding that has been authorized and appropriated by
Congress?
Answer. DOT continues to follow the law in its long-established
practice regarding the timing of obligations and continues to follow
the law with regard to the NEVI program. While GAO's May 22 decision
suggested otherwise, the conclusions reached in that decision were
based on fundamental errors of law and fact and GAO's opinions are not
binding on executive branch agencies. As an executive branch agency,
DOT adheres to the direction of the executive branch, including the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). As confirmed in OMB's June 3,
2025, letter, DOT's rescission of the previous Administration's NEVI
program guidance and temporarily pausing new obligations until new
guidance could be issued is consistent with its statutory authority
under 23 U.S.C. 106(a)(3). This revised guidance will be posted for
public comment. Once these comments are considered, final guidance will
be published, allowing States to revise their plans and obligate NEVI
funds. NEVI funds do not expire, so there is no risk of the period of
availability for these funds to lapse. However, it should also be noted
that the President's FY 2026 budget proposes rescission of unobligated
NEVI funding. On June 24, 2025, the U.S. District Court for Western
District of Washington issued a preliminary injunction that requires
DOT to permit 14 States to resume obligation of funds under their prior
State plans. DOT is complying with the injunction and considering
appellate options.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Hyde-Smith. And the subcommittee stands in recess,
subject to call of the chair. I want to say thank you to the
Lilleys, and please know that our condolences are definitely
genuine, and we are so sorry for your loss. But thank you for
being here and being the advocate.
[Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., Thursday, May 15, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene a time subject to the
call of the Chair.]
TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 2025
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 3:31 p.m. in Room 192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Cindy Hyde-Smith (chairwoman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Hyde-Smith, Gillibrand, Murray, Coons,
and Schatz.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT TURNER, SECRETARY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CINDY HYDE-SMITH
Senator Hyde-Smith. I am pleased to be joined this
afternoon by our Ranking Member Gillibrand and hopefully we'll
have Chair Collins and Vice-Chair Murray here momentarily or
sometime during this meeting as the other members of the
subcommittee, as we review the fiscal year 2026 budget request
for the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Secretary Turner, it's my pleasure to welcome you to your
very first hearing before this subcommittee. And I just want to
thank you for your willingness, how energetic you are in
getting things done, and it's just been a pleasure. I've
enjoyed our previous conversations and I'm so impressed by your
diverse backgrounds as your work as a pastor, an athlete, and a
Texas legislator, to your leadership on opportunity zones, and
your non-profit work supporting children in poverty.
How you found time to do all of this and accomplish all of
this while being a husband and a father is pretty impressive.
Your energy and leadership will be needed as the HUD budget
faces a time of uncertainty.
As we kick off the fiscal year 2026 process, I want to
highlight that Congress does not have a top line discretionary
budget agreement in place at this time. As a result, the House
and Senate will likely produce bills, with very different
overall spending levels that will need to be reconciled later.
Meanwhile, existing home sales failed this spring, the
lowest April numbers since 2009, according to the National
Association of Realtors. Sluggish home sales and high interest
rates suggest that the subcommittee can't rely on strong FHA
and Ginnie Mae receipts to offset the CBO score of our bill.
And of course, the cost of maintaining existing rental
assistance continues to increase, driven by insufficient
inventory of affordable housing across the entire country.
These housing challenges must be balanced against competing
demands in the transportation space, including aviation safety.
As for navigating these funding challenges, I think it's
fair to say that OMB did not do you any favors with their
request for HUD of $43.5 billion in new spending. This request
is $33.6 billion or 43.6 percent below the current funding
levels.
Despite the funding reduction, I'm delighted to see the
request continue support for the Foster Youth Independent
Living Initiative. This crucial funding ensures that when youth
exiting foster care are at risk of homelessness, that they have
access to a Section 8 voucher to help stabilize their housing
situation. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
will join me and recognize the importance of this particular
funding, and the need to continue assisting youth as they
transition out of foster care.
As much as I look forward to supporting the request, I do
have several concerns with a border request. The largest
concern, of course, is a proposal to consolidate HUD's rental
Assistance program, tenant and project-based Section 8 public
housing, housing for the elderly and housing for persons with
disabilities into one single block grant. Combined, these
programs serve approximately 4.5 million households, the
majority of whom are elderly and disabled.
There are a lot of concerns that losing this assistance
would place those residents at significant likelihood of
homelessness. The proposed single block grant would leave it to
states alone to determine how HUD funds will be spent. Suddenly
replacing current partnerships with local housing authority and
contracts with private owners, risk undermining HUD's
existence.
Although this new block grant proposal requires statutory
changes from the authorizers, the budget request assumes those
changes have already been made and request $2.7 billion below
the current funding level for these programs. With this
proposal, OMB appears to be putting the cart before the horse.
Separately, the request proposes the elimination of the
popular effective Community Development Block Grant program.
The CDBG program enjoys strong bipartisan support because it
provides flexible funding for critical investments, serving
low- and moderate-income communities across the country.
This essential resource for state and local government
flies at the heart of HUD, Community Development mission. And
at a time when there's a need to increase the supply of
affordable housing, the budget request eliminates the HOME
program and the critical role it serves in providing gap
financing to countless housing projects every year.
I was also disappointed to see the request eliminate the
Section four in Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program
(SHOP), which grow local nonprofit capacity and use sweat
equity models to promote home ownership. Additionally, when we
should be making even stronger commitments to lifting up the
least among us, and ending cycles of poverty and dependency,
eliminating the Family Self-Sufficiency and loss programs,
appear to be Pennywise in pound foolish, especially if Congress
adopts a Rental Assistant Block Grant proposal. There's a
danger to pulling on a loose thread.
I'm concerned about the broader risk across Federal housing
programs, not only at HUD, but also at USDA and at Treasury. It
feels like we're pulling on multiple loose threads without a
clear vision of what comes next. While I understand and share
the Administration's concerns about rising cost and shrinking
revenues, the uncertainty created by these proposals increases
risk, and risk raise cost.
The cost of uncertainty is reflected in the cost of
materials of labor, and other times it is reflected in either
fewer housing units or even entire projects being built.
Managing these risks and uncertainties should be addressed with
careful thought and deliberation.
As former HUD's Secretary, Dr. Ben Carson has often pointed
out, ``A people without a vision will perish.'' The committee
stands ready to work with HUD to identify a path forward to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the programs we
fund within the constraints we have to operate. Reducing undue
regulatory burdens and lowering the cost of housing production,
are two examples of where Congress and the Administration can
identify early successes to build on.
I look forward to working with Ranking Member Gillibrand
and the rest of our colleagues in writing a fiscally
responsible THUD Bill this year, one that seeks to meet the
needs of all Americans across the country.
Secretary Turner, once again, thank you for appearing
before the committee today, and I look forward to your
testimony and to continue these important conversations. And
now I'll turn to Ranking Member Gillibrand for her opening
statement.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Chair Hyde-Smith. Thank you,
Secretary Turner, for joining us today and thank you for our
discussion yesterday. I really appreciate it. Housing
affordability, as you and I discussed, is a huge problem across
the country. Whether you're in a red state or a blue state, a
big city or a suburb, housing is just too expensive and it's
time that we did something about it.
On day one, President Trump signed an executive order
directing agencies to take ``Appropriate actions to lower the
cost of housing and expand housing supply.'' I think we can all
agree on that goal. But I worry that the Administration's
actions are making things worse.
In fact, the President's tariffs and trade wars are making
housing less affordable. Just an example from my state of New
York, when you have a tariff on Canada, we get most of our wood
for building new houses from Canada, and so that's just
automatically going to raise your housing costs. And
notwithstanding many multiples of other parts of the supply
chain.
At HUD, the funding freezes, delays and contract and grant
terminations, have sent service providers scrambling to keep
supporting residents. Housing providers and homeless shelters
have struggled to pay rent on millions of housing units and
make payroll. Many have had to draw on costly lines of credit,
spending funds that should be spent on supporting residents.
HUD is struggling to meet the most basic responsibilities
after losing 2300 employees through the deferred resignation
program. All of this has created new challenges for private
developers, public housing authorities, and our communities.
To make matters worse, now, the Administration's trying to
cut HUD in half. The 2026 budget requests cuts rental and
homelessness assistance by over $27 billion, sets time limits
on assistance, and kicks responsibility for vulnerable families
to the states, without any detail about how that transition is
going to happen.
10 percent of all residential rental units are supported by
HUD rental assistance. That's 5 million residential units that
are worth an estimated of $900 billion. Over half a million of
those units are in New York. HUD assistance is baked into the
long-term financial stability of those properties. So, if we
just pull the rug out from under those renters, landlords and
property owners without any recourse, we're going to create
serious economic ripples.
On top of these cuts, the budget does nothing to address
the funding cliff for 58,000 households, that were able to
escape homelessness and intimate partner violence through the
Emergency Housing Voucher program, including 9,400 who live in
New York. I've visited some of those shelters. Some of them are
the most lifesaving, productive, helpful shelters we have for
women and their children.
The President wants to expand housing supply, but instead
of investing in housing production, the budget eliminates
funding for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
and HOME Investment Partnership programs. So, the question is,
how will this Administration increase the number of pieces of
housing and units available?
The first Trump administration's HUD budgets were all
rejected by Congress on a bipartisan basis, and I expect that
that will happen again. Are our HUDs housing programs perfect?
We agree, no. I agree with you that we should focus on working
together to improve them, but given the millions of lives at
stake, we need to be thoughtful and deliberative.
As we move forward with today's discussion about the fiscal
year 2026 budget, I want to remind us all of the important
things that HUD does and who HUD helps. HUD assistance helps
over 10 million Americans keep a roof over their head. 9 out of
10 households are elderly, disabled, or working families. It
helps address the dire housing needs in Indian country.
The Federal Housing Administration makes home ownership
possible for first time homeowners and actively manages over 8
million mortgages. Ginnie Mae is central to the stability of
America's housing finance system responsible for a portfolio of
$2.6 trillion.
So, as you and I discussed Secretary Turner, we share the
goals here. We want people to have a roof over their heads. We
want children to feel safe in their homes. We want homes to be
livable. We want to have much higher standard housing available
for more Americans. And I trust your commitment to those goals.
I struggle with how we're going to meet those goals with
the situation President Trump has created with regard to
funding streams, with regard to staffing, with regard to all
things HUD does, you'll have a massive challenge ahead of you,
but I pledge to you chairwoman Hyde-Smith and Secretary Turner,
I would like to work with you diligently on solving these
massive problems.
We have so many homeless children in New York. We have
enough homeless teenage girls from multiple Girl Scout troops.
Kids should not be growing up homeless in America. We are the
richest country in the world. This is a failure, a moral and
ethical failure. And as a Pastor, I don't have to tell you
about the Sermon on the Mount. We are called to do this work in
multiple ways, not just as elected leaders, but people of faith
and people of goodwill. So, I trust you'll work with me
diligently on this for as long as you are HUD Secretary, and as
long as you are chairman. Thank you.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. Now, Mr. Secretary, we would
love to hear your remarks.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT TURNER
Secretary Turner. Well, thank you, Madam Chairman, and
Ranking Member Gillibrand. I really appreciate your opening
testimonies and I'll say from the beginning that I do commit to
working with you. And also wanted to say hello and thank you to
all of these distinguished members of the subcommittee.
Thank you for this opportunity today to testify in support
of President Trump's 2026 budget for the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development. Members, we have a
small window of opportunity to help every American achieve the
dream of home ownership, and that clock is ticking.
As of April, of this year, the national median home price
is $414,000, up from more than $341,000 in April of 2021. And
this is an increase of more than 21 percent. It became very
hard to own a home due to the policies of the Biden
Administration, which have been marked by negligence and a lack
of stewardship of taxpayer resources.
We can't keep running the same losing plays. It's time to
run new plays. And I say that as the HUD Secretary, but also as
a former athlete, we have to run plays that help us to be
successful. And so, this budget, the President's budget of 2026
is indeed that new playbook that we are proposing. The budget
requests $43.5 billion for the department funding critical
programs and providing greater fiscal responsibility and
restraint. It carries out President Trump's Day One directive
to increase the supply of affordable housing.
This budget supports HUD's mission and we will maximize the
budget that you all provide for us no matter the amount given.
We've been taking inventory at HUD, as I said, during our
confirmation, of every program. And we found that HUD's rental
assistance to be full of waste, fraud, and abuse, broken and
really deviating from its original purpose of serving
temporarily Americans that are in need.
HUD's assistance is not supposed to be permanent. It should
be a trampoline, not a hammock, not a resting place, if you
will. It's supposed to be like a treadway, which is a temporary
military bridge that is removed once obstacles are overcome.
We also are eliminating radical political agendas and
wasteful spending at HUD. For example, we identified $260
million in savings for taxpayers, cancelled $4 million in DEI
contracts, and recovered an additional $1.9 billion from
inactive contracts that should have been closed out under the
previous Administration. We've seen that just pouring money
into these programs only has fueled existing issues.
Now, we're reversing course to be efficient and to be
effective, not to be bloated and bureaucratic as we have been.
We're also undoing harmful regulations, including the Obama-
Biden-era affirmatively furthering Fair housing rule, which
effectively turned HUD into a national zoning board. While
cutting red tape is indeed important, so is increasing the
housing stock and opportunities for first time home buyers.
The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) as we know it,
which ensures mortgages on more than 7 million homes, has
insured mortgages for more than 140,000 1st time home buyers
since January when President Trump returned to the White House.
So that's good news. In addition, we're ending taxpayer funded
subsidies at HUD for all illegal aliens.
But HUD is more than just about housing. We've streamlined
the disaster recovery process to help funding get to the
communities more quickly and efficiently. For our tribal
communities, we announced a $2.2 million expansion of the
tribal HUD-VASH program to address veteran homelessness. And
for our rural communities in our country, we convened round
tables and discussed solutions for workforce housing. We're
returning HUD to its intended purpose, serving Americans
through localized solution.
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 process will empower states to be
more thoughtful and to be more precise in their stewardship.
HUD currently manages approximately 30,000 program awardees
or recipients. No wonder the system is plagued by abuse.
Empowering states through a reimagined grant system would prune
this administrative burden, while maintaining necessary
assistance for the elderly and disabled as stated in the budget
language.
The budget also continued HUD's commitment to promoting
economic independence, by adopting a compassionate common sense
and historically bipartisan conversation around work
requirements and time limits that will encourage able-bodied
residents to move up and to move out of assisted housing.
It also addresses our nation's homelessness crisis by
welcoming efforts from faith-based service providers and
supporting localized solutions that affirm addressing
homelessness and it goes far beyond housing.
The President's budget will save billions of taxpayer
dollars and help us to restore fiscal responsibility. In order
to properly serve the American people, we must care about the
mission and care about the ones that we do serve and ones we've
been called to serve and that's who and what we are at HUD now.
This 2026 budget request will allow us to operate at a
standard of excellence, as part of the President's golden age.
And I'm proud to be here, proud to support, and I'm looking
forward, Madam Chair, for our conversation and to answer your
questions. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Scott Turner
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of
President Trump's 2026 Budget for the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
We have a small window of opportunity to usher in the Golden Age of
Homeownership. And the clock is ticking. As of April, the National
median home price is 414,000 dollars. Up from more than 341,000 dollars
in April of 2021-marking a huge increase of more than 21 percent. And
the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate is almost 7 percent, nearly
double the rate in 2019.
The numbers don't lie: It became significantly harder to own a home
due to the policies of the Biden administration. Simply put, we need a
new playbook. The President's Fiscal Year 2026 Budget is that playbook.
It requests forty-three point five billion dollars for the Department.
But more than that, it represents the clear balance between funding
mission critical programs and much-needed fiscal restraint.
It carries out President Trump's Day One Presidential Memorandum to
decrease the cost and increase the supply of affordable housing. And it
reflects excellence, accountability, and purpose. This budget supports
HUD's mission to serve rural, Tribal and urban communities. Much of
that work is already underway.
And I want to emphasize this: We will maximize whatever funds
Congress gives us, whether it's 10 billion dollars or just 10 dollars.
At HUD, we are taking inventory of every program and process. We
started this mission on day one and are continuing to take inventory
each and every day. What we have found is a rental assistance system
full of waste, fraud, and abuse; inefficiencies and bloated
administrative costs; deteriorating public housing units; and a rent
structure that punishes work and marriage among residents. Simply put,
it is a broken system that has deviated from its original and intended
purpose--to temporarily help Americans in need.
I want to focus on that word: ``Temporary.'' HUD assistance is not
supposed to be permanent. It's supposed to be a treadway, which is ``a
temporary, tactical pontoon bridge designed for use by the military to
cross water obstacles. It's a modular system made of sections that can
be assembled quickly to form a bridge, allowing the passage of heavy
vehicles and equipment.''
So HUD rental assistance is meant to be a temporary station for
people in need in the same way a treadway facilitates the crossing of
an obstacle. Military engineers remove the treadway after successfully
crossing. We are taking steps to return HUD to its mission and to fix
structural flaws.
We are consolidating our 40 plus departmental management systems
into one, common platform and implementing processes to ensure
accountability throughout our 60 plus grant programs so funding goes
where--and to whom--it is intended for. At the same time, we are
eliminating radical political agendas and wasteful spending. We
identified 260 million dollars in savings for the American people,
cancelled 4 million dollars in DEI contracts, and recovered an
additional 1 point 9 billion dollars from inactive contracts that
should have been closed out under the Biden administration. We have
seen that pouring more money into programs, without thinking of long-
term and sustainable solutions, has not and will not solve the issues
of housing affordability and homelessness.
We want to be lean and mean, not bloated and bureaucratic. We are
also working to undo harmful rules and regulations, including the
Obama-Biden-era Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule. This
mandate effectively turned HUD into a national zoning board, amounting
to one of the greatest top-down intrusions ever undertaken by
Washington. It forced local authorities to implement a 100-question
grading tool and undertake complicated demographic analyses of their
residents and housing stock to target suburbs and reshape them as part
of a misguided scheme of social engineering. It was an attack on the
American, suburban dream and, really, the American family. While
cutting red tape is an important part of the equation, so is increasing
the supply of land to build more housing.
The Department of Interior oversees more than 500 million acres of
Federal land, including areas suitable for residential use. We are
working with Secretary Doug Burgum to identify underutilized Federal
land suitable for affordable housing development, while still
protecting our public lands, parks and other important spaces.
As part of this partnership, we will work with governors and local
leaders to better steward our public resources.
Finally, we are enforcing the rule of law at HUD and cutting off
the taxpayer funded subsidization of HUD programs for illegal aliens,
particularly when it comes to HUD-funded housing or HUD-backed
mortgages. But HUD is about more than housing. Congress has provided
HUD funding to support disaster recovery. But oftentimes, we found that
paperwork was getting in the way of helping people. So, we did
something about it. We streamlined and simplified the disaster recovery
process with an updated universal notice that incorporated over 700
stakeholder comments, and fully aligns with the President's Executive
Orders. For our Tribal communities, we announced 2 point 2 million
dollars under the expansion of the Tribal HUD-VASH program to address
veteran homelessness.
And for our rural communities, especially ones with growing
populations, we convened stakeholder roundtables and discussed
solutions for more workforce housing so people can work where they live
and live where they work. The impact of our policies underscores how we
are returning HUD to its intended purpose-- serving everyday Americans
through localized solutions. The President's Budget continues this
local-first approach by limiting the size, scope and spending of
Federal programs.
It is transformational and fundamentally changes how the government
works for the better. It proposes a State-based formula grant which
would encourage States to have skin in the game for the funding and
design of their own rental assistance programs without heavy-handed
interference from Washington. The block grant process will also empower
States to be more thoughtful and precise in their distribution and
spending of taxpayer dollars.
HUD currently manages approximately 30,000 program awardees or
recipients, so there's no wonder the system is plagued by so much
redundancy and abuse. Empowering States through the reimagined grant
system would cut down on this administrative burden, help them do what
the Federal Government has failed to do, and better serve the American
people while maintaining necessary assistance for the elderly and
disabled.
Importantly, the Budget also maintains HUD's commitment to
promoting economic independence by adopting a compassionate, common-
sense, and historically bipartisan conversation around reforms like
time limits that will encourage able-bodied residents to move up and
out of assisted housing.
Finally, it thoughtfully addresses our Nation's homelessness crisis
by welcoming efforts from faith-based service providers and supporting
comprehensive localized solutions that acknowledge addressing
homelessness goes far beyond housing.
Overall, the President's Budget would save billions of taxpayer
dollars that can play an important role in balancing our Nation's
budget. The 2026 HUD Budget Request will allow HUD to operate at a
standard of excellence as part of the President's Golden Age and I am
proud to support it.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much. And I'm going to
start the questioning process. I know the budget request speaks
to rental assistance, but I would like to focus on housing
production, especially affordable housing.
There's a lot of players involved in increasing the housing
supply, including local, state, and Federal governments, banks,
commercial developers, and nonprofit organizations. These
entities can be involved in regulatory oversight, funding
through grants and loans, or a combination of both.
As this is your first time before the committee, I'd like
to put a quarter in the machine, so to speak, and let you talk
about how the Administration sees the role of the Federal
government in increasing housing supply relative to other
actors. And then secondly, HUD's role relative to other Federal
entities.
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, one of our
first priorities was to look at the regulatory environment. And
you know, burdensome regulations have really crippled home
building in our country from a Federal level. I made a mention
of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule, which we
took down to restore flexibility back to localities, back to
states. And also, when you look at some of the burdensome
regulations on our local level where builders and developers,
40 percent of building a multifamily project is regulation. 20
to 25 percent of building a single-family project is in
regulations.
And so, tearing down and making those regulations, easing
the burden, will unleash the creativity, unleash the ingenuity
of our developers and private builders around our country. We
need about 7 million units of housing in our country.
Multifamily, single family, manufactured housing duplexes,
condos.
And so having said that, Secretary Burgum and I from the
Department of Interior signed a joint task force MOU, to
identify underutilized Federal lands. About 500 million acres,
the Department of Interior has, and to look at those and say,
where can we build more housing around our country, on our
Federal lands, while protecting our national forest, while
protecting our national parks and the beauty of our country,
but utilizing this land to build more affordable housing and
all types of housing.
Also, HUD is as you know, the leader and holds the code for
manufactured homes. Manufactured homes are a great alternative,
if you will, and building homes, affordable homes around our
country. And so, we're working very hard to make sure that
those codes are up to date, as a lot of codes need to be up to
date. But manufactured housing is also one thing that we can do
from a HUD standpoint to increase the housing supply.
So, in summation, taking down the regulatory environment,
the MOU we have with Department of Interior, the manufactured
housing, and also restoring flexibility and control and
creativity, if you will, back to localities.
Senator Hyde-Smith. And Secretary Turner, I've spoken with
you before about my Respect State Housing Laws Act, which would
repeal a section of the Pandemic Era Cares Act of 2020 that
continues to require many landlords and property owners to
issue a 30-day notice to vacate before filing to evict a tenant
for nonpayment of rent. As you know, we're no longer facing a
pandemic. This supposedly temporary eviction provision needs to
end and return the statute to its pre-Covid requirements.
However, on December the 13th of 2024, HUD published a
final rule titled, 30 Day Notification Requirements Prior to
Termination of Lease for Non-Payment of Rent. The rule requires
tenants to receive a written notice at least 30 days before a
formal judicial eviction is filed to non-payment of rent if
they live in public housing or one of the several project-based
rental assistance properties.
Will you rescind this rule to return eviction policies back
to the state and local level in order to help house providers
meet their financial obligations, and continue to provide
affordable housing? And if you plan to rescind this harmful
rule, when will you do it?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Madam Chair. And yes, you
know, housing affordability is of utmost priority for myself
and our team at HUD. And to answer your question, this issue
has been raised to us and I know that we are committed to
working with you and your staff to make sure that this issue is
resolved. And so, yes, ma'am, I commit to working with you to
make sure that housing is affordable again and you best be
assured that we've talked about this and the issue has been
addressed.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. And the last one for right
now, is like other agencies across the government, HUD
programs, especially in the case of rental assistance, can be a
high-risk area for improper payments. In some cases, rental
subsidies exceed what a household is eligible to receive, and
in other cases, the payments are too low.
And while the Government Accountability Office (GAO) notes
that reducing improper payments is critical to safeguarding
Federal funds and could help achieve cost savings, the HUD
Office of Inspector General (IG) reported last month that the
department is unable to estimate improper payments for the
tenant-based and project-based Section 8 programs. Its two
largest rental assistance programs.
In April, the acting IG testified that HUD has uniquely
struggled to identify and mitigate the risk of improper
payments. Mr. Secretary, how has HUD prioritizing fixes to its
improper payments problem? In what step will the new leadership
in the office of Chief Financial Officer, Public and Indian
Housing and the Office of Housing, be taking this year to
resolve the GAO and the IG concerns?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Madam Chairman. So, you know,
we have the best CFO in the country and Mr. Irving Dennis, who
was in a previous Administration with Dr. Carson. We had clean
audits during Dr. Carson's tenure here. And now, you know, we
do have a bit of an issue on our hands. But having Irv Dennis
back and his team and the CFO's office and our offices of PIH
and Housing, they are doing a top to bottom review of this
improper payment issue. And it will get resolved and we will be
in compliance.
And we look forward to hearing from you and the committee
and working with you on this. But Irv Dennis and his team are
on top of this. Thank you, ma'am.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. Senator Gillibrand.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. The other
committee that I have a leadership role on is the Senate Aging
Committee, and you know how important housing is to our older
Americans. Seniors are the fastest growing age group among
people experiencing homelessness. Over 41,000 seniors, age 65
and older experienced homelessness at the time of the 2024
point in time count. And that number could triple by the year
2030.
The budget, however, cuts HUD homeless assistance by 13
percent, and you propose strict time limits even for seniors.
These are people with fixed incomes, can't work, face very
increasing healthcare costs and challenges and need wraparound
services to stay housed.
So, Mr. Secretary, under your proposal, what happens to the
seniors currently being served in permanent supportive housing?
And what's your ambition with regard to addressing homelessness
amongst our older Americans?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Senator Gillibrand. I
appreciate our conversation yesterday. And as you will note in
the budget, the language in the budget prioritizes our seniors,
our elderly and disabled and our veterans. And so, we are well
aware of this. And at HUD, we will continue to prioritize our
seniors.
You know, you alluded to the homelessness in our country.
And I want to make note for the committee, you know, with
record funding from HUD, HUD's budget over the last 8 years
went from approximately $42 billion to $77 billion, and yet,
homelessness is at an all-time high. It went up 18 percent last
year with over 770,000 people homeless at one single night in
January of 2024.
And when I look at this, obviously with this type of
funding and with the role that we do have, that's unacceptable.
As you know, I was just in New York City visiting New York City
and NYCHA, the public housing authority there, which has many
problems as it pertains to stewardship, as it pertains to fraud
and abuse and authorities there, leadership there, being
indicted and, you know, homelessness.
We've made it very hard for faith-based institutions to
work with the government, to work with HUD in particular. And
when I visit cities around our country and you see the faith-
based institutions that are actually doing the work every day
as it pertains to homelessness, we need to partner with these
institutions, partner with the nonprofits that actually have
data-driven results to decrease homelessness, to not only get
people off the streets, but also to help people be transformed.
When you think about drug addiction, mental health, the
restoration of the family, the faith. And so that's my approach
to it, Senator, is to have a holistic approach and better
stewardship, if you will, and to bring in these partnerships so
that we can eradicate homelessness on our streets. But the
budget language does prioritize our elderly and our disabled.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you. And I would like to work
with you on perhaps new legislative language about increasing
the ability to do partnerships, faith-based partnerships, as I
mentioned to you yesterday.
There's a not-for-profit in the Bronx called the Fortune
Society. And I would love you to tour that, because they deal
with formerly incarcerated men, which is a very critical
population that are at risk for homelessness. Not only do they
house them, they give them skills training, they give them
mental health support, they give them any substance use
disorder order prevention that's necessary.
And they holistically look at these individuals and say,
how do we make sure that you get on your feet, that you have a
great job and you can pay for your own housing? And what does
it take to get you from the day you are released to the day you
are self-sufficient.
And I would love to work with you on legislation to
accomplish those goals in whatever ways we can because again,
the failure of this country not to house Americans is painful
and we have to do a better job. And I'm open to all solutions
and I'd love to work with the chairwoman on that.
The second issue that I raised with you that I wanted to
raise for the committee is, what do we do with all the
buildings that are empty in cities like New York? There are so
many commercial buildings that no one is going to work in
anymore, that are entirely unutilized. And I would like to work
on legislation to provide conversions, to be able to create
resources, and also authorities, so that we can make it easier
to take empty buildings and transform them into critical
housing needs.
Now, the type of critical housing needs that I would make
this eligible for, is certainly for formally homeless. I think
we have to get out of the model that homeless people are going
to shelters. They should be going to permanent housing, with
the transitional wraparound services like the Fortune Society
offers for this one group of people, like some of the shelters
offer for battered women and their children.
So, the kinds of services that get people on their feet so
they can be self-sufficient. And there's going to be a lot of
important things we need to look at to make conversions
possible. And I also would like your commitment that you will
work with me on that to get legislation written and supported
to get the resources and the authorities to do that kind of
work.
Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am. I look forward to working
with you on these two issues that you raised. Thank you.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Schatz.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair, and vice-Chair, and thank
you, Secretary. First of all, appreciate our team's working
relationship as Maui continues to try to recover, which starts
with housing. So, I appreciate that good working relationship.
I just wanted to touch upon your testimony regarding
reducing regulatory barriers. I've sort of over the last, I
don't know, five to 8 years or so, been radicalized on the
extent to which there really are regulatory barriers and they
really are an impediment to building enough housing for
everybody, not just affordable housing, capital A, capital H,
but housing for everybody.
And I agree with you, there are Federal barriers, but the
truth is, if you talk to any developer and this 20 to 40
percent of the cost of home being regulations, most of those
regulations are at the local level. So, I guess the first thing
I'd like you to do is just speak to where the Federal
government cannot sort of override. It's my dream, override
zoning locally. I would get exactly three votes in the Senate
for that, so I understand. But not to override it, not to come
over the top, but to nudge them in the right direction.
And then secondly, I want to talk about the pro housing
program. I have some pride of authorship. It was my thing when
I was chair of this subcommittee, and I understand it's sort of
gotten caught up in this DEI question plus there's budgetary
pressure. But I want to get that relaunched, with you, because
I do think it's the most significant pro housing deregulatory
mechanism that we've passed.
Maybe there are other things that we can do in the future,
or that we should have done in the past, but this thing is a
big pot of money to incentivize states and counties to kind of
unravel this labyrinth that we've created for ourselves. So,
I'd like your comments on both matters.
Secretary Turner. Well, thank you Senator. And yes, it's
been good to work with you and your staff for your constituents
there. And I look forward to being with you there sometime.
You know, the regulatory environment, I mentioned the AFFH
rule that we tore down as far as HUD being a national zoning
board, that restores the flexibility back to the locality. So,
from our standpoint, from the Federal side, to restore that
back to them as one step.
The second step is as the HUD secretary and as I travel,
and this is what I have been doing, so I'm going to bring you
real time. What I have been doing is I travel around the cities
and meet with stakeholders.
When I meet with local officials, mayors, economic
development authorities and things and people of this nature,
is to encourage them, as we are doing from a Federal side, to
take inventory of their regulatory environment, to take
inventory of their restrictions, what's causing the
restrictions in their localities that is keeping people from
building, keeping developers from building, and not only
identify the problem, but do something about the problem.
And so, that has proven to be very effective thus far. And
so, to answer your questions, taking down a regulatory
environment from HUD standpoint and encouraging localities from
their standpoint to do the same. I believe that if we
continually do this, that will help unleash the flexibility and
the freedom for developers to build. Again, we need 7 million
units, and developers want to build, they just need the
government to take their hands off of them from Federal and
state.
Senator Schatz. This is one of the only areas where
politicians create a shortage of something on purpose and then
stroke their chins wondering why there's not enough of it. But
I guess the point I wanted to make to you, Mr. Secretary, is
that, I have some colleagues, who are sort of waking up to how
much of a problem regulatory barriers are, specifically at the
zoning level, restrictive covenants, minimum lot sizes, all of
that stuff, which was essentially the sort of great grandson of
post Jim Crow real estate law.
And as they evolve and they think about the policy tools,
they basically reinvent the thing that we have annually in the
THUD mark for the last, I think it's now 3 years. And so, this
program induces--it doesn't just provide planning grants, it
induces with a small financial incentive to counties to sort of
get off their butts and do the thing. So, I just want to keep
working on this.
And I understand that you and I may have a disagreement
about what constitutes woke or DEI or whatever, and there were
some racial equity criteria in the grant announcements, that I
understand Donald Trump is President. He's not going to go for
that. And fair enough, you won. But the core of the bill and
the core of the program does not hinge on that particular
question. And you could restart it sort of in your own vision.
And I'd be really pleased to see it be restarted because it
was always a bipartisan priority. It's a real innovative
program. The THUD mark doesn't allow you a lot of flexibility
to do cool stuff and innovate. You just kind of have to go,
okay, here's our capital expenses for public housing
authorities, here's our home program. And they're all so
important and so underfunded. You don't get to do a lot of new
things. This is an area where we did a new thing and it was
really starting to make progress. So, I encourage you to look
at restarting it as quickly as you can. Thank you, sir. Thank
you.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Murray.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much. Chair Hyde-Smith,
Senator Gillibrand, good to work with both of you on this
committee. Secretary Turner, welcome. You know, the entire
point of your department is to help Americans keep a roof over
their head. I am really afraid that pretty much everything that
you and President Trump have done to date appears kind of in
direct opposition to that goal.
First off, the President's illegal funding freezes are
causing chaos across the country. I was in Everett in my home
state of Washington a few weeks ago. I was talking to
organizations that help people find housing. And if they can't
get their already awarded funding, they will be forced to start
evicting people this summer, and may even have to shut down
their services altogether.
And on top of that, you're pushing out 2,300 staff who are
dedicated public servants with decades of experience.And I just
don't see how you can tell us with a straight face that forcing
out over a quarter of your workforce is going to have no
effect, on your department's ability to meet its statutory
responsibilities under law.
And now, after all the damage that's been done, you are
here today requesting that congress slash funding for your
department nearly in half, nearly in half, that would force
millions of Americans out of their homes. Your request would
force states to make up for the draconian cuts and abdication
of responsibility. And I don't know what state can afford to do
that, especially when this Administration is simultaneously
working to shift even more costs to states for things like
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and
healthcare.
It is kind of absurd to claim that we cannot afford basic
programs that keep people off the streets, but we can hand
trillions of dollars in new tax cuts to billionaires and big
corporations. You know, housing affordability and homelessness
is a crisis in Washington State and in many places across the
country, you know that. But this Administration just appears to
me to be trying to make it all worse.
And I'll tell you right now, looking at your budget
request, as far as I'm concerned as Vice Chair of this
committee, it's not going anywhere. I want to start with the
funding that you are illegally freezing. The Continuum of Care
program is essential to addressing homelessness in my home
state of Washington.
In March, HUD began issuing grant agreements with a host of
new conditions that are deeply concerning and completely
unrelated to HUD's mission. HUD did that without notice and
without any explanation of what the vaguely worded conditions
mean, or what a grantee would be required to do.
As I said earlier, organizations I have talked to in my
state say that without these funds, they're going to evict
people this summer. The courts, as you know, are sorting this
out. I'm glad to see that they have extended the preliminary
injunction to stop HUD from enforcing these new and extreme
requirements.
But Mr. Secretary, I want to ask you, are you going to, and
I quote from the court order, ``Take every step necessary to
effectuate this order, including clearing any administrative,
operational or technical hurdles to implementation?''
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Madam Senator. Great to meet
you. As you have said, this is under active litigation and so
we'll leave it there. And once this is through litigation, I
look forward to having a conversation. But right now, I won't
comment on it.
Senator Murray. Not even to tell us if you're following the
court order?
Secretary Turner. I will follow the law, but I won't
mention it anymore, it's under active litigation.
Senator Murray. Are you following the court order?
Secretary Turner. Our team follows the law and the court
order. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Murray. Are you in full compliance with the court
order?
Secretary Turner. I'm not going to speak anymore on it
because of the active litigation.
Senator Murray. Then you can't even tell us.
Secretary Turner. You know, the other thing that I wanted
to mention to you, well----
Senator Murray. Let me just follow up on this, when will
you be in full compliance with the court order? Are funds being
withheld today?
Secretary Turner. We will be with you as soon as we can
once it's done with active litigation.
Senator Murray. So, are funds being withheld right now,
even though the court order is in place?
Secretary Turner. You know, you talked about the 2300
people----
Senator Murray. Mr. Secretary, I just want you to know I'm
talking about this continuum care because, I am hearing from
providers in my state that funds are being withheld, meaning
you are not in compliance. Are you aware of that?
Secretary Turner. Ma'am, I am aware of the litigation, yes,
ma'am. It's an active litigation Senator.
Senator Murray. Yeah. And I'm hearing that funds are still
being withheld despite the court order. So, I need to know if
you know that, and if you're going to make sure that the funds
are released?
Secretary Turner. Yes ma'am, I'm the Secretary. And so,
things that go on at HUD I'm well aware of. But I also know
with this active litigation that I'm not going to say very much
in our hearing today, but happy to talk to you as time goes on
and as I'm able to. I commit to that.
Senator Murray. Well, we are running out of time. They're
going to start evicting people and they need those funds. I
want to move on to another example because I just haven't----
Secretary Turner. Can I address the 2300 people that quit?
Senator Murray. Well, you're just going to--you got 10
seconds because I need to talk to you about a specific program.
Secretary Turner. Alright, I'll take it. So just to
clarify, the 2300 people that left HUD, it was voluntary. They
were not forced out.
Senator Murray. I know. I've been hearing that from every
Secretary that comes before.
Secretary Turner. Well, no ma'am. This is just me from HUD,
and I'm just telling you it's 2,300 that they took----
Senator Murray. They were told, if you don't get out now,
you're going to be sorry in the future. So, it is people that
we need there. Anyway, let me move on to another example. Your
Green and Resilient Retrofit Program, that was created to help
make properties more resilient to disasters, and less expensive
to heat and cool.
On day one, you and the President deemed this common-sense
program woke, somehow, and illegally attempted to terminate it.
The courts have now directed HUD to process and disperse those
funds. But I want you to know, we are hearing from owners that
HUD is doing nothing to restore the administrative contract
that DOGE canceled, which is holding up this deal for moving
forward.
This committee has now asked five times for HUD to brief my
staff on this, yet they've refused to speak to us about basic
legal requirements. So, let me just ask you here today, why are
you preventing HUD assisted property owners from making overdue
upgrades to low income and senior housing?
Secretary Turner. Again, Senator, this also is under active
litigation, as you know. And so, my comments on this will be
zero to limited. It's under active litigation. As soon as we
get done with that, I'm happy to speak with you.
Senator Murray. Well, there are people waiting. And this
fund's critical and there are court orders, I expect them to be
followed. And I'm just going to say for the record, there is
nothing objectional about this funding.
It's stunning to me that we are under a court order and
you're not giving the money out. It's for things like replacing
windows and outdated HVAC systems, installing fire resistant
roofs. These are things that are badly needed for people in
this country. And I am out of time. So, thank you Madam Chair.
Secretary Turner. Thank you, ma'am.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Chair Hyde-Smith, and Ranking
Member Gillibrand. Secretary Turner, welcome. Thank you for the
chance to be with you today. I appreciated receiving finally,
your budget submission. And I look forward to getting to know
you better and to work with you.
I'll just mention right at the outset, Madam Chair, that my
week had a positive start because I got to visit a project
built by a faith-based organization from the Mennonite
community, to address youth aging out of foster care in a rural
community known as Greenwood, Delaware. And I'm pleased, as are
you, that the youth aging out of foster care program will be
sustained.
But I'm gravely concerned that several of the tools that
were used to make that project work, are not being continued. I
was a county executive. I spent 6 years of my life working on
housing. We were responsible for the second largest housing
authority in my state. The housing Authority didn't own any
units. It was all private sector, private landlords, but
working in partnership with us and with HUD.
And I'm working on a bipartisan piece of legislation with
Senator Kramer of North Dakota, called The Choice in Affordable
Housing Act. And this would make housing choice vouchers more
accessible. It would do a better job of attracting and
retaining private sector landlords to the program. It's got a
wide range of groups involved in housing, housing production,
housing advocacy, supporting it.
And I'd like you to commit to working with me on that
legislation to see if we can make progress on improving the
Housing Choice Vouchers program. Is that something you'd be
willing to work with me on?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Senator. It is great to see
you, sir. And I do look forward to seeing the language and
hearing from you and your staff and how we can work together.
Obviously, the housing affordability is a top priority of mine
and taking care of American people. And also, to see people
live lives with self-sustainability and for the youth aging out
of foster care.
You know, I'm looking forward to working with this
committee and also with the First Lady as we take care of our
youth to make sure that they land on solid ground in the days
ahead.
Senator Coons. Well, you heard from Senator Gillibrand, and
I'll repeat the same thing. A passion on my part for working on
the conversion of formerly commercial buildings to residential
buildings. I'm close with a developer in Delaware that's done
that a number of times successfully. As Senator Gillibrand
knows, it's very difficult to do.
Some properties lend themselves to it easily, some
properties are almost impossible. We have a significant
challenge nationally. We are not producing enough affordable
housing. We're not producing enough housing in urban centers.
We're not producing enough housing in rural areas. And taking
underutilized or vacant commercial properties and appropriately
transitioning them to housing for those who are either
homeless, unhoused or under housed, is another thing I'd love
to work with you on.
But I must say, just right off the top, that I looked at
this budget, you are a person of faith as are the rest of us on
this panel. You share a commitment to caring for our vulnerable
neighbors, the least of these. But this budget, Mr. Secretary,
is not a serious proposal. It does not meet the urgent housing
needs of our country. A 50 percent cut to all the programs at
HUD would be devastating to families, and goes well beyond
right sizing a bloated agency, which was your phraseology.
I think it takes a chainsaw of programs that I've worked
with for years, and that I've seen help the neediest Americans.
As county executive, I relied on the HOME program. I've worked
closely with the SHOP Sweat Equity program. I've supported and
worked closely with the Continuum of Care program, whether it's
HOPWA or housing for the elderly, or housing for persons with
disabilities.
The solution to eliminating all of these services and then
rolling them up into a new black ground program, I will assert
Mr. Secretary, will simply shift the burden onto states and
counties. States and counties will end up being forced to pick
up services for people who will become newly unhoused. That may
not be your intention, but it is certainly my intention to test
and push and challenge some of the assumptions underlying this.
The Administration is shifting the burden onto states and
counties for a lot of other programming, for food assistance,
healthcare, education, and that will badly strain state and
county budgets, to also move housing affordability for seniors,
for the disabled for families with children. I think goes
beyond streamlining HUD services, but leads to fewer people
receiving services.
Let me just talk a little bit more about CDBG and HOME. As
county executive, HOME was absolutely critical to our working
and partnership with local nonprofit, several of them faith-
based. It required a non-Federal match, a robust non-Federal
match. It allowed us to build affordable housing, especially
for disabled folks in our county. It helped 44,500 individuals
a year.
Do you actually believe state and local governments have
the ability to pick up the cost for services that will be
shifted to them if all of these programs are eliminated?
Secretary Turner. Thank you, Senator, and I appreciate your
perspective on everything and thank you to your service, you
know, both locally and here, nationally. Senator, HUD has
record funding and currently we're only able to serve one out
of four eligible families with $77 billion.
And I alluded to this before, and I will say again, we have
to do something different, because what we have been doing over
these many years has not been working. Stewardship has to be a
priority. There's a lot of waste, there's a lot of fraud,
there's a lot of abuse in our system, and we can't, when I
alluded to saying, you know, you can't keep running the same
plays.
What I mean, the best teams that I've seen in my career are
the teams that make adjustments. You know, we can't keep
running the same play because it's causing us to lose. Well,
that's what I feel like in America today, and particularly with
HUD, that we've been running plays that have caused us to lose.
And so, sir, this is a different way of looking at things.
It's a rethinking of how can we get states to have skin in the
game. I do realize, I understand the responsibility that you
speak of, but this is a way for states to identify their unique
needs and then to distribute their funds as they see fit. They
can identify those that have been successful and fund those.
And so, it's a way for the states to uniquely get involved, to
be very deliberate and decisive of their stewardship.
And so, sir, that's the paradigm that I'm talking about.
That's the culture shift I'm talking about. It's a new way of
looking at it, a new way of rethinking it. The HOME program, to
be honest, over the last 33 years has built 1.3 million units.
That's only 32 units a year, and it provides gap funding, but
the other funding has been $185 billion. So, I think we have to
relook look at this in a different way and do it better.
Senator Coons. Mr. Secretary, with all due respect, I
welcome and appreciate some fresh thinking or a new look, a new
attitude. But cutting funding by 50 percent, cutting the HUD
workforce by a third, is not going to produce any significant
increase in housing production.
You can reorganize, you can right size, you can reanalyze
existing programs. I would reject the assertion that the HOME
program as administered in my county was rife with waste,
fraud, and abuse. I'm not going to defend every HOME program in
every county in America because I can't. But I know the ones I
was responsible for.
I met with the Delaware Home Builders earlier today. Many
of the folks in the room I've known four decades. One of them
is among the leading builders of quality, affordable
multifamily housing in America. And they probably don't want me
to quote them right now, but their comment was the staffing
cuts that you've pushed through this agency, reducing by a
third, the total headcount, means that getting projects
approved that have to have an approval, a sign off on a
mortgage, or a sign off on a project approval, their wait times
have gone from months to projects not moving forward, falling
apart.
And they cited to me the potentially disastrous
consequences for low-income housing tax credit projects, for
HOME projects, for Section 232 and 202 projects, of having all
the staff with experience and expertise managing these, gone.
And then all the funding shoved into one big pile and sort of
pushed at the states to say, you come up with your priorities.
In the room full of folks, I just met with, who have
decades of experience building housing of all kinds, high end,
mid, low, multi-family, single-family, inner city, rural. These
are guys who represent the whole scope of the home building
industry in my state. They were not optimistic that working
together, we are going to generate more housing.
And I'll say one last point on one comment if I might.
Senator from Rhode Island, Senator from Hawaii, Senator from
Delaware: the idea that we're going to solve this problem by
accessing Federal lands, that doesn't build you one single unit
of housing in my state.
East Coast, there's not a whole lot of relevant vacant
Federal land. And I dare say, although these are not my states
or my geography, in states like Wyoming, or Montana, or Utah,
my hunch is the infrastructure cost to connect out to and build
on available vacant Federal land may not pencil out.
Let me conclude, I'm way over, and I apologize, Madam
Chair, but I was the last, so I figured I'd take a little
moment. Thank you for what you've said today about the values
you bring to this work and about working together to find the
right balance. And thank you for your willingness to take on a
challenging department at an important time.
But bluntly, Mr. Secretary, I think we need to produce more
housing, not less. And I look forward to working with you to
try to find ways to do that in keeping with our charge of
stewardship. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you. Without objection, this
letter from the First Lady Melania Trump, in support of the
Foster Youth Independence Initiative, will be entered into the
record.
[The information follows:]
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Hyde-Smith. And if there are no further questions,
Senators may submit additional questions for the subcommittee's
official hearing record. We request your responses within 30
days. The subcommittee stands in recess, subject to call of the
chair.
Questions Submitted to Hon. Scott Turner
Questions Submitted by Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith
Question. Mr. Secretary, one of President Trump's first actions was
to direct Federal agencies to pursue actions to lower the cost of
housing. This continues the action the President took in his first
Administration by establishing a White House Council on Eliminating
Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Housing. In 2021, the HUD Office of
Policy Development published a report on the Council's work.
Unfortunately, this report was largely ignored by the Biden
Administration.
Mr. Secretary, does the 2021 report still provide value as a
roadmap for HUD to address housing affordability challenges, or is
there a need to start fresh?
Answer. The report, ``Eliminating Regulatory Barriers to Affordable
Housing: Federal, State, Local, and Tribal Opportunities'', was
published in January 2021 under the leadership of Secretary Ben Carson.
It continues to serve as a valuable roadmap for addressing the housing
affordability issues facing the Nation. This Administration carries on
the commitment to reducing housing costs and increasing housing supply
through the reduction of burdensome regulations.
The report provides a foundation on which overly burdensome
regulations and processes can be identified, such as instances when
``1) the costs of implementing or complying with the regulation or
process exceed the social benefits; (2) complex, non-transparent
development processes limit entry to the market; and (3) restrictive
land use regulations near employment and services may limit labor
mobility, harming households and the National economy.''
The report identified areas where HUD can take a leadership role in
the effort to reduce and eliminate regulatory barriers, such as making
environmental review processes less restrictive, reducing the burden of
program requirements in the Housing Choice Voucher program, and quickly
implementing innovation and best practices in the manufactured housing
sector. This Administration will continue to look for areas in which
program processes can be improved and burdens reduced in ways that
tangibly expand housing supply and lower costs for American households.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Susan Collins
Question. Mr. Secretary, enabling seniors to age-in-place is
critical for the health and well-being of the individuals, the
stability of local communities, and the Federal cost savings captured
by avoiding the high costs of assisted living facilities. For these
reasons, I have championed funding at HUD for low-cost, low-barrier,
high impact home modifications that enable seniors to remain in their
homes and communities.
These modifications include minor adjustments such as installing
grab bars and railings, and replacing door knobs and faucets, as well
as relatively bigger modifications such as replacing an existing bath
tub with a walk-in tub, or anchoring an outside wheelchair ramp.
In the cases of replacing existing tubs in existing homes, or
anchoring wheelchair ramps on existing property footprints, HUD has
determined that these activities require environmental reviews. These
requirements result in time delays and cost increases, and discourage
proven strategies to help seniors remain in their homes.
Meanwhile, the Department of Transportation has figured out how to
exempt from environmental review the replacement of the Francis Scott
Key Bridge in Baltimore following its collapse last year. If D.O.T. can
figure out how to exempt an entire bridge replacement project from an
environmental review, surely HUD can figure out how to do that for
replacing a tub in an existing bathroom.
Mr. Secretary, what can you do to help HUD get out of its own way
when it comes to establishing reasonable environmental review
requirements?
Answer. In compliance with several of the President's executive
orders, HUD is reviewing all environmental requirements and removing
those that are not based in statute and impede housing development.
As to your example above, the FHA single family mortgage insurance
program is not subject to environmental review under HUD's NEPA
regulations.
For all other HUD funding and mortgage insurance programs, while
minor housing rehabilitation is technically subject to environmental
review, repair activities such as installing grab bars, replacing sinks
and tubs, and replacing fixtures are categorically excluded from NEPA
and not subject to related laws and authorities (See categorical
exclusion covering maintenance activities: 24 CFR 50.19(b)(13)).
Larger scope rehab such as a full bathroom remodel is also
categorically excluded from NEPA, but is subject to certain laws such
as the National Historic Preservation Act. However, these activities
would be exempt from compliance with most other environmental laws and
authorities (See categorical exclusion for rehab: 24 CFR 50.20(a)(2)).
Question. HUD's rental assistance programs provide access to safe,
stable homes for veterans, women at risk of or fleeing domestic
violence, people with disabilities, and families with young children.
They also provide tenants choice on where to live and housing providers
with a steady, reliable source of income with a lower risk of
nonpayment, and increase efficiency and reduce bureaucracy by putting
the onus of maintaining housing on providers rather than the Federal
Government.
The Administration's Budget Request proposes to consolidate HUD's
rental assistance programs into a State-based formula grant program and
institute a 2-year cap on rental assistance for able-bodied adults.
According to the proposal, this State Rental Assistance Block Grant
program would lead to a $26 billion decrease in HUD's rental assistance
programs.
While it is no secret that there are many improvements that can be
made to these programs, I am not sure that a $26 billion cut is one of
them. HUD's rental assistance programs often operate in silos with
different rules, funding mechanisms, and administrative requirements
that can create inefficiencies for housing providers and confusion for
tenants. Streamlining would reduce significant burdens for housing
providers, families, and the administration, but shifting rental
assistance to a State-based block grant model could also reduce
accountability, national consistency, and put services that are
provided to the elderly and people with disabilities in jeopardy.
Mr. Secretary, HUD has been successful with rental assistance pilot
programs like the Rental Assistance Demonstration and Moving to Work.
Are there lessons that HUD can take away from these pilots or are there
other strategies HUD is considering to improve the delivery and
effectiveness of rental assistance?
Answer. The Moving to Work (MTW) Demonstration is a HUD program
that provides PHAs with funding and regulatory flexibilities to tailor
their programs to fit their local needs. Through the demonstration
program PHAs are able to improve cost effectiveness, provide greater
housing choice, and promote resident self-sufficiency. MTW agencies
have led the country in RAD conversions, self-sufficiency programming,
and regionalization of PHAs to expand efficiencies and housing choice.
Further, five State-level PHAs are already MTW agencies. MTW has been a
very successful demonstration program and is an approach we can learn
from and expand for the proposed State Rental Assistance Program.
The Rental Demonstration Program (RAD), as a demonstration program,
has the flexibility to keep adapting to changing conditions and to
provide the participating PHAs, private owners, and their partners with
the tools to address their affordable housing recapitalization needs.
It's a great example of reducing regulatory constraints to unleash
creativity and resources, with proven results.
HUD will leverage its knowledge from these programs to support
States in designing rental assistance programs to improve housing
choice, expand affordable housing, and promote economic independence
for low-income families.
In the Research and Technology (R&T) account in the President's
budget, HUD will support States by providing research findings on what
works and through sharing of model documents between States as States
create them to support transition from existing HUD agreements with
housing providers to State or local agreements with housing providers.
HUD R&T funds would also be used to facilitate peer learning between
the States.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
Question. North Dakota's State and local housing entities utilize
HUD and other Federal funding to facilitate public-private
partnerships. This leveraging ensures maximum efficiency of taxpayer
dollars.
Can you discuss how the Fiscal Year 2026 budget request supports
these types of public-private partnerships?
Answer. HUD has strong partnerships to support housing and economic
development around the country, including with faith-based
organizations. The 2026 budget supports the Center for Faith (formerly
the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives), which serves as
the Department's liaison between faith-based and community
organizations, HUD program offices, and the White House Faith Office.
This office assists in developing and coordinating HUD and the
Administration's policy agenda affecting faith-based and other
community programs and initiatives and optimizes the role of such
efforts in communities. The budget also proposes new Implementation
Support to States which would provide tools, templates, and supports to
guide States in designing and launching innovative rental assistance
programs.
Question. Are there steps HUD can take to streamline any
administrative burdens that programs under FHA may place on loan
servicers like the North Dakota Housing Finance Authority?
Answer. HUD is looking at all programs, systems, regulations, and
sub-regulatory guidance to reduce burden for our stakeholders, and we
stand ready to assist your North Dakota stakeholders.
Question. How will the Department's Fiscal Year 2026 budget request
support elderly populations that rely on HUD's rental housing
assistance programs?
Answer. The President Budget maintains HUD's commitment to
protecting our most vulnerable elderly and disabled citizens. This
budget would prioritize rental assistance for these families. At the
same time, HUD will also maintain our commitment to promoting self-
sufficiency and economic independence by adopting a common-sense time
limit that will encourage able-bodied residents to move up and out of
assisted housing.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jerry Moran
Question. Delinquency rates for FHA have increased, and FHA
recently announced changes to its loss mitigation program.
While FHA premiums are a key tool to improve affordability, how is
HUD evaluating the tradeoff between providing cost relief to borrowers
and ensuring the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund remains well-
capitalized in the event of future stress?
Answer. FHA remains focused on striking the right balance between
supporting affordable and sustainable homeownership while safeguarding
the long-term strength of the MMI Fund. FHA's recent updates to its
loss mitigation program are aimed at helping homeowners stay in their
homes while addressing increases in delinquency and re-default rates.
We recognize that broader financial pressures, including the resumption
of student loan repayments for many FHA mortgagors, may contribute to
additional strain on household budgets and increase the risk of
mortgage delinquencies. Combined with ongoing uncertainty in the
housing market and the broader economy, these factors reinforce the
need for careful, data-driven stewardship of the MMI Fund.
Question. Will HUD consider further reductions to its mortgage
insurance premiums to expand credit access for first-time homebuyers
and low-to-moderate income borrowers?
Answer. HUD is not currently considering a reduction to FHA
mortgage insurance premiums as it continues to monitor the performance
of the MMI Fund and evolving economic conditions. Ensuring the Fund
remains well-capitalized is critical to FHA's ability to support future
borrowers and respond effectively in times of stress.
Question. FHA multifamily production has dropped more than 40% in
the last several years.
What are your plans to modernize the program and bring private
sector developers back into building rental housing?
Answer. There are many factors that impact multifamily production,
including interest rates, available land, and local land use
requirements. The administration has taken a comprehensive review of
staffing, programs, systems, regulations, and sub- regulatory guidance
to reduce administrative burden. Additionally, since January 20, 2025,
HUD implemented the following to modernize the program, streamline
processing, and bring private sector developers back into building
rental housing: Published FR-6522-N-01 Federal Register Notice
proposing across-the-board MIP reductions which are necessitated by a
sharp rise in construction costs and mortgage interest rates. Published
Mortgagee Letter 2025-11 Annual Revisions to Base City High-Cost
Percentage and High-Cost Areas Annual Indexing of MAP Guide's
Substantial Rehabilitation and Large Loan Risk Mitigation Thresholds.
Implemented Risk Based Underwriter Training to improve consistency and
efficiency. Implemented The Single Underwriter Model to streamline and
shorten HUD review times.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
Question. To make commercial building conversions possible and
unlock the massive amount of new housing we need in this country, large
scale zoning and land use de-regulation is necessary. In your
confirmation hearing you said the Federal Government has a role in
encouraging States and local governments to reduce regulations and
barriers, and I agree with you. Yet the FY26 budget request eliminates
the PRO Housing grant program, which is designed to do exactly that.
How specifically will you incentivize State and local governments
to remove their legal and regulatory barriers to housing production
without the PRO Housing program?
Answer. PRO Housing was first authorized in FY2023. Twenty-one
awards were funded in June 2024 at $85 million in aggregate. Eighteen
awards were funded in January 2025 at $100 million in aggregate. These
figures represent full appropriations for their respective fiscal
years. The awards are slated to fund a wide variety of housing planning
and development activities. These activities were developed by the
State and local government applicants as part of their applications.
However, housing planning and development take years to complete. Thus,
the effectiveness and impact of this new program remains to be seen.
Further, while office to residential conversions can be subject to
zoning and land-use regulations, they are also subject to innate
construction challenges. Office buildings are generally not designed
for residential occupancy. Office conversions often require the
redesign and reconstruction of interior spaces and structures. Other
challenges include significant rework of existing building systems,
including plumbing, electrical, heating, ventilation and air
conditioning, lighting, window size and placement, sound reduction and
insulation, and fire protection systems.
Meanwhile, taxpayer dollars are a precious resource. Opportunity
zones and low-income housing tax credits have proven to be real drivers
for change. One of the President's earliest Presidential Memoranda
recognized the need to ``lower the cost of housing and expand housing
supply'' and deregulation is a key Administration priority, outlined by
the Executive Order 12866, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.
The budget supports deregulation in the housing market and HUD's
commitment to expand the affordable housing supply to unlock
homeownership housing opportunities for the American people, including
homeownership opportunities. HUD looks forward to working together with
States and local governments to identify other ways to stimulate
housing supply and break down the barriers holding housing production
back.
Question. How specifically does the budget request support State
and local deregulation efforts?
Answer. HUD is undertaking a regulatory review, with a focus on
reducing the burdens we put on communities, grantees, and developers.
We are working to make HUD a better partner. The Budget request
includes funding for research and demonstrations in the Office of
Policy Development and Research (PD&R) focused on deregulation in the
housing market, increasing housing supply, and lowering housing costs.
This work will build upon PD&R's ``Eliminating Regulatory Barriers to
Affordable Housing: Federal, State, Local and Tribal Opportunities''
report, published during the President's first term.
Our proposed State Rental Assistance Program will remove the
multiple layers of overlapping programs and the rules that accompany
them, allowing each State to take its own path and provide rental
assistance in the way that best meets their needs. In that process, HUD
will encourage States to reduce and remove regulatory barriers. States
that retain barriers will see other States' grants going further and
making more progress. This is the kind of competition that will lead to
real, organic deregulation instead of top-down mandates and edicts.
Question. How specifically does the budget request carry out the
Federal deregulatory work this Committee has encouraged under both
Democratic and Republican administrations?
Answer. Deregulation is a key Administration priority, outlined by
the Executive Order 12866, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.
The budget supports deregulation in the housing market and HUD's
commitment to expand the affordable housing supply to unlock housing
opportunities for the American people, including homeownership
opportunities.
Question. The House-passed reconciliation bill expands the Low-
Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC). However, one third of LIHTC deals
rely on HUD programs to actually pencil out and make these ``public-
private partnerships'' work. The FY26 budget request eliminates all of
those HUD programs.
Congress goes along with the budget proposal to eliminate HOME,
CDBG, and the current rental assistance programs, what are the
potential ripple effects on the LIHTC program?
Answer. LIHTC projects are typically built with a variety of local
government financing. While HOME, CDBG, and Federal rental assistance
are currently used in LIHTC transactions, they are not the sole source
of gap funding and many LIHTC projects are completed without the use of
those funding sources. Due to the interest of private developers and
equity providers in the LIHTC program, these transactions will continue
as a valuable source of low income housing.
Question. By accepting the budget request, how much housing will be
built that is affordable to very low-income households?
Answer. The current system of rental assistance programs has been
dysfunctional for a long time, wasting taxpayer dollars and
artificially driving up housing costs for all through government
subsidies, all while stifling self-sufficiency and economic
independence for residents.
When I came to HUD, I committed to taking inventory of our programs
and processes to find out what is and isn't working well for taxpayers
and those who depend on our programs. It's time to take a different
approach--the Washington approach of one size fits all for communities
does not work.
What I have found is a rental assistance system full of waste,
fraud, and abuse; inefficiencies and bloated administrative costs;
deteriorating public housing units; and a rent structure that punishes
work and marriage among residents.
What we propose is indeed transformational--a State-based formula
grant which would encourage States to have skin in the game for funding
and design of their own rental assistance programs based on their
unique needs and preferences, without heavy-handed interference from
Washington.
The proposal also maintains HUD's commitment to protecting our most
vulnerable elderly and disabled citizens. This budget would prioritize
rental assistance for these families. At the same time, HUD will also
maintain our commitment to promoting self- sufficiency and economic
independence by adopting a common-sense time limit that will encourage
able-bodied residents to move up and out of assisted housing.
Question. HUD is required by law to ensure its assisted properties
are safe and in good repair. Over the years, this Committee has
invested in an inspection standard modernization effort that began
under Secretary Carson, and the Appropriations Committees have worked
with HUD to dig out of a massive inspection backlog. Money is not an
issue here. HUD currently has over $110 million for inspections. HUD
chose to cancel one of its property inspection contracts, before having
a plan in place for how HUD would maintain oversight of property
conditions.
Mr. Secretary, will you commit to getting inspections back on track
and on schedule as quickly as possible?
Answer. HUD currently has awarded several contracts to support
HUD's mission to ensure housing units and properties meet National
Standards for the Physical Inspection (NSPIRE). The work we are doing
on IT modernization and upgrading HUD's technology systems will help
these inspections work more efficiently.
Question. Will you commit to increasing the number of in-house
inspectors?
Answer. HUD is prioritizing inspections and will continue to focus
on bringing in inspectors via contract or Federal inspectors. We will
keep all options open.
Question. Will you commit to inspecting all failing properties at
least once a year?
Answer. HUD prioritizes inspecting high risk properties identified
as Troubled and is exploring ways to reduce the regulatory burden to
re-inspect High Performers every 3-years.
HUD has completed 8,834 of its 11,335 targeted inspections as of
July 17, 2025. The remaining inspections for 2025 plus the 2,639
backlog are ordered, scheduled, underway or under review.
Question. When PHAs are in violation of statutes or regulations for
systemic, long-standing, or severe issues, they often require
extraordinary levels of expertise and resources to remediate
performance deficiencies and improve the quality and safety of housing
for residents. Under possession or administrative receivership, HUD
assumes responsibility for both the governance and daily management of
a PHA's public housing and voucher programs.
How many PHAs are currently in receivership?
Answer. Five PHAs remain in HUD possession: Alexander County
Housing Authority of Cairo (IL), since 2016, Highland Park (MI) Housing
Commission, since 2021, Irvington (NJ) Housing Authority, since 2022,
Indianapolis (IN) Housing Authority, taken into HUD possession in April
2024, and Atlantic City (NJ) since 2025.
Question. How many PHAs in receivership does the Department plan to
return to local control in FY2025?
Answer. In FY2025 the Housing Authority of the City of Slidell was
returned to local control so it's no longer in HUD's possession.
Question. How have the staffing levels and organizational
structures of the Office of Prevention, Recovery and Transformation and
Office of Field Operations changed since January 20, 2025?
Answer. The Office of Field Operations took approximately a 31%
reduction while the Office of Prevention, Recovery and Transformation
took a 22% reduction.
Question. Under your leadership, how will HUD manage and oversee
PHAs that are troubled and in default of their annual contributions
contracts?
Answer. This is a priority for HUD. HUD plans to utilize the
expertise from throughout the organization to focus on troubled PHAs
and hold them accountable sooner and ensure effective and appropriate
oversight. This will allow HUD to provide direct operational oversight
early, creating solutions that will ensure residents are living in safe
and healthy homes.
Question. Mr. Secretary, I am concerned with the impact President
Trump's tariffs are having on housing affordability. The National
Association of Home Builders estimate tariffs are adding nearly $11,000
to the average cost of a new home. Home insurance rates could jump by
another 11 percent. All of this will inevitably increase rents, and as
rents increase, so will homelessness.
Mr. Secretary, based on your experience working for a major housing
developer, will the Administration's tariff policies make housing
construction and maintenance more expensive or less expensive?
Answer. The Trump Administration is implementing revisions to
tariff policies to increase economic and national security. The
Administration's view is that in the short run foreign producers will
reduce prices to offset about 3/4 of the tariffs. Recent evidence has
in fact shown that the prices of imported goods have been stable or
falling since the beginning of this Administration's current term. In
the long run, tariffs will stimulate increased domestic production of
building materials which will ultimately lead to lower prices due to
economies of scale and reduced reliance on imports.
Question. What are you doing to help public housing authorities and
affordable housing developers address these higher costs, especially
insurance?
Answer. Rising insurance costs are a pressing concern for housing
stakeholders and the residents they serve. That's exactly why we have a
proposed a paradigm shift through the creation of a new State-based
formula rental assistance grant that will encourage States to have skin
in the game for funding and design of their own rental assistance
programs based on their unique needs and preferences, without heavy-
handed interference from Washington. Under the proposal, the States
will be in the best position to negotiate and leverage the cost of
insurance for their jurisdiction. These reforms will go a long way
towards cutting down onerous costs.
In addition, the cost of insurance is driven by many factors, all
of which are out of the control of HUD. That being said, our
Multifamily FHA Office has taken steps to assist owners and lenders in
addressing these costs, including using other available tools to assist
owners. Another way HUD is working to address these higher costs is the
proposed elimination of the Green and Energy Efficient Mortgage
Insurance Premium (MIP) category which standardizes all MIP rates at
0.25% within FHA's multifamily housing programs.
Question. In 2024, on a bipartisan basis, Congress authorized HUD
to run the Continuum of Care (CoC) competition on a 2-year cycle so
that CoC programs don't have to re-apply for funding every year. This
approach would cut down on red tape, and eliminates nearly 115,000
hours of administrative work to fill out new applications. We can all
agree these hours would be better spent on improving services and
outcomes for homeless individuals and families.
Mr. Secretary, will you commit to a 2-year competition cycle for
CoCs for FY2024 and FY2025, instead of issuing a new NOFO this year?
Answer. On July 3, HUD sent out a letter informing CoCs to prepare
for a FY2025 competition focused on treatment and recovery, reducing
unsheltered homelessness, reducing returns to homelessness, and
increasing employment income. The 275,000 people living on our streets
and American taxpayers deserve the careful stewardship of resources to
address homelessness.
Question. Will you commit to a 2-year competition cycle for FY2026
and FY2027?
Answer. HUD acknowledges the administrative burden of the CoC
program for communities and for HUD staff and is taking inventory of
how to best streamline the process. HUD does not have the authority to
run a 2-year CoC competition in 2026 and 2027.
Question. According to the Department of Government Efficiency
(DOGE) website, HUD has terminated or cancelled at least 3 leases for
office space in two States and the District of Columbia.
Please provide a detailed list of all leases that have been
terminated or cancelled by the Department between January 20, 2025 and
the date of receipt of this question. This list should include: the
location (including address) of the leased building or office space;
the date on which the existing lease was to expire prior to the
termination or cancellation; the date on which the existing lease will
end as a result of the termination or cancellation (i.e. when it will
no longer be used by the Department); the amount of any early
termination or cancellation fees; the number of staff whose duty
station was the leased building or office space as of January 20, 2025;
where the staff whose duty station was the leased building or office
space will report to following the termination or cancellation; and
whether the Department will consolidate or co-locate the staff whose
duty station was the leased building or office space in a building or
office space currently leased or owned by HUD.
Answer. To date, HUD has not initiated any lease terminations.
Question. According to the DOGE website, Federal agencies have
terminated or cancelled countless contracts, but the website
intentionally goes out of its way to provide the information in the
least useful manner.
Please provide a detailed spreadsheet of all contracts that have
been terminated or cancelled by HUD between January 20, 2025 and the
date of receipt of this question. This spreadsheet should include the
following for each contract: Program office, Source of funding for the
contract, Recipient name, Purpose of the contract, Amount originally
awarded and/or approved for obligation, Contract period of performance,
Rationale for why the contract was no longer necessary, and Whether the
contract has since been reinstated, and if so, whether the contract is
still listed on the DOGE website as of the date of receipt of this
question.
Answer. HUD is reviewing all contracts for efficiency and
effectiveness to accomplish good government goals. When certain
contracts are found not to accomplish HUD's mission with economy,
efficiency, and effectiveness, action is taken. HUD will continue to
deliver on its critical functions, mission to serve rural, Tribal, and
urban communities and statutory responsibilities.
Question. Please provide a list of all advisory committees, panels,
task forces, and commissions that were funded and operational in fiscal
year 2024. Indicate those that are mandated by law and those that are
discretionary, the funding level of each and the expiration date of the
most recent charter.
Also list each advisory committee, panel, task force, and
commission that have been terminated or cancelled by the Department
between January 20, 2025 and the date of receipt of this question, as
well as those the Department proposes to operate in fiscal year 2026,
with the proposed budget for each.
Answer. No committees, panels, task forces, or commissions mandated
by law have been terminated or disbanded by HUD between January 20,
2025 and July 16, 2025.
Please see the chart below for the committees and panels the
Department intends to operate in FY26, along with the proposed budget.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Est. FY26
Mandated by Law or FY24 Cost Cost
Name Discretionary Charter Expiration Date (values in (values in
thousands) thousands)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Housing Counseling Federal Advisory Mandated by Law June 11, 2026 $815 TBD
Committee (HCFAC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufactured Housing Consensus Committee Mandated by Law September 30, 2026 $991 $666
(MHCC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cityscape Panel Discretionary N/A. New Charter to be $24 TBD
developed by new PD&R
leadership.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MTW Research Federal Advisory Committee Mandated by Law May 30, 2026 $12 TBD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal Intergovernmental Advisory Discretionary The charter is ongoing $75 TBD
Committee (TIAC) until terminated
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. Please provide an update on any plans or planning the
Department has to reorganize the Department or its program offices.
Answer. At this point, there has been discussion about realigning a
small number of program office functions to increase effectiveness and
efficiency of those programs. There has also been discussion of how to
provide administrative support functions more efficiently across the
Department. However, no action has been taken on any of these
initiatives at this time.
Question. Please provide a list of all political and Presidential
appointees employed by the Department as of the date of receipt of this
question. This list should include the name and title for each
political and Presidential appointee and the program office in which
such staff is employed.
Answer. Political appointees are listed through the OPM Plum Book
consistent with the practices of prior administrations.
Question. Please provide the name, title, and office of employment
for each employee that is working at the Department as part of the DOGE
team as of the date of receipt of this question, as well as their job
description. Please specify if they have been hired as full-time HUD
employees or are Special Government Employees, and whether any
additional DOGE team members have been or will be detailed to the
Department.
Answer. HUD's DOGE Task Force is composed of HUD employees.
Question. Please provide a list of all IT systems, subsystems, or
IT contracts decommissioned or terminated in FY 2024, FY2025 through
the date of receipt of this question, and any planned over the next
year. For each such system, subsystem, or contract, provide a
description of the program or function supported, any plan for
replacing that functionality, and the cost for each of the past 3
fiscal years.
Answer. The Office of the CIO is currently conducting a 120-day
evaluation of the information technology (IT) platforms, applications
and systems used to support programs at HUD. OCIO's goal is to develop
an IT roadmap that integrates technology with enterprise architecture,
cybersecurity, and data protection requirements and that will support
the agency's mission. Our goal is to adopt best practices from across
industry and the Federal landscape to ensure optimal functionality and
performance. By collaborating with various stakeholders, including
program offices, technology providers, and other government entities,
we will devise a comprehensive and efficient strategy. Additionally, we
are prioritizing cybersecurity and data protection in line with
legislative mandates and executive orders, ensuring that HUD systems
are fortified against potential threats.P
Question. Please provide the total number of Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity investigations, settlements, closures, and dismissals that
occurred in FY 2024 and FY 2025 as of the date of receipt of this
question. This list should be categorized by State and should include
the basis of the discrimination alleged in each complaint and whether
the complaint was referred to the Department of Justice.
Answer. By way of summary, in 2024, the relevant totals were as
follows:
--Total number of Investigations: 8,423
--Total number of Settlements: 1,908
--Total number of Closures: 8,137
--Total number of Dismissals: 4,317
--Total number of Referrals to the DOJ: 15
In 2025, the totals so far are as follows:
--Total number of Investigations: 6,082
--Total number of Settlements: 1,336
--Total number of Closures: 6,317
--Total number of Dismissals: 3,382
--Total number of Referrals to the DOJ: 2
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
Question. Mr. Secretary, you went on TV to spread misconceptions
about the ``welfare state'' and said 50 percent of households that
receive HUD funding have no one working. This is a blatantly misleading
statement.
Nearly 60 percent of HUD-assisted households are headed by a senior
or person with a disability. True or false?
Answer. In 2024, the proportion of HUD-assisted renter households
headed by a person aged 62 or older or a person with disabilities was
61%.
Question. The majority of work-able households do indeed work. True
or false?
Answer. As a point-in-time, roughly 60% of non-elderly, non-
disabled households had some wage income in 2024. That means 40% had no
wage income in 2024. For non- elderly, non-disabled tenants in housing
assistance 3 years or longer, only 42% were consistently employed over
that 3-year time period, while 37% were in and out of the workforce,
and 21% did not work at all in those 3 years.
Question. 9 out of 10 HUD-assisted households include seniors,
people with disabilities, or have jobs. True or false?
Answer. False, a more correct statement would be ``more than 8 out
of 10 households include seniors, people with disabilities, or have
jobs.'' We estimate approximately 85% of all households are working,
disabled or elderly. These figures are based on data reported to HUD by
Public Housing Authorities and multifamily property owners on two
forms, the HUD-50058 (or public housing and vouchers) and HUD- 50059
(for multifamily assisted) forms which capture details on HUD assisted
tenants, including age, disability, and employment for each member of
the household.
Question. The median length of stay on HUD assistance is around 4
or 5 years, and statistics on the average length of stay statistics
(which you frequently use) are skewed by the high number of assisted
seniors and persons with disabilities who cannot work. True or false?
Answer. This chart provides data from December 2024 for current
average (mean) and median tenant length of stay in assisted housing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mean (years) Median (years)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working age households without 7.8 5.0
disabilities...........................
Older adults or people with disabilities 10.5 7.3
All Households.......................... 9.5 6.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. My colleagues and I sent you letters on February 16 and
February 20 on staffing cuts and actions that DOGE had taken up to that
point. I received a response on June 3 with little to no answers to the
questions posed in these letters. The Committee needs responses with
real information to be able to carry out our Constitutional duty to
oversee the funds that Congress provides.
Please respond to all 19 questions asked in these letters and
specifically provide the actual data requested in those questions. The
19 questions in these letters are as follows:
How many probationary employees were terminated--by office,
division, and branch?
Answer. Since January 20, 2025, HUD has terminated 83 probationary/
trial period employees from the following organizations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employees
Program Office Terminated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community Planning and Development (CPD)............... 1
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO).... 15
Field Policy and Management (FPM)...................... 12
Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA)........ 2
Housing (HSNG)......................................... 4
Administration (ADMIN)................................. 9
Chief Financial Officer (OCFO)......................... 3
Chief Information Officer (OCIO)....................... 2
General Counsel (OGC).................................. 14
Policy Development and Research (PDR).................. 2
Public and Indian Housing (PIH)........................ 19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. What factors did HUD consider in determining which
probationary employees would and would not be terminated on February
14?
Answer. HUD's leadership in each HUD program office identified
which probationary employees in their offices would be retained and
which would be terminated, ensuring that top performing probationary
employees supporting critical programs were retained.
Question. Were there any exceptions for offices that already lack
sufficient capacity to address HUD's legal obligations, statutory
mandates, and for the purposes of public safety, law enforcement, and
security?
Answer. Yes. Program office leadership determined which of the
probationary employees in their offices would be retained and which
would be terminated, ensuring that top performing probationary
employees supporting critical programs were retained.
Question. What steps did the Department take to ensure the
continuity of programs for families and communities prior to
terminating hundreds of employees?
Answer. HUD's program office leadership determined which of the
probationary employees in their offices would be retained and which
would be terminated and endeavored to ensure continuity of programs for
families and communities.
Question. What role did you personally play in directing and
reviewing employee lists vis-`-vis the DOGE team and vis-`-vis the
political appointees leading each office component?
Answer. Program office leadership determined which of the
probationary employees in their offices would be retained and which
would be terminated, ensuring that top performing probationary
employees supporting critical programs were retained.
Question. How much notice was provided to terminated employees?
Answer. Each probationary employee was given a written termination
notice informing them of the effective date annotated on the memorandum
for that same day.
Per Title 5, Chapter 1, Subchapter A, Part 11.5e, ``Before an
agency terminates the service of an employee serving a probationary or
trial period, it shall notify such employee in writing as to the
effective date of the action.''
Question. If terminations were conducted under 5 C.F.R.
Sec. 315.804, what justification was provided to employees as the
reason for their termination?
Answer. The only termination conducted under 5 C.F.R. Sec. 315.804
cited the justification that the employee displayed an inability to
perform their duties.
One additional termination for an excepted service employee under a
trial period cited conduct reasons. The remaining 81 probationary/trial
period terminations were conducted under Civil Service Rule XI,
established by Executive Order 14284.
Question. Consistent with the staffing review you are conducting in
response to the February 11 executive order, please provide HUD's
comprehensive list of the functions performed by each office that are
mandated by statute or related to public safety and law enforcement, as
well as the current number of staff associated with those functions.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/
implementing-the-presidents-department-of- government-efficiency-
workforce-optimization-initiative/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),
a Cabinet-level agency created in 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3532-3537), is
responsible for national policy and programs that address America's
housing needs, improve and develop the Nation's communities, and
enforce fair housing laws. HUD accomplishes its mission through
component organizations and offices that administer programs which are
carried out through a network of regional and field offices and
partnerships with other Federal agencies, State and local grantees, and
private sector, philanthropic and non-profit organizations.
HUD works to ensure Americans have access to fair, affordable
housing, and opportunities to achieve self-sufficiency, thereby
strengthening our Nation. It does that through mortgage insurance and
mortgage security guaranty that makes homeownership possible for
millions of Americans, housing and homeless assistance programs that
reduce and resolve homelessness, community targeted block grants that
help build and repair housing and infrastructure for strong
communities, and enforcement of civil rights laws, among others.
HUD serves over 6.2 million renters through programs administered
by its program offices in the Office of Public and Indian Housing
(PIH), Office of Multifamily Housing, and the Office of Community
Planning and Development (CPD). In 2024, the Federal Housing
Administration (FHA) served more than 790,000 Americans buying homes,
refinancing their mortgage, or accessing home equity to age in place
through the Single Family forward and reverse mortgage insurance
programs. Over 82 percent of FHA-insured forward purchase transactions
by loan count, or 498,363 mortgages, went to first-time homebuyers.
Question. For the employees who have accepted the deferred
resignation offer, what is the estimated cost to taxpayers to pay those
employees for not working through the end of the year?
Answer. The estimated cost to pay employees on the Deferred
Resignation Program (DRP) through the end of the year is nearly $220
million, but that cost will be more than offset by outyear savings from
a smaller and more efficient workforce better aligned to HUD's core
mission. The out year annual savings to taxpayers from HUD's new
workforce footprint is estimated to be approximately $400 million.
Question. The Committees on Appropriations intentionally funds each
HUD program office separately to support program execution and
fulfillment of HUD's mission. How are the costs of the deferred
resignations and planned reductions in force ``necessary expenses'' and
consistent with appropriation law?
Answer. HUD is focused on ``right-sizing'' our staffing levels to
meet the needs of HUD's mission, and to be good stewards of taxpayer
dollars. Appropriations for salaries and expenses are properly
available for those ongoing efforts to address agency human resources
needs, including the use of deferred resignation, potential reductions
in force, and other necessary and appropriate tools.
Question. How many individuals are currently part of HUD's DOGE
Task Force? Please provide the names of all Task Force members and
whether they are considered employees of HUD or any other Federal
agency.
Answer. HUD's DOGE Task Force is composed of HUD employees.
Question. What are the specific components of the $260 million in
contracts that you described in your February 11, 2025, interview on
The Charlie Kirk Show? Please provide a list of all contracts that DOGE
employees have identified as wasteful and the justification for
cancellation.
Answer. HUD is detailed and deliberate about every dollar spent to
serve rural, Tribal, and urban communities. We ended the business-as-
usual posture and eliminated contracts that do not further HUD's
mission. It is our duty to be good stewards of taxpayers' dollars,
identify and eliminate waste, fraud and abuse, and better serve the
American people.
Question. Do members of the DOGE Task Force have access to any non-
public HUD information, including data systems, contracting systems,
personnel records, or other legal records? Does this include
proprietary Tribal enrollment data submitted for Native American
Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) funding?
Answer. The task force is composed of HUD employees.
Question. Relating to Tribes, Tribes do not submit any proprietary
Tribal enrollment data to HUD. All Tribal enrollment data that is
submitted to HUD is currently publicly available online at HUD's Indian
Housing Block Grant formula website.
What steps have you taken to protect Americans' data and ensure
compliance with the Privacy Act?
Answer. HUD will continue to comply with all applicable laws
regarding the privacy and security of personal identifiable
information.
Question. What are the objectives of the HUD DOGE Task Force and
how long will the Task Force be in place?
Answer. The task force, composed of HUD employees, is examining how
to best maximize HUD's budget and ensure all programs, processes and
personnel are working together to advance the purpose of the
department.
Question. Has there been any pause or delay in disbursing or
obligating HUD funds, including delays in signing grant agreements,
since January 20, 2025? Please provide a detailed accounting of any
pauses or delays.
Answer. HUD will continue to administer its grant programs
consistent with all applicable laws and regulations.
Question. Has HUD cancelled--or does HUD intend to cancel--the
Green and Resilient Retrofit Program, including terminating or failing
to enter into awards or contracts?
Answer. HUD has terminated various technical assistance contracts
associated with the GRRP. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act has rescinded
all unobligated balances appropriated under Section 30002 of the
Inflation Reduction Act. Consequently, HUD cannot enter into new awards
or contracts with GRRP funds. The awards which were obligated under
Section 30002(a)(1) prior to January 20, 2025, remain in place and,
pursuant to the Court's order in Woonasquatucket River Watershed
Association et al v USDA et al, HUD is processing transaction materials
submitted to the Department and is disbursing funds in response to
appropriate construction draw requests.
Question. Please explain in detail any plans to reduce HUD staffing
below the level of staff employed at the agency on January 20, 2025,
including:
Current or planned changes in staffing by HUD Office and the reason
for any change, including retirement, participation in a Deferred
Resignation Program, or other actions; The number of staff that would
be present in each HUD Office after planned changes; and whether any
programs or functions of HUD would be reduced or eliminated.
Answer. About 30% of HUD's workforce elected to participate in
voluntary downsizing incentive programs such as in the Deferred
Resignation Program, Voluntary Early Retirement Program, or Voluntary
Separation Incentive Program. HUD leadership is assessing if any
additional rightsizing actions are needed, and if so, what those are.
Question. Are there any programs, functions, or offices you plan to
eliminate at HUD? If so, please provide a list of those programs,
functions, or offices. If not, please detail how you intend to perform
HUD's critical functions and prevent mismanagement of funds with the
proposed staff reductions.
Answer. At this time HUD is assessing its staffing and functions to
determine what additional reductions, if any, will be made. The
Department is exploring the use of technology to support critical
workforce needs and will prioritize mission critical work and oversight
to prevent mismanagement of funds.
Question. One of your first official acts as Secretary of HUD was
stopping the enforcement of the Equal Access rule, which provides
universal access to life-saving shelter, regardless of a person's
gender identity. For months, a proposed revised rule has been listed on
OMB's website as ``pending,'' but no one has seen it.
Mr. Secretary, what is the status of the proposed rule?
Answer. The intent of the statement ordering HUD to cease all
enforcement of the rule is meant to comport HUD policies with the
president's executive orders, particularly EO 14168, Defending Women
From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the
Federal Government.
Question. Does HUD agree that people in crisis should have quick
and safe access to emergency assistance?
Answer. HUD is committed to supporting localities in providing
immediate homelessness services and shelter to address the crisis on
our streets. The President's proposed budget does just that, by
providing $4-billion in funding for the Emergency Solutions Grant
program to administer emergency and short-to medium term assistance.
Question. Will you provide at least 60 days for public comment so
that the people who would benefit and be harmed by it can weigh in?
Answer. HUD will follow all applicable legal requirements when
publishing regulatory actions.
Question. In March, HUD and DHS entered into an unprecedented
memorandum of understanding regarding data sharing.
What specific information is HUD sharing with DHS?
Answer. HUD will provide appropriate data pursuant to requests
supported by law enforcement investigations managed by DHS.
Question. What steps is HUD taking to protect the privacy of the
individuals and families in its programs?
Answer. HUD will continue to comply with all applicable laws
regarding the privacy and security of personal identifiable
information.
Question. Mr. Secretary, in your written testimony you claim to
have ``identified $260 million in savings for the American people'' and
shared that you ``cancelled $4 million in DEI contracts.'' This
Committee asked your staff for the details on these savings and
cancellations, but has received no response. I'm deeply concerned by
the lack of transparency and accountability on what you are cutting and
how it is impacting communities in our States.
Please provide the full details in writing to the Committee on what
makes up the $260 million in savings and $4 million in cancelled DEI
contracts.
Answer. HUD is detailed and deliberate about every dollar spent to
serve rural, Tribal, and urban communities. We ended the business-as-
usual posture and eliminated contracts that do not further HUD's
mission. It is our duty to be good stewards of taxpayers' dollars,
identify and eliminate waste, fraud and abuse, and better serve the
American people.
Question. According to the DOGE website, Federal agencies have
terminated, cancelled, or reduced funding for countless grants, but the
website intentionally goes out of its way to provide the information in
the least useful manner.
Please provide a detailed spreadsheet containing all grants that
have been terminated, cancelled, or reduced in funding by the
Department between January 20, 2025 and the date of receipt of this
question. This spreadsheet should include the following information for
each grant:
Program office, Grant program, Source of funding for the grant,
Recipient name, Amount originally awarded, Amount approved for
obligation, If/how the scope of work has changed, Rationale for why the
grant was no longer necessary or reduced in funding, and Whether the
grant has since been reinstated, and if so, whether the grant is still
listed on the DOGE website as of the date of receipt of this question.
Answer. The Department is responsible for ensuring our grantees and
contractors are in compliance with the President's Executive Orders.
When certain grants are found not to accomplish HUD's mission, action
is taken. We're looking forward--not back--and investing in programs
that deliver the greatest impact for the American people. We invite you
to visit https://doge.gov to learn more about information listed on the
DOGE website.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Dick Durbin
Question. Secretary Turner, in a recent interview, you were asked
about the vision and purpose of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. You responded, quote, ``HUD's mission is to serve the most
vulnerable people in our country. We meet people where they are.'' In
the same interview, you acknowledged that our Nation has a shortage of
7 million affordable housing units. That is correct-we are short 7.1
million affordable housing units in the United States, including more
than 442,000 affordable housing units in Illinois.
Secretary Turner, listening to this interview, it sounds like we
agree on a great deal, but then I see President Trump's Fiscal Year
(FY) 2026 Budget Request, which calls for severe cuts to nearly every
HUD program. This includes a $27 billion cut for Housing Choice
Vouchers, project-based rental assistance, public housing, and housing
for seniors and people with disabilities; a nearly $300 million cut to
HUD's Healthy Homes and Lead Hazards program, which protects families
from the devastating impacts of lead poisoning.
Mr. Secretary, how do you reconcile what you have said about
serving the Nation's most vulnerable populations, meeting them where
they are, with this 44 percent cut to HUD?
Answer. The current system of rental assistance programs has been
dysfunctional for a long time, wasting taxpayer dollars and
artificially driving up housing costs for all through government
subsidies, all while stifling self-sufficiency and economic
independence for residents.
When I came to HUD, I committed to taking inventory of our programs
and processes to find out what is and isn't working well for taxpayers
and those who depend on our programs. It's time to take a different
approach--the Washington approach of one size fits all for communities
does not work.
What I have found is a rental assistance system full of waste,
fraud, and abuse; inefficiencies and bloated administrative costs;
deteriorating public housing units; and a rent structure that punishes
work and marriage among residents.
What we propose is indeed transformational--a State-based formula
grant which would encourage States to have skin in the game for funding
and design of their own rental assistance programs based on their
unique needs and preferences, without heavy-handed interference from
Washington.
The proposal also maintains HUD's commitment to protecting our most
vulnerable elderly and disabled citizens. This budget would prioritize
rental assistance for these families. At the same time, HUD will also
maintain our commitment to promoting self-sufficiency and economic
independence by adopting a common-sense time limit that will encourage
able-bodied residents to move up and out of assisted housing.
Question. Around 35 million homes have lead-based paint, impacting
almost 30percent of all housing units. Lead-based paint was banned in
1978-nearly 47 years ago. And yet, families with young children are
still exposed to lead and its well-known health hazards. Even at very
low levels, lead exposure damages a child's brain and nervous system,
resulting in slowed growth and development, learning and behavior
problems, and hearing and speech issues. The financial consequences of
childhood lead exposure are estimated to be around $84 billion, and it
will take decades for the existing HUD programs that address lead in
homes to reach all the children at risk of lead poisoning, particularly
as many communities already struggle to access resources and coordinate
remediation efforts. President Trump's FY26 Budget Request called for
just $49 million for HUD's Healthy Homes and Lead Hazards program, a
nearly $296M decrease from FY25.
Given that the financial consequences of childhood lead exposure
are estimated to be around $84 billion in lost wages, health care, and
other services, can you explain to the Committee how this cut would
keep our kids safe?
Answer. HUD recognizes that its lead safety programs are not scaled
to reach all homes and children on their own, given that, as noted,
around 35 million homes have lead-based paint (and that HUD has also
found that around 29 million homes have one or more significant lead-
based paint hazards). HUD's lead hazard reduction program can be used
to not only address lead paint hazards directly, but also to leverage
private funding and prompt market forces. As more lead-safe housing is
created, more landlords and homeowners may be motivated to address lead
paint hazards in their units to realize increased property values
associated with lead hazard control in a competitive market. HUD funded
research has shown this in at least one study and we will continue to
prioritize this with available funds.
In 2026, HUD will continue implementing approximately 210 lead
hazard reduction grants from previous fiscal years, which will continue
to serve as models for leveraging private funding and prompting market
forces.
Question. How far do you expect this $49 million to go in
remediating these homes, and what other initiatives is HUD pursuing,
including cross-cutting initiatives with other agencies?
Answer. HUD will use the estimated $273.2 million in unobligated
balances for grants in 2026. Given this, the President's Budget does
not request new budget authority for the Lead Hazard Reduction program.
HUD is continuing its cross-cutting lead safety initiative on
making and keeping HUD- assisted housing lead safe through
implementation of the Department's Lead Safe Housing Rule by the HUD
program offices and their grantees. HUD is also continuing its long-
standing interagency collaboration with EPA and CDC and other Federal
agencies, to explore, understand, and act together to improve
children's environmental health and safety. Initiatives include those
to reduce children's exposure to lead sources, identify lead-exposed
children and improve their health outcomes, communicate more
effectively with external partners, and support and conduct critical
studies on reducing lead exposures and health risks.
Question. Does HUD currently have the staff to complete its mission
to keep kids safe from lead poisoning?
Answer. Yes. The Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes
(OLHCHH) has been assigning staff, within their existing position
descriptions, to grant-based activities to keep children safe from lead
poisoning. OLHCHH is working with HUD's support offices to increase
their level of support to cover functions lost, and to automate
processes that were previously more manual. Future OLHCHH hires will
continue this adjustment in workload priorities.
Question. Public housing serves a critical role in housing some of
our most vulnerable citizens. For many, it is the only the option they
have for shelter. These are seniors, people living with disabilities,
and low-income families with children. After decades of disinvestment,
our public housing stock has fallen into disrepair. President Trump's
FY26 Budget Request, however would not provide funding for the Public
Housing Capital Fund.
Secretary Turner, how would you evaluate our Nation's public
housing stock? What is your plan to stop our existing public housing
units from continuing to fall into disrepair, since the Administration
refuses to fund its maintenance?
Answer. The Department believes that States are in the best
position to make sound decisions about the delivery of affordable
housing in their jurisdictions. Under the State Rental Assistance
Proposal, States will have the flexibility to facilitate capital
investment in properties where it makes sense to invest in them
through: Obtaining mortgage financing that will be unlocked because the
properties will no longer be subject to a Federal declaration of trust;
Providing tax credit and bond financing; Providing local financial
support; Allowing properties to have more flexibility; and, Potentially
develop other creative solutions once freed from most Federal
oversight.
Bottom line--Washington needs to get out of the way and allow
States to flourish! States will also have the freedom to discontinue
support for properties that are not cost effective to operate or are
not worth the investment in relation to other options to provide
affordable housing.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
Question. The Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) program has a proven
record of success: 34% of FSS graduates no longer need Federal rental
assistance within 1 year of leaving the program, while nearly 10% of
graduates purchase their own home. That's why Senator Britt and I have
introduced legislation, S. 970, the Helping More Families Save Act,
which would expand FSS.
Given that a rhetorical theme of the Department of Housing and
Urban Development's (HUD) budget request is supporting self-
sufficiency, why does your budget propose eliminating the successful
FSS program?
Answer. HUD's State Rental Assistance Program proposal includes
transformational program requirements, such as time limits, that will
help able-bodied HUD-assisted residents achieve true self-sufficiency.
In addition, HUD encourages communities to work with State and local
governments, local non-profits, the private sector, and faith- based
organizations to incentivize self-sufficiency among HUD-assisted
residents according to their specific circumstances.
Question. HUD's budget request would eliminate rental assistance
programs and cut total rental assistance funding by $26.7 billion--a
42% cut. HUD data shows around 10 million low- income Americans are
currently served by these programs.
Has HUD analyzed how many individuals currently assisted by HUD
will become homeless if program funding is cut by over 40%?
Answer. The current system of rental assistance programs has been
dysfunctional for a long time, wasting taxpayer dollars and
artificially driving up housing costs for all with government
subsidies, all while stifling self-sufficiency and economic
independence for residents.
When I came to HUD, I committed to taking inventory of our programs
and processes to find out what is and isn't working well for taxpayers
and those who depend on our programs. It's time to take a different
approach--the Washington approach of one size fits all for communities
does not work.
What I have found is a rental assistance system full of waste,
fraud, and abuse; inefficiencies and bloated administrative costs;
deteriorating public housing units; and a rent structure that punishes
work and marriage among residents.
What we propose is indeed transformational--a State-based formula
grant which would encourage States to have skin in the game for funding
and design of their own rental assistance programs based on their
unique needs and preferences, without heavy-handed interference from
Washington.
The proposal also maintains HUD's commitment to protecting our most
vulnerable elderly and disabled citizens. This budget would prioritize
rental assistance for these families. At the same time, HUD will also
maintain our commitment to promoting self- sufficiency and economic
independence by adopting a common-sense time limit that will encourage
able-bodied residents to move up and out of assisted housing.
Question. HUD did not begin finalizing Continuum of Care (CoC)
contracts with Rhode Island awardees until the end of May. This was
just a few weeks before some contracts, and the homeless assistance
services they provide, were due to expire. Many Rhode Island CoC
contracts with expiration dates later this year have still not been
finalized. As you know, these are CoC awards that HUD announced months
ago.
Will you commit to me that HUD will finalize all of Rhode Island's
CoC contracts before any of these contracts expire this year?
Answer. On January 17, 2025, the Department announced $3.6 billion
in CoC Program awards for nearly 7,000 projects across the country, and
additional funding for CoCs affected by major disasters that received
an extension to the original application deadline of October 30, 2024,
was announced on March 21, 2025. Final grant agreements for all awarded
projects were made available on March 20, 2025, and HUD prioritized
executing grant agreements for recipients with existing renewal grants
expiring within the first 4 months of the calendar year. The Department
has continued to prioritize processing grant agreements for the FY24
CoC awards.
Question. In 2024, on a bipartisan basis, Congress authorized HUD
to run the CoC competition on a 2-year cycle so that CoCs would not
have to re-apply for funding every year. This change cuts down on red
tape by eliminating nearly 115,000 hours of administrative work CoCs
need to fill out extremely similar applications.
Will you commit to a 2-year competition cycle for CoCs for FY 2024
and FY 2025, instead of issuing a new NOFO this year?
Answer. On July 3, HUD sent out a letter informing CoCs to prepare
for a FY2025 competition focused on treatment and recovery, reducing
unsheltered homelessness, reducing returns to homelessness, and
increasing employment income. The 275,000 people living on our streets
and American taxpayers deserve the careful stewardship of resources to
address homelessness.
Question. HUD's budget request and your testimony in front of the
Senate Appropriations Committee advocate for States and localities to
be given more autonomy within our Nation's housing assistance programs.
But HUD's budget request would eliminate the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) program, which has long provided flexible grants
that States and localities use for housing, economic development, and
other local needs at their own discretion.
How does eliminating flexible CDBG funding give localities more
control?
Answer. States and localities are in the best position to know how
to tackle their unique housing and community development challenges--
not Washington. The President's Budget reflects a right-sizing of HUD
to limit the size, scope and spending of Federal programs. Many of
these housing and community development activities are better funded
and administered at the State and local level. The President's Budget
advances this local-first approach for housing and community
development.
Further, CDBG is poorly targeted and has been used for activities
that the Federal Government simply should not be funding, such as
improvement projects at a brewery, a plaza for concerts, and skateboard
parks. For example, the Town of Greenwich in Connecticut's famously
affluent ``Gold Coast'' does not need Federal grants, yet it received
nearly $4 million in CDBG funding in the last 5 years and spent it on
wasteful projects like theater arts programming for students and public
swimming pool renovations.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question. Infrastructure costs for housing, such as water and sewer
piping and electrical wiring, is far higher in remote areas and for
low-density housing.
How does HUD plan to address infrastructure costs for housing on
Interior Department land?
Answer. Through HUD's and Interiors' respective expertise, the
Joint Task Force for Federal Land for Housing will help both identify
where the housing needs are most pressing, and locations that are best
suited to meet those needs. Our agencies will work together to ensure
we support the infrastructure required for development.
Question. Other Federal agencies such as the Department of Defense
have land in built-up areas close to existing infrastructure.
In addition to its work with the Interior Department, will HUD
prioritize multifamily housing on other Federal lands?
Answer. HUD is committed to creating additional housing and will
explore opportunities to do so on various Federal lands, including
utilizing FHA insurance programs.
Question. The Indian Housing Block Grant Program provided 40,309
homes in FY2024. According to Census data, these homes housed 137,000
people, including more than 37,000 children.
With the $875 million proposed in the president's budget, how many
people will lose housing assistance on Tribal lands and Hawaiian
Homelands?
Answer. HUD recognizes that the Indian Housing Block Grant program
is the largest source of funding for Tribal housing programs. The $1.1
billion provided last year was a dramatic increase from the program's
traditional funding levels of less than $700 million. The President's
budget proposal for the program this year ensures that families
currently receiving assistance under the IHBG program will continue to
do so. We expect that this level of funding will allow Tribal grantees
to continue to maintain and operate their existing housing stock. With
that said, we are working hard with our Tribal partners and our Tribal
Advisory Committee to identify ways to streamline burdensome
regulations so that they can build housing and infrastructure for their
communities more efficiently and cost-effectively. For example, we are
actively soliciting feedback from Tribal leaders on how we can
streamline NEPA and other environmental requirements to ensure that we
are taking a reasonable and balanced approach to housing development.
With respect to the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program,
the budget recognizes a greater role for State and local governments,
the private sector, and nonprofits to address housing and community
development needs across the Nation. The budget also recognizes that
the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands has accumulated a large balance
of unexpended funds and can continue to operate in FY26 using
unexpended NHHBG funds.
Question. HUD has still not unfrozen more than 100 grants for the
renovation of affordable housing properties across 40 States and
territories that were awarded through Comprehensive cohort of the Green
Resilient Retrofit Program (GRRP), despite a court order on April 15.
Other GRRP funding, such as the Jack Hall Waipahu project in the
Elements cohort, have also not been delivered.
What is HUD's plan and timeline for unfreezing the Comprehensive
GRRP projects so these rehab projects can move forward?
Answer. HUD is continuing to process GRRP awards consistent with
the court order in Woonasquatucket River Watershed Association et al v
USDA et al.
Question. Specifically, what is HUD's timeline to deliver funds
under the grant agreements it signed for $1.68 million awarded to the
Ainakea Elderly Housing Project and $750,000 awarded to Jack Hall
Waipahu in Hawaii?
Answer. Pursuant to the Court's order in Woonasquatucket River
Watershed Association et al v USDA et al, HUD is processing transaction
materials submitted to the Department in accordance with the GRRP
governing notice. With regards to the Jack Hall Waipahu Elements award,
the owner has not submitted the necessary due diligence materials for
HUD review. HUD cannot proceed to disburse funds unless the awardee
submits the closing documentation package described in the GRRP
governing notice, the package is reviewed, and the package is
determined to comply with the notice. The owner should reach out to
staff at the Office of Recapitalization at [email protected] with any
questions. With regards to the Ainakea Elderly Housing Project, HUD is
considering options for next steps.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
Question. The budget notes that the new State Rental Assistance
Program formula will be determined by the Secretary, taking into
account assistance provided in 2025 and ``other factors.''
What other factors are under consideration?
Answer. HUD is considering a range of factors, as we described in
our Congressional Justifications, the program will distribute block
grants to States by formula. It will require that States: 1. Prioritize
the rental assistance needs of the elderly and disabled; 2. Consider
currently assisted households; and 3. Incentivize self-sufficiency
among non-elderly, non-disabled residents, through the implementation
of 2-year time limits, as well as any other appropriate means.
The formula would consider data on prior-year occupied housing
units receiving rental assistance and could favor assistance provided
for households with elderly or disabled residents over non-elderly non-
disabled households. The formula could also be gradually adjusted to be
more representative of the relative needs of each State, and in
accordance with changing needs over time. HUD may also consider how to
best incentivize State contributions.
Question. Can you provide the formula that will be used to make
state allocations, and the allocation that would be made to Maryland if
the full request is funded?
Answer. See above.
Question. The existing rental assistance programs are carried out
by local Public Housing Agencies. The Department envisions eliminating
those programs in favor of a block grant carried out by States.
How might a State set up and administer a program and get rental
assistance out the door to families without any transition time?
Answer. Many States currently have a State-level housing finance
agency. This agency typically has a range of housing programming,
including the Low-income Housing Tax Credit program, and many States
already currently have a State-wide public housing agency (PHA). HUD
anticipates that many States likely would leverage their current
housing expertise to implement the State Rental Assistance Program. HUD
also anticipates that States may leverage the expertise of local PHAs
in the development and implementation of the program.
Question. Recent reporting has noted severe gaps in the HUD
workforce after about 2,300 civil servants took the early resignation
offer. The Washington Post reported that more than 30 HUD Field Offices
have staffing issues, including 13 that have 2 or fewer employees left.
These offices administer grants and respond to disasters. A HUD email
to staff noted, ``In some cases, supervisors are left with no staff, or
staff are left with no supervisors, or offices are left with nobody to
keep programs delivered.'' The Post reported that the Department is now
asking employees to relocate to quote, ``immediately cover skill gaps
and critical functions.'' Staffers would have to work in person but
would have to pay their own moving costs.
Bloomberg reported that the Office of General Counsel, which
includes forensic accountants and financial analysts as well as experts
in housing law, has experienced such a high loss of staff that it is
``significantly increasing litigation risk and the risk of fraud, waste
and abuse.''
Did the Department consider its operational needs when deciding to
allow staff to take early resignations?
Answer. Yes.
Question. What are the ``skills gaps and critical functions'' that
the Department is currently trying to fill with relocation offers?
Answer. It varies office by office, but relocation offers are not
the primary way gaps are being filled. Assessments are ongoing to
identify capable staff members who already have the skills and
competencies to perform the duties of those whose departures led to
these gaps.
Question. As the Department works to fill vacancies, is it still
providing full pay and benefits to the people who took the deferred
resignation offer?
Answer. Yes.
Question. The budget cuts Section 4 by 60% and eliminates the Self
Help Home Ownership Program. In the Appropriations Committee hearing in
the House, you noted that the budget returns authority to the States to
identify programs that work. You also said that the State Rental
Assistance Program block grant could not be used for this purpose, and
that there would not be additional block grant programs to support the
functions of the Self Help Home Ownership Program.
If the States want to fund these types of programs, would they have
to fund them entirely with state funds?
Answer. The States are uniquely situated to know their own State-
level needs and to identify ways to meet them within their own budgets.
The President's Budget right-sizes the Federal Government and returns
it to a proper balance whereby the States can develop localized
solutions that fit their needs. The President's budget reflects the
Administration's choice to discontinue funding for such programs in
favor of States developing their own locally driven public-private
programs with strong private leverage.
Question. The HUD Inspector General has noted that HUD has faced
challenges meeting its requirement to complete discrimination
investigations within 100 days, in part because of limited staff and
training, staff workload, and complexity of the cases. To help address
the delays, HUD hired 230 new employees from FY20 to FY22, and, at the
time of the most recent IG audit, noted it needed an additional 88
staffers to meet the necessary level. Since January 2025, the Office of
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) has lost 35% of its
workforce, and this does not account for probationary employees that
HUD attempted to fire and whose case remains in litigation. The FY26
proposed budget cuts Fair Housing activities by 70%.
Given the fact that the IG has identified lack of staffing as one
reason that FHEO saw investigation delays, how will HUD meet its
statutory requirements with these cuts?
Answer. HUD will continue to rigorously enforce the fair housing
laws and will at all times make a good faith effort to comply with any
applicable statutory obligations. The goal of any workforce reduction
is not a diminution of services to the public but instead it is focused
on achieving our mission objectives with greater efficiency.
Question. FHEO's discrimination complaint procedures have changed
in recent months, limiting the avenues for complaints to be submitted
and discontinuing hotlines, intake numbers available in English and
Spanish, and email addresses previously used for filing complaints.
How will you ensure that the public is aware of the complaint
process, it is accessible to all, and any barriers that arise are
mitigated?
Answer. Information about our complaint process is made available
to the public on the HUD.gov website at the following URL: https://
www.hud.gov/contactus/file-complaint.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Secretary Turner. Thank you, ma'am.
Senator Hyde-Smith.. The hearing was adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:26 p.m., Wednesday, June 11, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at a time subject to
the call of the Chair.]
LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS
----------
Page
Collins, Senator Susan, U.S. Senator from Maine, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 73
Durbin, Senator Dick, U.S. Senator from Illinois, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 85
Duffy, Hon. Sean, Secretary, Department of Transportation:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 7
Questions Submitted to....................................... 37
Statement of................................................. 1
Summary Statement of......................................... 5
Gillibrand, Senator Kirsten, U.S. Senator from New York:......... 43,76
Questions Submitted by
Statement of................................................. 3.55
Hoeven, Senator John, U.S. Senator from North Dakota, Questions Submitted
by............................................................... 38,74
Hyde-Smith, Senator Cindy, U.S. Senator from Mississippi:
Opening Statement of.......................................... 1,53
Questions Submitted by........................................ 37,73
Moran, Senator Jerry, U.S. Senator from Kansas, Questions Submitted
by................................................................ 75
Murray, Senator Patty, U.S. Senator from Washington, Questions Submitted
by................................................................ 40,81
Reed, Senator Jack, U.S. Senator from Rhode Island, Questions Submitted
by................................................................ 48,87
Schatz, Senator Brian, U.S. Senator from Hawaii, Questions Submitted
by................................................................ 48,88
Turner, Hon. Scott, Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban
Development:
Prepared Statement of.......................................... 59
Questions Submitted to......................................... 73
Statement of................................................... 53
Summary Statement of........................................... 57
Van Hollen, Senator Chris, U.S. Senator from Maryland, Questions Sub-
mitted by ...................................................... 50,89
[all]