[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 124 (Friday, July 28, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1554-E1555]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996

                                 ______


                               speech of

                             HON. JACK REED

                            of rhode island

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 27, 1995

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2099) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and 
     Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
     agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and for other 
     purposes:

  Mr. REED. Mr. Chairman, it is with great concern for veterans, 
seniors, the poor and our environment that I rise in opposition to the 
VA, HUD and Independent Agencies Appropriation bill for fiscal year 
1996.
  This bill before us is an ill-conceived, mean-spirited attack on the 
most vulnerable citizens in America. While those may sound like harsh 
words, here are the harsh figures; a 50-percent reduction in funding to 
fight homelessness, $400 million less for section 8 operating costs and 
a $1.2 billion cut in modernization funds for public housing. For 
veterans, there is $250 million less than what the VA said is necessary 
to maintain the current service level and quality for medical care and 
$500 million less in administrative and construction costs. The EPA 
budget is cut by a third, resulting in no new cleanups and no funding 
for the safe drinking water loan fund.
  Under this bill, Rhode Island would lose $7.7 million in 
rehabilitation and repair funds and $2 million that maintains 10,401 
public housing units. In addition, our State, which last year assisted 
4,910 people who came to emergency and domestic violence shelters, will 
lose nearly $2.6 million needed to assist these people. Ironically, if 
this bill passes, more people will be homeless and need this type of 
help.
  I am also afraid that the news for Rhode Island's veterans is equally 
discouraging. While some programs nationwide have been increased, 
veterans in southeastern Rhode Island will again wait for needed 
improvements. In 1990 the VA bought a building to consolidate VA 
services in Rhode Island. Now, that building is unoccupied and our vets 
are waiting for the promised consolidation. Unfortunately, because this 
consolidation is not funded, the Government will continue to pay rent 

[[Page E 1555]]
in downtown Providence, instead of cutting costs and consolidating the 
VA offices as planned.
  Lastly, I am disappointed with what this bill does to our 
environment. This bill contains language that would limit the EPA's 
authority to enforce major environmental laws such as the Clean Air 
Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Safe Drinking Act. With the inclusion 
of this language, the Republican leadership
 has essentially gutted the last 25 years of environmental progress.

  It will become harder for organizations in my State to continue the 
job of cleaning up our environment and protecting our health when 
virtually all funding to do so will be diminished. In fact, Rhode 
Island would lose $2.4 million compared to the President's proposal to 
finance wastewater projects, $9 million for loans to provide safe 
drinking water, and $674,000 to address polluted runoff. The loss of 
crucial funding to financing clean water infrastructure threatens both 
the protection of public health in Rhode Island and industries like 
shellfishing, boating, and tourism that are dependent on clean water.
  While I understand the need to reduce the deficit, I do not believe 
we should place a disproportionate share on the backs of those who can 
least afford it. Unfortunately, that is what the Republicans have done 
in this bill. And this is not the first time. Just 4 months ago, the 
rescission bill attacked low income and elderly people by cutting money 
for section 8, rental assistance and homeownership initiatives. H.R. 
2009 marks the second time this year that our poor, elderly, and 
disabled have been asked to make sacrifices in the name of deficit 
reduction. These sacrifices seem much higher than what other people 
have been asked to contribute.
  I would like my colleagues to ask themselves why these cuts are so 
severe. Why have we decided to continue to invest less and less for 
those who have no roof over their head? Well, my colleagues, one answer 
is the space station. Some may argue that housing programs need reform, 
and therefore, they should be cut. But Mr. Chairman, if the same logic 
holds, why should we spend billions on a space station with innumerable 
design changes, cost increases, and failures?
  Mr. Speaker, this bill's priorities are wrong and I see no reason to 
support it. I ask my colleagues to join me in opposing this misguided 
legislation.


                          ____________________