[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 64 (Thursday, May 9, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H4662-H4753]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   UNITED STATES HOUSING ACT OF 1996

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. LaHood). Pursuant to House Resolution 
426 and rule XXIII, the Chair decalres the House in the Committee of 
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration 
of the bill, H.R. 2406.

                              {time}  1109


                     in the committee of the whole

  Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole 
House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2406) to repeal the United States Housing Act of 1937, 
deregulate the public housing program and the program for rental 
housing assistance for low-income families, and increase community 
control over such programs, and for other purposes, with Mr. Gunderson 
in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Wednesday, May 
8, 1996, title II was open for amendment at any point.
  Pursuant to the order of the Committee of that day, debate on each 
amendment, and any amendment thereto, shall be limited to 10 minutes, 
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, with 
the following exceptions:
  Amendment No. 7, as modified, by the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Frank] for 60 minutes; amendment No. 17 by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] for 60 minutes; amendments Nos. 33 and 34 
by the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velazquez] which may be 
considered en bloc for 20 minutes; amendment No. 22 by the gentleman 
from Indiana [Mr. Roemer] for 20 minutes; and amendment No. 8 by the 
gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth] for 20 minutes.
  Are there any amendments to title II?


  amendment no. 7, as modified, offered by Mr. Frank of Massachusetts

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to the unanimous-
consent request of last night, I offer an amendment, as modified.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment, as modified.
  The text of the amendment, as modified, is as follows:

       Amendment No. 7, as modified, offered by Mr. Frank of 
     Massachusetts:
       Section 225(a) of the bill (as amended by the manager's 
     amendment), strike paragraph (2) of such section and insert 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subsection, the amount paid by a family for monthly rent 
     for a dwelling unit in public housing may not exceed 30 
     percent of the family's adjusted monthly income.''.
       Section 322(a) of the bill (as amended by the manager's 
     amendment), strike paragraph (2) of such section and insert 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Limitation.--Except as provided in paragraph (3) and 
     notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, the 
     amount paid by an assisted family for monthly rent for an 
     assisted  dwelling  unit  may  not  exceed  30 percent of the 
     family's adjusted monthly income.''.
       Section 352 of the bill (as amended by the manager's 
     amendment), strike subsection (a) and insert the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(a) Units Having Gross Rent Exceeding Payment Standard.--
     In the case of an assisted family renting a dwelling unit 
     bearing a gross rent that exceeds the payment standard 
     established under section 353 for a dwelling unit of the 
     applicable size and location in the market area in which such 
     assisted dwelling unit is located, the amount of the monthly 
     assistance payment for housing assistance under this title on 
     behalf of such family shall be the amount by which such 
     payment standard exceeds the lesser of (1) the resident 
     contribution determined in accordance with section 322(a)(1), 
     or (2) 30 percent of the family's adjusted monthly income.''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] and a Member 
opposed will each control 30 minutes.
  Does the gentleman from New York wish to control the time in 
opposition?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I will be controlling the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] will control 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank].
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Gutierrez], one of the coauthors of the 
amendment.
  Mr. GUTIERREZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strongly urge my colleagues to

[[Page H4663]]

support the amendment that I am offering today with my friends and 
colleagues, Mr. Frank and Mr. Hinchey.
  This amendment is truly very simple.
  And yet, as simple as this amendment is, I strongly believe that its 
approval is critical to Americans who depend on public housing.
  If this Congress has any interest in preserving its commitment to 
providing decent, affordable housing to Americans who need it most, 
passage of this amendment is a critical step.
  Our amendment places a cap of 30 percent of total income as the 
amount a public housing resident or family can spend on rent.
  In addition, our amendment allows local housing authorities the 
flexibility to allow residents to pay less than 30 percent of their 
income for rent.
  And this flexibility is critical. Because it gives local housing 
authorities a greater ability to reach a goal that is important to all 
of us who care about public housing.
  The ability to encourage residents of mixed incomes to live in public 
housing and not create a disincentive to earning more money.
  But without this amendment, we do nothing more than create a 
situation where people who need housing most will not be able to afford 
it.
  Under the current language of the bill, families in public housing 
will have no protection against financially debilitating rent 
increases.
  Let me be clear.
  This bill does not raise the income cap to 35 percent. It doesn't 
push the cap all the way up to 40 percent. It doesn't take the extreme 
step of allowing the cap to skyrocket to 50 percent of your income.
  This bill eliminates the cap.
  And that is little different from eliminating our commitment to 
public housing.
  We cannot pretend in this House to care about providing quality 
housing to Americans if we are completely willing to disregard whether 
that housing is affordable.
  Affordability is the heart of America's commitment to public housing.
  Unless the Frank-Gutierrez amendment is passed, that heart is cut 
out. And we abandon our commitment to providing quality public housing 
that the people who need it most can afford.
  Now, some of my colleagues might simply say, ``what rent increase? 
There is nothing in this bill that requires local housing authorities 
to raise the rent of public housing residents.''
  Don't be fooled by that argument. This bill allows local housing 
authorities to charge whatever they feel is necessary to stay within 
their budgets. And what has this Congress done to the budgets of 
housing authorities?
  Well, we have just cut the operating subsidies by $100 million. By 
$100 million.
  Let me recap. We have taken away $100 million--$100 million that was 
essential to keeping rents affordable. And now my colleagues suggest 
that we should tell them that the sky is the limit on rent increases.
  I do not think it takes a detective to uncover where the extra money 
is coming from.
  It is going to come from the people who can least afford it.
  I urge my colleagues do not force this economic hardship on Americans 
who rely on public housing. Paying 30 percent of your income on rent is 
hardly a giveaway, hardly a free ride.
  I strongly believe that 30 percent is a fair and reasonable 
contribution of a family's income.
  Thirty percent is logical; in fact it basically follows the 
guidelines that lenders use in deciding how much a family can afford to 
spend on their mortgage.
  Most lenders don't want families to spend more than 28 percent of 
their income on their mortgage. 28 percent--for people who can afford 
to own their home. Yet, incredibly, this bill proposes no cap at all 
for people who can barely afford to make ends meet.
  A fundamental goal of public housing is that it gives residents an 
opportunity to live in safety and dignity--and ease their financial 
burdens.
  If we ask those very people to pay 32, 35, 40 percent of their income 
just to meet their housing expenses, the government is not easing the 
burden of public housing residents--it is imposing a burden on public 
housing residents.
  Instead of helping to light a path toward a better future, we are 
setting hurdles in the way.
  Let's be clear. We are talking about a population that will be 
affected by even a slight increase in out-of-pocket expenses for 
housing.
  Quite simply, most of the people who will be facing a rent affected 
by this increase do not have the money to pay for their increase.
  We are talking about Americans with very, very modest incomes.
  How modest?
  The average annual income of public housing tenants is $6,400--
$6,400. And this bill suggests that they somehow have the ability to 
pay more for rent.
  They do not. And yet we have created a bill that will give them very 
few alternatives.
  They will have some alternatives.
  Move to worse, substandard, dangerous housing. Or have no housing at 
all.
  My colleagues who support this bill are right about one thing--public 
housing residents deserve better than they are receiving now.
  They deserve a commitment to safer, better quality housing.
  Congress has not been very good about keeping that commitment. But 
they also deserve to have decent housing they can afford.
  This Congress should honor that commitment as well.
  We can honor that commitment by passing this amendment and protecting 
the economic security of public housing residents.
  I hope my colleagues will say yes to that vital commitment.

                              {time}  1115

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let us begin by talking about what this amendment is 
not about. It is not about protecting seniors, because they are 
protected in the bill. It is not about protecting the disabled, because 
they are also protected in the manager's amendment. It is not about 
protecting the poorest of the poor, because they too are protected 
precisely the same way that my friends from the other side of the aisle 
are arguing need to be protected.
  What we are talking about is whether we will keep an amendment, a 
provision of the law, that has proven to be a job killer, a work 
incentive, whether we are going to continue on the path of creating 
warehousing for the poor.
  The gentleman from Illinois lives in a city where State Street 
exists, a public housing development 4.5 straight miles of 19-story 
buildings, 99 percent unemployment, universal despair.
  We are talking about creating an environment where people begin to 
have hope, where there is mixed income, where there is role models, 
where people can talk to somebody next door who has a job, who may know 
about another job available.
  We are talking about transforming people, not warehousing people. The 
Brooke amendment has had the effect of warehousing people. It has led 
to a disastrous mix in terms of income. It has led to a huge 
disincentive to work.
  If you do not believe me, Mr. Chairman, listen to some of the people 
who are doing this hands on, the public housing authorities themselves. 
The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials says, 
``The Brooke amendment, which limits the amount of rent a resident pays 
to 30 percent, is a disincentive to work, encourages fraud, and offers 
local housing authorities with little flexibility to reward working 
households.''
  This is an antiwork provision. It actually raises rent on those 
people who decide to work.
  The Public Housing Authorities Directors Association says, ``To base 
rents solely on income has proved disastrous over recent years.'' 
Disastrous.
  These are the people with hands-on experience. What we are talking 
about is thinking out of the box. What we are talking about is letting 
housing authorities fix rents just like the rest of the world operates. 
If the housing authority says this particular unit is $50, is $75, a 
resident knows that if they work overtime, if they get a better job, if 
they earn more money, they can keep that money. They are not going to 
be subject to a one-third tax the minute they go to work, which is 
exactly what this Frank-Gutierrez

[[Page H4664]]

amendment does. It is precisely what it does.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The amendment that I have offered puts an 
upper limit of 30 percent, but does not at all require any increase.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, but that is 
exactly what is going to happen. The amendment that the gentleman from 
Massachusetts is offering, which suggests that housing authorities can 
set rents at up to 30 percent of income, will create not just a floor, 
but a ceiling. Housing authorities will continue to set rent based on 
income. That is the problem.
  If we had to pay 30 percent of our income in rent, I guarantee you, 
this place would not be voting for it. But because we do not have to 
live in those places and we do not have to live with this, it becomes 
very easy rhetorically to say we are so incompassionate, because we are 
protecting the poor. That is nonsense. It is not serving the very 
people that these people purport to represent.
  Let me just say again, Mr. Chairman, that this has been a work 
disincentive. We are in fact protecting almost 90 percent of the 
current population in public housing. We are trying to create an 
environment where people can transition to work, where work ethic is 
rewarded, where there is mixed income, there is hope, there is 
opportunity. The Frank amendment would destroy all those things. It 
would move us back into the past. It would reclaim the situation that 
we have in State Street of 4.5 miles, where there is 99 percent 
unemployment for 10,000 Americans. We cannot condemn 10,000 Americans 
to another 30 years of failed policy.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  The gentleman has shown how indefensible his amendment is by 
absolutely misrepresenting its substance. The amendment I have goes 
back to the pre-1981 days. It sets a 30-percent limit. It does not 
require an increase.
  The gentleman's argument, be clear, here is what he says: If you tell 
housing authorities that they can charge no more than 30 percent, but 
less if they want to, they will charge more than if you tell them they 
can charge 40 or 50 percent.
  His amendment says the housing authorities can raise the rents on 
these working people to whatever level you want. Our amendment says set 
whatever level you want, but in no case above 30 percent. In fact, 
there is one group of people who get the 30 percent protection, and 
that is people on welfare under his version.
  So he singles out working poor people in housing and he protects them 
by taking the cap off their rent. There is absolutely nothing in the 
amendment we are offering that requires, encourages, pushes, urges, an 
increase in the rent. All we say is a cap.
  When a 30-percent limit on what you can charge someone is 
transmogrified into raising the rents, as opposed to allowing them to 
go higher, you see how logically indefensible the gentleman considers 
the amendment to be.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Blute].
  Mr. BLUTE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment to 
restore the so-called Brooke amendment. Before I discuss the merits of 
this amendments, let me first address the bill as a whole and the 
exemplary job my good friend from New York, Mr. Lazio, and his staff 
have done on this legislation.
  The Department of Housing and Urban Development is perhaps the one 
segment of the Federal Government that needs reform the most. Most of 
the current housing policy is based on the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, 
reflecting the needs of a different era.
  Chairman Lazio was faced with a very significant challenge at the 
outset of this Congress, and I commend him for his perseverance and 
commitment to bring sanity to public housing policy. He literally has 
traveled around our great country searching for answers to the problems 
of housing our citizens.
  However, Mr. Chairman, I do have one area of very serious concern 
with this legislation. While I believe housing authorities ought to be 
given more flexibility in operating their developments, I do believe 
the need still exists for the Federal Government to provide certainty 
when it comes to the level of rent.
  In 1969, in response to an increasing inability of public housing 
tenants to afford their rent, the former distinguished Republican 
Senator Ed Brooke of Massachusetts remembered advice given him by his 
father. This advice was that an individual should not pay more than 25 
or 30 percent of their income on housing.
  This is still a widely accepted rule of thumb today, and most of us 
live by this rule. I have visited housing units all over my district, 
places like Great Brook Valley in Worcester, MA. I have spoken with 
people like Wanda Alvarado, a single parent struggling to raise her two 
children and to improve their standard of living. They and many others 
are concerned that repeal of the Brooke amendment or alteration of the 
Brooke amendment would lead to significant rises in their rent.
  Therefore, I rise in support of the amendment that would restore the 
Brooke amendment. This amendment would simply ensure that low-income 
families would not pay any more than 30 percent of their income on 
their rent. These families are some of the poorest in America, and I 
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Baker], a member of the 
Committee on Banking and financial services and a very active member of 
the Subcommittee on Housing.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me time, and certainly want to commend him for leadership in 
this most difficult issue and all issues relating to reform of housing 
in America.
  But this is not just a debate about the Brooke amendment. It is not 
just a debate about the necessity to repeal the one-for-one requirement 
or to do something with the admissions or eviction processes, or just 
about education and job skills, necessities in public housing, or even 
just public housing. It It extends to what is known as the section 8 
based project assistance. It is all of this, and more, regrettably.
  We must look not just at the specific issue before us this morning in 
the Brooke amendment. We must look at the effects, the consequences, of 
the aggregate of these legislative remedies, which although well-
intentioned, have led us down a long, dark road.
  It is unfortunate, but all we can conclude when we look at the 
inventory of housing provided by our Nation today to the working poor 
of America, you can only reach one conclusion. It is sad, but the U.S. 
Government is the world's largest slum landlord. We must change that. 
How can this be?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has a photograph 
next to him that I believe is in his neck of the woods. Is this the 
situation the gentleman is referring to?
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, only one 
among many. But this is the answer to how can this be. When one drives 
just a short distance from my home, in a bus, goes down to the Desire 
Street Housing Project, built in the 1950's, now on a Superfund site, 
surrounded on all sides, with one way in and out over a railroad track, 
1,800 units now occupied by 400 individuals, not aggregated one locale, 
but spread out throughout 1,8000 units, unprotected. The employees do 
not have two-way communication. If something happens, as it did one 
week before I went when a 15-year-old child was killed on the doorstep 
of his unit over rival drugs wars, over sales territory, I went 
upstairs and talked to the 80-year-old lady who lived in that building 
by herself and said, ``Ma'am, is there anything I can do to help you?''
  She did not know who I was, nor did she care. She said, ``Come with 
me a minute.'' Her unit was well kept. It was the only one in 16 units 
in that building. It was not just rundown, depreciated, and worn out. 
There were no walls, there were no floors. There were

[[Page H4665]]

dogs and cats running through the bottom area.
  She walked up those steps every night by herself, locked herself in 
the room, and she said, ``There is one thing I would like you to do for 
me, if you might.'' And she took me into the restroom and showed me the 
large gap in the wall above the shower stall.
  She said, ``At night when I try to take a bath, the roaches come down 
the wall. It bothers me just a bit.'' How would you feel if that was 
your grandmother?
  Now, here is the real problem. If that were just the only issue, if 
it was just the fact there was not a sufficient amount of money in the 
bank to solve this problem. Desire has, the Housing Authority of New 
Orleans, this morning has $200 million in their account to spend for 
renovation.
  I called the GAO. I said, ``Look, guys, tell me what is going on. I 
am really worried about this, because not only is it a waste of 
taxpayer money, look at the conditions in which these people have to 
exist.''
  I got this back, dated May 1996. I know it is a little old, but we 
will use it anyway. When I flipped through the pages, there is a 
summary of the history. Secretary Cisneros wrote Leon Panetta a letter 
2 years ago saying, ``Mr. Panetta, we have to do something about this 
circumstance. It is dismal. It is not fit for human habitation.'' This 
report dated May 1996 says the circumstances today are unfit for human 
habitation.
  I have a letter from employees. I have a letter from occupants, 
saying ``Please, get us out of these circumstances. It has got to come 
to an end.''
  What effect does the Brooke amendment have on this circumstance? What 
effect does one-for-one have on this circumstance? Concentration 
issues. The Desire Street Housing Project is an example. Ninety percent 
of the occupants are single, poor, women with children, without 
education.

                              {time}  1130

  Now, if we are going to do something about the problems, we have got 
to turn that around. We have got to have those kids in an environment 
where they see dads going to work and where there are children playing 
in the yard. We have to turn this around.
  It is not just a question of the poorly run disasters like Desire in 
New Orleans. And, by the way, I intend to ask the Secretary of HUD to 
seize control and take it away from the city and given those people a 
chance for real hope and opportunity, because we can do it.
  There is more vacant housing in New Orleans than there are people on 
the waiting lists if you bulldozed Desire. That is incredible to me. By 
the way, when I first got involved in this they were going to spend 
$71,000 per unit to renovate on this Superfund site. The most recent 
plan, after I objected, calls for them to spend $130,000 per unit. I am 
really doing a good job. Mr. Chairman, we have got to get a grip.
  What about the well-run public housing. I called Baton Rouge. I said, 
``Guys, what is going on?'' We had a big debate about the number of 
people on the boards that govern public housing. I said, ``Tell me how 
you run it.'' They have seven members, two are residents. Tell me who 
the other bad guys are that are making the terrible public policy. 
Well, we have a realtor. I am sure that is the problem. We have a 
doctor from Southern University. A former Secretary of Health and Human 
Resources is on the board. We have a volunteer coordinator at a public 
hospital. We have a Methodist minister. He has got to be the one that 
is driving these poor people into these poor conditions.
  I said, ``How much do they make to serve on the public housing boards 
and do all of this damage to the poor people of America?'' Nothing. No 
reimbursement, no per diem, no travel. It is 100 percent volunteer. 
These people are performing a public service to try to help the poor of 
Baton Rouge.
  Mr. Chairman, these people have asked for the ability to govern their 
housing authorities. Take off the Brooke amendment. Help us govern and 
help people who want to help themselves. Let us get a population mix in 
public housing that reflects what is going on in America. Let us give 
these people something more than decent housing. Let us give them some 
hope; the belief that they can be a part of America and not be locked 
up in a multistory, 1,800-unit complex on top of a Superfund site with 
nothing but drug dealers at their front door. It is ridiculous. It has 
got to change.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, that was a very interesting speech; I just do not know 
what amendment it was supposed to be relevant to since it obviously 
does not affect ours.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana, 
although he would not yield to me.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I regret that. If I had had 
more time, I would have.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, the 
gentleman had 6 minutes. Who is he kidding?
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would continue 
to yield, I was talking about the amendment of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, and the results of it and others in the concentration of 
poor people.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, we just 
got it. The gentleman was talking about ``it and others.'' The 
gentleman was talking about things unrelated. The only relevance of the 
Brooke amendment to his story was that poor woman that he was talking 
about under the Brooke amendment, that if they wanted to they could 
raise her rent. That is how the gentleman gives hope, raising their 
rent.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. 
Velazquez].
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today amazed by how far the 
Republican majority will go to keep hard-working Americans down. 
Instead of being the first rung on the ladder out of poverty, this 
housing bill kicks the ladder away. By repealing the Brooke amendment, 
the already difficult lives of the extremely poor will become a 
nightmare. Adequate housing must remain affordable for everyone.
  In New York City alone, 560,000 housing authority tenants will face 
higher rents or eviction if Brooke is eliminated. There is not going to 
be mixed income people living in public housing. There will be families 
making $40,000 living in public housing and poor people will be thrown 
into the streets.
  This is a price they simply cannot afford to pay. Faced with higher 
rents, families will have to scrimp for even their most basic 
necessities. How much more are we going to bleed out of our poor?
  The United States already has the impressive distinction of having 
the highest poverty rate of the industrialized world. Elimination of 
rent caps coupled with funding cuts to housing and a 25-percent cut to 
homeless shelters will force waiting lists for park benches to 
skyrocket.
  Mr. Chairman, I say to my Republican colleagues, you should be 
ashamed of yourself. Stop trying to balance the budget on the backs of 
the Americans least able to shoulder that burden. Think of the message 
you are sending.
  Mr. Chairman, clearly, the majority cares more about the haves than 
the have-nots. Instead of investing in the neediest Americans, they 
give a $7 billion increase to the Department of Defense; they give 
hefty tax breaks to wealthy corporations and contributors that dwarf 
our spending to house the poor; and they deny an increase in the 
minimum Federal wage for working Americans.
  Today confirms that the Contract With America was not a contract with 
all Americans, only the privileged few. I urge my colleagues to support 
the Frank amendment.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he May 
consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Schumer].
  (Mr. SCHUMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Frank 
amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.

[[Page H4666]]

  Mr. Chairman, I am just sick and tired of people calling compassion 
State Street, which has been tolerated for the last 30 years by the 
last majority. It was OK to warehouse people and keep people 
unemployed, and it is OK to make sure we cut off the commerce and make 
sure they do not have access to jobs or access to good education. That 
is compassion.
  But give people a chance to get a job and get a decent education and 
get income mix, and we lack compassion and we are extreme?
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maine [Mr. 
Longley].
  (Mr. LONGLEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. LONGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to compliment the gentleman from 
New York [Mr. Lazio], chairman of the subcommittee. The gentleman has 
done an exceptional job in trying to articulate the need for change in 
the area of public housing.
  I have to confess that we are asked to be expert on any number of 
subjects that are frankly far beyond our ability to do so, but I have 
been attempting in the last year to visit many of the public housing 
projects in my district. I visited projects in Portland, Sanford, and 
Augusta. I have talked to the director of the State Public Housing 
Authority and I visited a project that they have sponsored. I talked to 
trustees in south Portland and I have also talked with the director of 
the Portland Public Housing Authority.
  The message that I hear over and over and over again is the need for 
change in Washington. Particularly, I spoke a year ago with the 
director of the Public Housing Authority in Sanford. He said, ``If you 
would just give us some flexibility, we can manage these projects more 
efficiently, we can do a better job, and we can do it at less cost.''
  Mr. Chairman, I happened to get a letter yesterday from the director 
of the Portland Housing Authority, Mr. Peter Howe. I want to point out 
that he said,

       H.R. 2406 contains, much-needed regulatory relief, that is, 
     repeal of Federal preferences, the one-for-one replacement 
     rule, and the take-one, take-all provision. The provisions 
     contained in this legislation provide local housing 
     authorities with the type of administrative relief and 
     authority necessary to operate these programs in tenuous 
     funding environments.

  Mr. Chairman, it goes on to say--

       I also encourage you to support compromise language that 
     calls for targeting 30 percent of all units for those below 
     30 percent of median income. This provision will assure that 
     affordable housing units will be available to the poorest 
     members of our community.

  I would just say this to the House this morning: Again, we cannot 
pretend to be experts on everything, and I question the extent to which 
we have the ability to do that. But I do know that when I talk to my 
local housing authority officers and officials and visit the projects, 
talk to the people who are residents, that the people in the local 
level have the ability to manage these projects, and I have confidence 
that they are moving in the right direction and that they can 
be trusted to do the right thing when it comes to their residents and 
the future viability of their projects.

  Mr. Chairman, I insert for the Record the following correspondence:

                                    Portland Housing Authority

                                        Portland, ME, May 8, 1996.
     Hon. Jim Longley, Jr.,
     Longworth House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Longley: On behalf of the Portland Housing 
     Authority, I want to encourage you to support passage of H.R. 
     2406, the United States Housing Act of 1995. H.R. 2406 
     contains provisions that are needed to ensure the continued 
     success of the nation's public and assisted housing programs. 
     Passage of H.R. 2406 will allow the House and Senate to 
     conference their respective versions of public housing reform 
     legislation.
       H.R. 2406 provides local housing agencies (LHAs) with much 
     needed regulatory relief, i.e., repeal of federal 
     preferences, the one-for-one replacement rule, and the take-
     one, take all provision. The provisions contained in this 
     legislation provide LHAs with the type of administrative 
     relief and authority necessary to operate these programs in a 
     tenuous funding environment.
       I also encourage you to support compromise language to 
     retain the Brooke Amendment for those below 30 percent of 
     median income. This will ensure that the poorest members of 
     our community will not suffer excessive rent burdens. I also 
     encourage you to support compromise language that calls for 
     targeting 30 percent of all units for those below 30 percent 
     of median income. This provision will assure that affordable 
     housing units will be available to the poorest members of our 
     community.
       If I can be of any assistance to you, please feel free to 
     call me at (207) 773-4753.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Peter A. Howe,
                                               Executive Director.

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Wynn], a member of the committee.
  Mr. WYNN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment. 
The Republicans like to moan about us calling them extremists. Well, 
they are and this is a classic example.
  Mr. Chairman, they take a bill that has many laudable points and then 
they ruin it because they repeal the Brooke amendment which was 
designed to cap the rents that are paid by some of the poorest people 
in this country, people who make $6,400 a year. That is extreme.
  The Brooke amendment simply reflects the standards of the industry, 
the banking industry, the real estate industry, the financial services 
industry which says that people should only pay a reasonable portion of 
their income, about 30 percent, for housing.
  If we do not have the Brooke amendment, what we do is create a cycle 
of poverty because poor people then have to choose between medicine and 
rent; between paying bills and rent; between car repairs and rent. The 
first emergency that happens, they fall further behind. That is the 
cycle of poverty that is created in the language in this bill.
  My Republican colleagues recognize this is a problem because they 
keep the Brooke amendment for current residents, disabled people, and 
for seniors. If it is good enough for the disabled and seniors, why not 
new tenants? We need to keep the Brooke amendment.

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute and 15 
seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, I now it is part of the Democratic strategy to try and 
label, use words. That substitutes for analysis in terms of this. But 
let me tell my colleagues what is extreme, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, what is extreme is allowing people to be concentrated 
in poverty and not allowing them a chance to get out. What is extreme 
is a housing authority like in New Orleans with a score 27 out of a 
possible score of 100, and still receiving taxpayer dollars. Or DC at 
33; or Philadelphia at 35; Chicago, 45; Atlanta, 49; Pittsburgh, 47; 
even Boston, 62.
  Mr. Chairman, I would say if our children came home with scores like 
that, we would make sure they changed schools or went and did their 
homework. Neither one of them is happening right now.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I have tried to 
compliment the chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community 
Opportunity for many of the changes that the gentleman has incorporated 
into this bill that in fact will allow the Secretary to deal with some 
of those housing problems.
  But, Mr. Chairman, that has nothing to do with what the Brooke 
amendment does. The Brooke amendment simply caps the rents at 30 
percent. As the gentleman knows, he protects all of these very poor. He 
protects the elderly and the disabled. The only people the gentleman is 
going to be pushing out of public housing are working poor.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Torkildsen], although this may be a 
Democratic strategy.
  Mr. TORKILDSEN. Mr. Chairman, housing is a key part of the American 
dream. For some this means owning their own home, and that's why we 
must keep the tax deduction for mortgage-interest. For others it means 
renting an apartment at market rates. And for others it means living in 
subsidized housing. For those people the Brooke amendment is essential.
  As a Republican from Massachusetts, I am proud to support this 
amendment, which upholds the strong tradition of housing fairness 
established by a great

[[Page H4667]]

Massachusetts Republican, Senator Ed Brooke.
  I applaud the chairman of the Housing Subcommittee for crafting a 
bill that skillfully reinvents the Federal Government's approach to 
housing policy. But I find no reason to alter the Brooke amendment as 
part of this reinvention.
  In 1969, Ed Brooke proposed his amendment in response to increasingly 
unaffordable rents charged by public housing authorities struggling to 
meet expenses. Unfortunately, not much has changed since then. We still 
need this valuable safety net for families living in public housing.
  The Brooke amendment is plain and simple. It says that families in 
public housing will not pay more than 30 percent of their income in 
rent. Last week, I met with Senator Brooke and he explained that his 
amendment was based on a common-sense rule-of-thumb his father told him 
when he was young man. Brooke's father said that if he was paying more 
than 25 percent of his income in rent, he should find another place to 
live. Unfortunately, for most families in public housing the only 
alternative is homelessness.
  Last year, the Federal Government spent $2.9 billion on public 
housing agencies. This amount pales in comparison to the $58.3 billion 
value of the mortgage-interest deduction.
  Critics claim that the Brooke amendment discourages work, but this 
issue is easily addressed without repeal. Repeal of the Brooke 
amendment would force many people out of the only quality home they 
have access to.
  The Brooke amendment was authored by a Republican Senator and signed 
into law by a Republican president. It would be disappointing for this 
Republican Congress to dismantle such a commonsense policy.
  Mr. Chairman, I submit the following for the Record:

                  [From the Boston Globe, May 8, 1996]

                       Save the Brooke Amendment

                         (By Edward W. Brooke)

       As a young man starting out on my own, my father taught me 
     that if I was paying more than 25 percent of my income on 
     rent, I was paying more than I could afford and should find 
     another place to live. It was sound advice then, and it is 
     sound advice today.
       Too much spent on housing leaves a person juggling to pay 
     for other essentials, robbing Peter to pay Paul, with no 
     ability to save for the future.
       Twenty-seven years ago as a Republican US senator from 
     Massachusetts, I introduced the ``Brooke Amendment'' to keep 
     rents affordable for low-income families, elders, veterans 
     and disabled people living in public housing. Then, as now, 
     public housing authorities faced increasing operating 
     expenses and, in order to cover costs, were charging tenants 
     higher and higher rents--in some cases upwards of 50 percent 
     of their meager incomes.
       Congress had two choices: fill the operating-cost gap or 
     turn people out of their homes. We voted to fill the gap and 
     passed legislation, signed into law by President Nixon in 
     1969, to cap rents at 25 percent of income. In 1981, this cap 
     was raised to 30 percent.
       Now, US Rep. Rick Lazio, a Republican from New York and 
     chairman of the housing subcommittee, is expected to bring to 
     the full House a bill that calls for the elimination of the 
     Brooke Amendment. It will put 2.7 million households in 
     danger of losing the rent-cap safeguard in their federally 
     subsidized housing. The rationale for repealing the Brooke 
     Amendment is that, to fill the current revenue gap, housing 
     authorities need to attract working people who can pay higher 
     rents into public housing. The 30-percent cap is seen as a 
     disincentive for residents to obtain work.
       The purpose of public housing is to provide decent, 
     affordable housing for low-income families, and the Brooke 
     Amendment has ensured that for almost 30 years.
       However, a specious argument has caught hold in Congress 
     that people who have jobs and more choices will choose to 
     move into public housing developments where apartments are 
     cramped, safety is often a problem and one is branded with 
     the stigma of living in a poor development. Do members of 
     Congress really believe that people who have the means to 
     live elsewhere will move into public housing projects? The 
     reality is that people live in public housing because they 
     have no other choice; they are poor and have no other place 
     to go.
       If Congress truly wants to remove barriers that discourage 
     public housing residents from obtaining employment, the 
     solution is to give housing authorities the flexibility to 
     set rents below 30 percent in certain instances and allow 
     people to save and get back on their feet. Congress should 
     not withhold operating subsidies from public housing 
     authorities and try to balance the budget by reaching deeper 
     into the pockets of our poorest people. We must keep rents in 
     public housing at a fair and reasonable percentage of income, 
     a percentage that recognizes that people need money to pay 
     for other basic expenses as well.
       Some advocates of the repeal cite the rate of crime in 
     public housing. The fact is that less than 15 percent of 
     public housing tenants are involved in crime. More than 85 
     percent are decent, law-abiding citizens who live in fear of 
     crime. The way to address the crime problem is not repeal of 
     the cap on rents, but through eviction and prosecution of 
     criminal tenants.
       I fear that the real intention in repealing the Brooke 
     Amendment is to abandon federal public housing. This 
     misguided and hard-edged legislative action will destroy the 
     foundation of our federal housing policy.
       Abandoning public housing is unwise for the country. It 
     ignores the investment that this country has already made to 
     build millions of units of housing--housing that, if we had 
     to rebuild today, would be prohibitive in cost.
       The Brooke Amendment is not a budget buster. Last year, the 
     federal government provided $2.9 billion to agencies that run 
     public housing. This figure was dwarfed by the $58.3 billion 
     in mortgage interest deductions that reduce housing costs for 
     middle- and upper-income people. There is clearly no fairness 
     or equity in the allocations between the haves and the have-
     nots.
       There comes a point in making policy decisions when 
     compassion and common sense must dictate. I respectfully urge 
     my Republican successors in Congress to preserve the Brooke 
     Amendment.

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Reed].
  (Mr. REED asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. REED. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Frank 
amendment. I have heard from hundreds of Rhode Islanders who are 
concerned about the repeal of the Brooke amendment. While I commend 
Chairman Lazio's amendment which aims to improve his original provision 
regarding rent payments, I believe that we need to do more to protect 
those Americans who relay on public and assisted housing.
  Our Nation's low-income residents are already coping with drastic 
cuts in funding for many important programs. Rhode Island's seniors, 
disabled, and low-income families are already forced to make many 
choices between the bare necessities of life that Members of Congress 
do not face. The Frank amendment will allow these people to live in 
decent, affordable housing and still provide for their food, clothing, 
and medicine. Simply put, increasing rents for our Nation's most 
vulnerable will not achieve the goal of ``empowering'' our citizens. 
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to provide real help to our Nation's 
elderly, disabled persons, children, and low-income residents. Support 
the Frank amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Frank amendment. I have 
heard from hundreds of Rhode Islanders who are concerned about the 
repeal of the Brooke amendment. While I commend Chairman Lazio's 
amendment which aims to improve his original provision regarding rent 
payments, I believe that we need to do more to protect those Americans 
who rely on public and assisted housing.
  We need to ensure reasonable rents for our Nation's seniors, disabled 
persons, and low-income families so that they can live in safe decent 
and affordable housing. Our Nation's low-income residents are already 
coping with drastic cuts in funding for many important programs, and 
now we are contemplating penalizing those who may find themselves in 
need of public housing in the future whose incomes fall below 50 
percent of the median income level.
  Rhode Island's seniors and disabled are already forced to make many 
choices between the bare necessities of life that Members of Congress 
do not face. The Brooke amendment has allowed these people to live in 
decent, affordable housing and still provide for their food, clothing, 
and medicine. Simply put, increasing rents for our Nation's most 
vulnerable will not achieve the goal of ``empowering'' our citizens. 
Rather, it could force many of these people deeper into poverty.
  In Rhode Island, the Brooke amendment matters. In Rhode Island, 
25,100 households fall under the Brooke amendment, and not all of them 
live in public housing. The Brooke amendment matters because 11,400 of 
these households including children that need to be fed, clothed, and 
educated. The Brooke amendment matters because the Providence housing 
market lost some 1,100 units of affordable housing from 1988 to 1992. 
Regrettably, the bill we are now considering will only exacerbate the 
problems of those struggling and older Rhode Islanders who desperately 
need the Brooke amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to provide real help to our 
Nation's elderly, disabled

[[Page H4668]]

persons, children, and low-income residents. Support the Frank 
amendment.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Los Angeles, CA [Ms. Waters], a member of the 
committee and an expert in this field.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I agree that this is, too, about the Brooke 
amendment, but it is about more than the Brooke amendment. It is about 
whether or not we are going to develop some sensible public policy that 
will allow people to become independent.
  My friends on the other side of the aisle claim to understand that we 
have a lot of policies in government that do not allow people to really 
pull themselves up by their bootstraps. When we look at public housing, 
we will find a lot of that. One of those policies is the policy that 
will take more from people when they go to work, which serves as a 
disincentive.
  Recognizing this, we are simply saying, and the chairman needs to 
understand this, because I do not think he is a dishonest man. I really 
believe that he is little bit confused about this. When we say that we 
want to make sure that we are not taking away more than 30 percent, we 
are doing this so that we can create incentives for people to go to 
work and earn more money without their rents being raised to 40 and 50 
percent. It is as simple as that.
  We here in this House, many of us make as much money, take home as 
much money as these residents make in an entire year.
  We heard what the income is of these residents. We take that much 
money home a month. Let me say, taking that much money home a month, 
some Members on the other side of the aisle sleep in their offices at 
night and they get free rent. How dare we talk about taking away more 
money from the poorest of the poor. We have policies now in public 
housing where, if one of the members of the family goes to work, we 
take away more money. This is outrageous and unconscionable. My 
colleagues ought to just quit it.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  I will tell my colleagues what is outrageous and unconscionable. It 
is penalizing work. It is to continue to have the Brooke amendment in 
place. It is to suggest that rents continue to be tied to income, 
whether it is 30 or 20 or 25 percent. None of us have to deal with 
that. None of us have to pay 20 percent of our income the day we look 
for an apartment.
  No one goes around and shops for an apartment and finds that this 
apartment is 25 percent of our income or this is 30 percent of our 
income, but that is precisely the old model that they want to go back 
to. That is precisely the model that has led to disastrous results. Do 
not ask me; go back to the housing authorities that have said this.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds 
to point out, nice speech, wrong subject.
  The amendment we are offering on a bipartisan basis does not tie rent 
to income. It allows the housing authority every freedom to set the 
rent for working people except in one context. It says it cannot go 
above a certain amount. The only difference between this amendment and 
the gentleman's proposal, by the way, with regard to welfare recipients 
we are the same. With regard to existing elderly people we are the 
same. But with regard to working people and new elderly residents, 
there is one difference. We say set the rent however you want and 
whatever basis you want, but there is an upper limit. Their bill says, 
set the rent however you want and whatever way you want without an 
upper limit. Some protection.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. 
Sanders].
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to make two basic points.
  First of all, one of the great crises in America today is that 
millions and millions of low income and working people are spending 40, 
50, 60 yes, 70 percent of their limited incomes on housing. Therefore, 
they just do not have the money available for the food they need, for 
the transportation they need and maybe to put away a few bucks for 
educational opportunities for their kids. That is a real crisis.
  The second point that I would make is to try to put this discussion 
in human terms. I called up a housing authority, senior citizen housing 
authority in Vermont this morning. They told me that many of the 
seniors in the housing earn $8,000 a year on average from Social 
Security. Right now they are paying 30 percent of their income for 
rent, $2,400 a year.
  Mr. Chairman, if this proposal that is in the bill goes through, what 
could very easily happen is that senior citizens bringing in $8,000 a 
year will now pay 40 percent of their income in housing. That is an 
additional $800 a year, when you are bringing in $8,000 a year. Ten 
percent of all of your income more now goes for housing.
  Second of all, if their Medicare proposals go into effect and we 
raise the Medicare premiums for senior citizens, in a few years time we 
will be talking about those same seniors paying $500 a year more for 
Medicare premiums; $800 plus $500, $1,300 a year more on a senior 
citizen earning $8,000 a year on Social Security.
  Meanwhile, we are talking about huge tax breaks for the wealthiest 
peole in America. Mr. Chairman, this proposal in the bill is unfair. It 
constitutes a war against many senior citizens.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes and 30 seconds 
to the distinguished gentlewoman from New Jersey [Mrs. Roukema], my 
friend and colleague, former ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Housing and Community Opportunity.
  (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Frank 
amendment to keep traditional Brooke percentage of income rents in 
place for all public housing residents. While I share his concern that 
the very low-income families must be protected, but I also think we 
must allow room for more local decisionmaking to create public housing 
communities that are more socially and economically mixed, that provide 
more inspiring environments for the children and that remove 
disincentives to work. Also, we must face the budget realities. It 
seems unreasonable to keep Brooke in full force while the compensating 
operating subsidy will fall almost $1 billion in fiscal year 1996 and 
fiscal year 1997 from what is needed for the current system. Let public 
housing administrators find ways to become less dependent on shrinking 
subsidy resources and let us not presume that they are less sensitive 
to the needs of the poor than Congress.
  I think your bill takes important steps to reform a program that has 
been laden with Federal misdirections over the years. Allowing the 
limited use of new flat and tiered rents for other than the poorest is 
a good move. We should allow PHA's, within limits, to imitate more 
fully the simpler rent methods of the private world, where extra family 
income doesn't result in extra rent. It is important in the era of 
welfare reform that we remove disincentives to work which many feel has 
often been unintended consequence of Brooke. By the way, we allow rents 
in excess of 30 percent of income in the voucher, tax credit, and HOME 
programs.
  I urge the chairman as this legislation evolves with that of the 
Senate to consider increasing the minimum percentage of units that a 
PHA must always afford to those very, very low-income households below 
30 percent to something higher than the bill's 30 percent to some 
higher percentage. I also urge you to ensure that the current, non-
Brooke residents are thoroughly protected from burdensome rent 
increases by seeing whether the Gonzalez cap is adequate for that 
purpose.
  I applaud your undertaking to update this valuable, but overly 
federalized housing program. Let's give change a chance.
  Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record the following correspondence:

       Mr. Chairman: I am going to support you on the issue raised 
     by Mr. Frank's amendment to keep traditional ``Brooke'' 
     percentage of income rents in place for all public housing 
     residents. While I share his concern that the very low-income 
     families must be protected, but I also think we must allow 
     room for more local decision making to create public housing 
     communities that are more socially and economically mixed, 
     that provide more inspiring environments for the children, 
     and that remove disincentives to

[[Page H4669]]

     work. Also, we must face the budget realities and our own 
     outlawing of unfunded mandates. It is unreasonable to keep 
     Brooke in full force while the compensating operating subsidy 
     will fall almost a billion dollars in fy96 and fy97 from what 
     is needed for the current system. Let us let public housing 
     administrators find ways to become less dependent on 
     shrinking subsidy resources and let us not presume that they 
     are less sensitive to the needs of the poor than Congress.
       I think your bill takes important steps to reform a program 
     that has been laden with federal misdirections over the 
     years. Allowing the limited use of new flat and tiered rents 
     for other than the poorest is a good move. We should allow 
     PHAs, within limits, to imitate more fully the simpler rent 
     methods of the private world, where extra family income 
     doesn't result in extra rent. It is important in the era of 
     welfare reform that we remove disincentives to work which 
     many feel has often been an unintended consequences of 
     Brooke. By the way, we allow rents in excess of 30% of income 
     in the voucher, tax credit and HOME programs.
       I urge the chairman as this statute evolves with that of 
     the Senate to consider increasing the minimum percentage of 
     units that a PHA must always afford to those very, very low 
     income households below 30% to something higher that the 
     bill's 30% to some higher percentage. I also urge you to 
     insure that the current, non-Brooke residents are thoroughly 
     protected from burdensome rent increases by seeing whether 
     the Gonzalez cap is adequate for the purpose.
       I applaud your undertaking to update this valuable, but 
     overly-federalized housing program. Let's give change a 
     chance.

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bentsen].
  Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Massachusetts 
for yielding time to me.
  Let me remind my colleagues, as I told them last night, I was one of 
the members of the Democratic party who supported this legislation when 
we reported it from the Committee on Banking and Financial Services. I 
commend my colleague from New York for crafting a bill which I believe 
moves public housing policy forward in ways which I agree with. In 
particular, greater involvement at the local level, moving away from 
project-based assistance to tenant-based assistance through the use of 
vouchers and promoting home ownership. These are proper goals. But the 
bill is not perfect.
  By removing the Brooke amendment, which places a rent cap of 30 
percent, it creates some serious problems. There are two significant 
problems with the repeal of Brooke which we should correct by adopting 
the Frank-Gutierrez-Hinchey amendment.
  First, by lowering the funding for assisted housing and removing the 
rent cap, local housing authorities will have no choice but to raise 
rents to meet existing demand, let alone any growth. It is a simple 
economic fact which the majority deny but not dispute. The housing 
authorities will have to maximize revenues to meet need and can only do 
so by raising rents.
  Second, the bill, through the manager's amendment, makes the same 
mistake that we have in Federal welfare policy. By lifting the rent cap 
for families with incomes over 30 percent of the median, we actually 
tax work and thus create a discentive to achieve.
  I think my colleagues in the majority would agree that an effective 
tax increase of 100 percent is a disincentive to economic opportunity 
and growth, let alone work. This bill moves us in the right direction, 
which should be to help people in need but to try and move them away 
from housing projects and ultimately off assistance and into homes 
which they own. But by repealing the Brooke amendment and not adopting 
the Frank amendment, we will contradict that goal and ultimately fail.
  Adopting the Frank amendment will correct this flaw in an otherwise 
well-intentioned bill. I would ask my colleagues to remember, when they 
have gone to the bank to apply for a mortgage, that the banks will 
often have them fill out a formula that tries to see if you can pay the 
monthly note with 28 to 30 percent of your adjusted gross income.
  Adopt the Frank amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute to just 
outline the fact that the compromise that was struck on the so-called 
Brooke amendment which allows for protection in our bill, the poorest 
of the poor, seniors and disabled, is supported by housing authorities 
throughout the country, including the Massachusetts Chapter of the 
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials.
  Let me just read part of that, if I can:
  ``We support the compromise language on the Brooke amendment. We do 
not support the position taken by Congressman Kennedy and Congressman 
Frank. Both Congressman know this. Massachusetts Housing Authorities 
are pleased that your legislation will breathe life into dying housing 
developments. Key to our support is the local control, flexibility and 
trust you place in locally elected or appointed officials to lead LHA's 
and to do the right thing. Your concept is correct. They are 
accountable to their communities.''
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I just point out that 
when you are putting money in the back pocket of the housing 
authorities, it is very easy to get a letter like that.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, it is not 
this side of the aisle but your side of the aisle that wants to 
increase administrative fees that go directly to housing authorities. 
They simply want the flexibility to do the right thing.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. 
I know this is clearly one where the housing authorities are on one 
side; the tenants are on the other.

                              {time}  1200

  No tenant has said to me, ``Please let them raise my rent.''
  The housing authorities explained this to me: Given the cutbacks that 
have occurred in the housing budget, they believe they are going to 
have to raise the rents on working tenants to get moneys to offset it. 
One of them said to me, yes, these Massachusetts people will be between 
a rock and hard place. I do not think that is the case. I think they 
are between a rock and a rather soft place, the lower income people. 
But I do understand the housing authorities are faced with these cuts, 
are prepared to raise the money from the tenant. I disagree very much 
with the housing authority.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from the great State of Oklahoma [Mr. Watts] 
for purposes of offering an amendment.


  Amendment Offered by Mr. Watts of Oklahoma as a Substitute for the 
      Amendment Offered by Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, as Modified

  Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment as a 
substitute for the amendment, as modified.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Watts of Oklahoma as a substitute 
     for the amendment offered by Mr. Frank of Massachusetts as 
     modified:
       Page 157, after line 26, insert the following new 
     subsection:
       (b) Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this section, the amount paid by an assisted family that is 
     an elderly family or a disabled family, for monthly rent for 
     an assisted dwelling unit bearing a gross rent that does not 
     exceed the payment standard established under section 353 for 
     a dwelling unit of the applicable size and located in the 
     market area in which such assisted dwelling unit is located 
     may not exceed 30 percent of the family's adjusted monthly 
     income.
       Page 158, line 1, strike ``(b)'' and insert ``(c)''.
       Page 158, line 9, strike ``(c)'' and insert ``(d)''.
       Page 159, line 1, strike ``(d)'' and insert ``(e)''.
       Page 172, line 11, before the period insert the following: 
     ; except that in the case of an assisted family that is an 
     elderly family or a disabled family, the amount of the 
     monthly assistance payment shall be the amount by which such 
     payment standard exceeds the lesser of the amount of the 
     resident contribution determined in accordance with section 
     322 or 30 percent of the family's adjusted monthly income.

  Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask 
unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed 
in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Oklahoma?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Reserving the right to object, Mr. 
Chairman, we have not been given the courtesy of a copy.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Oklahoma asks unanimous consent that 
the amendment be considered

[[Page H4670]]

as read. The gentleman from Massachusetts reserves the right to object.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Indeed, since we have just now been given 
a copy, I do object but would like to proceed with the reading.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman withdraw his reservation of 
objection?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I object because we need time to read 
this. We have not been given the courtesy.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman objects. The Clerk will continue the 
reading.
  The Clerk completed the reading of the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Watts] is recognized 
for 2 minutes.
  Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, as we have heard read, this 
amendment provides for protection of elderly and disabled by providing 
that their rental payment will not exceed more than 30 percent of the 
family's monthly adjusted income.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  The CHAIRMAN. Before the gentleman is recognized, the Chair wants to 
make sure everyone understands that the time utilized to discuss the 
substitute in front of us is taken from the 1 hour equally divided 
between the gentleman from Massachusetts and the gentleman from New 
York so that the gentleman has the opportunity to utilize that time in 
debating either the substitute or the amendment originally offered by 
the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent, 
given the changing aspects of this, that we add another 10 minutes to 
each side of the debate.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is it the intent of the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Kennedy] that that time be allocated simply to the substitute or 
to the full 60 minutes allocated earlier?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I would offer it to the 
full 60 minutes, depending on how this works out.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts asks unanimous consent 
that an additional 10 minutes equally divided between both sides be 
allocated to the original 60 minutes of debate for consideration of the 
Frank amendment.
  Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume, and I thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] for 
his courtesy in this regard.
  We have here one more tactical retreat. In the interests of 
simplicity, they further complicate things. Here is the problem:
  The manager's amendment would have created a new notch act for people 
who are nostalgic about the notch act. The manager's amendment that the 
other side was so vehemently defending said for currently disabled and 
elderly people it would be a 30-percent cap, but for new people it 
would not be. So now what this does is to apply the 30-percent cap to 
new elderly people.
  I like that. So does my amendment.
  Why is it offered now? It is offered now in a desperate hope to 
prevent a vote on the underlying amendment because if this substitute 
is adopted, then there is no vote on the underlying amendment.
  As a matter of fact, this was a preexisting amendment, and 
intellectual property does not apply in here. It is a substitute 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Watts] crossing 
out ``Mr. Hinchey of New York.'' They took Mr. Hinchey's amendment, 
which would have done this subsequently, and they crossed it out and 
they wrote in ``Mr. Watts.''
  Mr. Chairman, that is okay. They can do that. The gentleman from 
Oklahoma is not the Peoples' Republic of China. He is not held to any 
standard on intellectual property. He can copyright and counterfeit and 
pirate; that is OK. But the reason he did it is to prevent a vote under 
the underlying amendment.
  And I just want to make one point before I yield to my friend from 
Massachusetts. Understand that the gentleman from New York said the 
tenants are better off without this 30-percent cap. Understand the 
wholly illogical and inconsistent approach he takes. On the one hand he 
says over 30 percent cap has been bad, even if it is not a flaw, it is 
bad for the tenant, it drives their rents up. So now he says, ``I am 
going to protect the elderly by subjecting them to that 30 percent 
cap,'' that he says is so bad for them. It just shows what a sham this 
is.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I have a question of the 
author of the amendment.
  The gentleman has offered this amendment under the section that deals 
with the vouchers of programs side of this. Does the gentleman intend 
for this to cover public housing as well?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, this would apply to tenant 
based, project based and public housing.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I ask the gentleman, are 
you sure, Mr. Lazio, it applies to public housing? Because you have 
offered it in the third section of this bill.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, maybe 
we should find the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey]. They stole 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey]. Why 
do we not get the gentleman from New York to explain it to the 
gentleman?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would 
continue to yield, I am just pointing out to my colleague that he has 
offered this amendment in the third section of the bill, and my 
understanding from staff is that that raises a serious question as to 
whether or not it covers public housing.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, in fact what happened was 
the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey] had two separate amendments, 
and they only stole one. They forgot to steal them both. So the 
gentleman only took half of Hinchey; he got a ``Hinch'' but no ``E'' 
here. So that is the problem.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous-consent request 
to amend this amendment.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I object.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for the 
purpose of a unanimous-consent request.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I ask unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, to 
allow this amendment to apply to seniors, prospectively in public 
housing, as well as those seniors who use vouchers through the section 
8 program.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Reserving the right to object, Mr. 
Chairman, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey] has these 
amendments in proper form pending. The appropriate way to do this would 
be to vote on the amendment that is now pending. If it is defeated, 
these two amendments would then be in order. This is simply an effort 
to hijack the amendment of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey] to 
preempt a vote, and therefore I object.
  The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, we are again going around and around. We are talking 
about ensuring that working people have the incentive to go to work. We 
are trying to ensure that the Brooke amendment, which is a tax on work, 
which will result, even the Frank amendment will result, on more taxes 
on working people, on higher rents, kills jobs, hurts working poor, 
hurts working people, hurts mixed income, will be defeated.
  What we are saying is that we need to protect the most vulnerable 
members of our society, and that is not inconsistent. We are saying we 
need to protect the seniors, we need to protect the disabled, we need 
to protect the poorest of the poor, and all those people are protected 
in our manager's amendment and in our bill.
  We are trying to move beyond that. The gentleman has objected to a 
unanimous-consent request so that we can apply this to seniors in 
public housing, but we are going to apply this prospectively in the 
future to seniors using section 8 voucher-based program.

[[Page H4671]]

  We will, through the process, hope to amend this even through the 
objections of the other side so that seniors will be protected who will 
prospectively live in public housing.
  Let me explain for my colleagues what we want to do so that working 
people have a decent chance. If we have fixed rents, flat rents, the 
rents that all of us pay in their own marketplace, if we go out and 
look for an apartment, someone does not ask us how much we make and we 
will fix the rent based on how much that person makes, whether it is 20 
percent, 25 percent or 30 percent. If the housing authority fixes rent 
for an apartment at $65 a month and somebody is making $75 a week, 
under the Frank-Gutierrez amendment, as it currently stands, they would 
pay $100 as opposed to $65 a month, a disincentive to go to work for 
even $75 a week.
  If someone is offered overtime and the ability to go to work again 
and take another job and make $150 a week, again his rent goes up. 
Instead of paying $65 a month, he goes to $200 a month. Why should 
somebody go out and do the overtime if he knows it is being eaten up in 
additional rent? If he goes to $300 a week, his rent goes up to $400 a 
month as opposed to $65 a month. All these are disincentives to work.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ 
minutes to say I have never heard such misleading nonsense on the House 
floor. The amendment we offer does not require anybody's rent to go up 
a penny. Indeed it is the amendment of the gentleman from New York 
already in the bill that allows the housing authority to go much 
higher.
  We say, ``The housing authority, use whatever basis you want, but in 
no case go above 30 percent.''
  The gentleman from New York says, ``Use whatever basis you want and 
go as high as you want.'' And if, in fact, not being subjected to a cap 
is such a protection, why is he then taking that away from the elderly?
  But the central point is the gentleman from New York has just made 
statements that are so widely at variance with the facts that I am 
astonished. He says under our amendment the individual's rent would go 
up. No, only if the housing authorities, whom he is defending here, 
choose to do it.
  His argument is that if we give a housing authority a 30-percent 
limit, they will set the rate higher than if we tell the housing 
authority they can set it as high as they want to. The gentleman knows 
that is a hard argument to make. That is why, just to remind people of 
the parliamentary situation, the gentleman has taken the Hinchey 
amendments in an imperfect form and put them in here, because he is 
desperate to avoid a vote.
  The key difference is this: Under his bill, even with the Hinchey 
amendments that they have stolen for these purposes, working people 
will be subject to unlimited rents, people on welfare and elderly will 
be subjected and protected by the 30-percent cap. That would then be 
the sole difference, and I believe we ought to have a vote on that and 
not be preempted by some parliamentary sleight of hand.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, it is ironic the gentleman from Massachusetts is 
complaining about parliamentary sleight of hand.
   Mr. Chairman, I am trying to compromise and move the extra yard to 
ensure that some of the concerns by the other side of the aisle are 
met. I tried to make unanimous-consent requests to allow that seniors 
who will prospectively live in public housing or use section 8 housing 
will be able to have the protections that the other side claims that 
they are in favor of. But that is not good enough. They have objected 
to my unanimous consent.
  If the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] wants an up-and-down 
vote on his amendment, which I think is a disastrous amendment, which 
all housing authorities' associations have basically said is a 
disastrous amendment, I am happy to do that.
   Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from the great State of 
Oklahoma [Mr. Watts] for purposes of unanimous-consent request to 
withdraw the amendment as it exists and to allow the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] to offer it as is.
  Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to 
withdraw my substitute amendment and then proceed.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Oklahoma?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma 
[Mr. Watts] as a substitute for the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] is withdrawn.


                         parliamentary inquiry

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary 
inquiry.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, may we know how much time 
is remaining and on what amendment?
  The CHAIRMAN. At the present time the original Frank amendment is the 
only amendment before the House.
  The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] has 10\1/2\ minutes 
remaining, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] has 12 minutes 
remaining.

                              {time}  1215

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from the great State of Arizona [Mr. Hayworth], 
a great member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity 
of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New York for 
his courtesy in that introduction and, indeed, for his goodwill and 
incredible patience in trying to deal with what has become a very 
contentionus situation.
  My good friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts, to whom I always 
listen with great interest, a little bit earlier said he had never 
heard such outrageous nonsense on the floor of this House. Resisting 
the temptation to bring up some incredible mathematic equations that 
have been offered by that side with reference to real increases in 
spending being portrayed as cuts, I would simply say that there has 
been a great deal of nonsense that has emanated from the other side of 
the aisle with reference to a myriad of subjects.
  But let us move away from nonsense to solving this problem. That is, 
trying to have housing for the poorest in our society, trying to reach 
out and empower them to become part of the economic mainstream and to 
live the American dream.
  Mr. Chairman, it is inherent with the proposal from my colleague, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts, that an unintended by-product, an 
unintended consequence, if you will, even with the modification, is to 
in essence levy a tax on those who want to work; for even if there is a 
cap instituted, as the gentleman from Massachusetts in modifying his 
amendment has done, even if there is a cap, the temptation is always to 
go to that limit, to that cap and no further.

  Indeed, if we focus on what has been our history, if we focus on the 
parameters set forth, if we have that parameter decreed by Washington, 
it is a virtual certainty that then the 30 percent cap will in fact 
take place, you will have a situation where you have a malicious tax 
imposed, and that is something we must categorically reject. I stand in 
opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 90 seconds to the 
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento], one of the senior members of the 
committee, a great housing advocate.
  (Mr. VENTO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, the proposition that is proposed here by the majority 
is that if we have safeguards in terms of limiting rent, that that is 
somehow going to hurt the tenants. That is what is being suggested. We 
agree, I guess, on the senior citizens that are in housing and 
disabled, and on very low income, but not on future senior citizens or 
low-income residents. We are going to have a disparity. They are going 
to pay more, or they are at least going to be exposed to pay more for 
rent.
  I am not surprised that housing authorities actually want this 
flexibility.

[[Page H4672]]

Let us face it, the administration, housing authorities, want all the 
money and all the flexibility they can get. That is not surprising--the 
housing authorities trust themselves. It is our role in Congress to 
look at whether or not we are going to accommodate and try to provide 
some protection--some safeguards for those that are in public housing.
  I think all we have to ask ourselves is who is for it and who is 
against it. In other words, the housing authorities, the landlords are 
for the Lazio amendment; they want the flexibility to go this way and 
to in fact raise rents. The tenants are against it because they get no 
assurance as to the limit of rent increases--no safeguards out of this 
proposal.
  In other words, this amendment that the gentleman has and the way he 
has structured the law hurts the working poor. The Frank amendment 
ceiling cannot hurt them, it can only help. If they want to collect 
less, if you say they need work incentives, they can disallow income, 
they can go in all sorts of directions. But the amendment that is 
before us says you can only go down as long as you are below 30 
percent. What is before us in the bill removes the ceiling, removing 
the safeguards in terms of the costs protection for working Americans 
who are in this public housing, that are fortunate enough to be in 
public housing. When we remove the safeguards and reduce the Federal 
dollars and restrict them in terms of this block grant, we can be sure 
they are going to be pushed, pushed into higher rents for working 
people and their families.
  The fact is the Republicans refuse to deal with the minimum wage, and 
now they are pushing low income public housing residents into higher 
rents, higher rent for working Americans.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, we are still arguing about income-based rent. Therein 
lies the philosophical divide. Therein is the reason why people who 
manage public housing and do this on a daily basis day in and day out, 
and live with the problems, live with the challenges, work with the 
people, and understand the problems, why they say that this approach is 
so devastating to work. They say it has been a disincentive to work, it 
has been an incentive to fraud, and it has caused a humongous amount of 
change in terms of mixed income, which is very important.
  Let us talk about mixed income in public housing for a second, 
because the Brooke amendment and the Frank amendment would continue to 
com- pound the problem that exists in public housing today because it 
chases out the people that get a job, because it is a tax on work. It 
is a tax on employment. It is a work disincentive. It hurts the working 
poor. It increases rent for the working poor.
  Over here, we talk about the change that has existed as a result of 
the changes through the last Congress as a result of many different 
issues, including the Brooke amendment.
  Over here, we show the red line, which is where tenant income as a 
percentage of those people who occupy public housing, where it has 
gone. In 1982 it was up here. In 1996, during that same time, the blue 
line represents the operating subsidies, the amount of money that we 
have had to subsidize as that has gone up in direct correlation. As 
that number has gone down, the red line has come down; it means fewer 
people have role models.
  There are no opportunities to have the kind of exchange with working 
people that leads to job opportunities: Have you heard about a job? Do 
you know where I can get a job? Do you know where I can leave my 
resume? All those things do not exist in some housing developments in 
America. That is a disgrace. That is a shame. That is what the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank], through his amendment, is 
continuing to support.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I am trying to understand. 
Apparently all the discussion has been unable to make our case quite 
clearly. Is it the circumstance, in the gentleman's opinion, if a 
working family is in public housing today and mom is at home, and they 
somehow make arrangements to get child care, and mom leaves and takes 
on a new job, so the income of the family may go up to $1,200 or $1,500 
a month, they have to pay for day care, but that does not matter when 
we look at the 30-percent rule, that that then applies to both new 
incomes; so rather than mom go out and work and pay for day care, mom 
just stays home. Is that what the gentleman is saying?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. That is exactly what I am saying. The day that 
mom goes to work is the day she pays 30 percent of her income in new 
taxes or rents.
  Mr. BAKER of California. If the gentleman will further yield, he is 
telling me that it is the local housing authority that sets the rules 
in place.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute, 
and we can continue this debate.
  Mr. Chairman, I would say the gentleman from New York has a key 
point, but I think it makes our argument. Remember, the Brooke 
amendment has had two forms. As originally proposed by Senator Brooke 
and adopted, it was simply a cap and not a floor. It was changed in 
1981 to be both a cap and a floor. Interestingly, the gentleman's chart 
begins with 1982, after the change. He is showing a decline.
  In fact, the amendment we are offering would restore the Brooke 
amendment to what it was before his. The point is, by the gentleman's 
own point on the chart, the Brooke amendment, before Gramm-Latta, did 
not have that effect. That is where he starts his chart. He 
characterizes the negative effect of the amendment to the Brooke 
amendment. But what we put forward leaves that out and restores it to 
the pre-1982 pre-chart days.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, the exact same situation that 
exists currently under Brooke will be in place under the gentleman's 
amendment, the exact same situation.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is still talking about basing rent on 
income. Whether it is 30 percent or whether it is 28 percent or 25 
percent or 20 percent, Mr. Chairman, the day you go to work, you get 
that additional tax. Your rent goes up. You are punished for working. 
That is why this is a rent increase on the working poor.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I want to try to reach some 
agreement here. The point is this: By the gentleman's own chart he is 
acknowledging, by his choice of a date, that when the Brooke amendment 
was simply a cap and not a floor, it did not have that negative effect. 
His own chart starts there. I am talking about returning it to what the 
gentleman regards from his chart as the good old days. The gentleman 
should read his own chart.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, our chart 
begins in 1982 or 1983. I guess we could have gone back 10 more years.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, anybody can make charts and draw diagrams. Certainly 
they can make their own, rather than use ours. The point is, we should 
turn to those people who administer public housing at the local level 
and who do a good job.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I would like to 
understand, from a working family's perspective, let us assume the 
example that the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Baker] gave of a family 
whose mother goes out and gets this job. Does anybody really think it 
makes a difference to her whether she is paying a percentage of her 
income in rent or just an increase in rent? The truth of the matter is 
that she is paying more in rent.
  What is wrong with the first chart, which I would just take a second 
to go

[[Page H4673]]

pull out here, the chart that the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] 
used. Let us go to this chart here. Somehow or another, according to 
this chart, the mythical rent under this bill will be $65 a month. The 
truth of the matter is that what the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Lazio] does not say on this chart is the fact that there is no rent cap 
whatsoever, and that this figure can go up twice as high as this 
figure. This is a rent ceiling. There is no rent ceiling on that of the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], and that is the fundamental 
difference.
  Mr. Chairman, what we are talking about here is something fairly 
simple. What we are talking about is the fact that under the Lazio 
bill, we are saying that very poor people are going to be protected by 
only paying 30 percent of their income. We are saying that elderly and 
disabled people that are currently in public housing are only going to 
pay 30 percent of their income.
  The gentleman tried to amend his own bill by extending that to 
elderly and poor new residents, but the truth is that the only people 
left to jack up the rents on are the working people. It is the working 
people, the very people that they claim to be protecting by the 30-
percent protection, by eliminating that, they are the only people left 
on which to jack up the rents. By cutting the housing budget by $2.5 
billion in public housing alone, $5 billion in both assisted and public 
housing, you have to get public housing authorities to raise more 
money, which is why they all endorse your bill.
  What they are going to do is jack up the rents, and with the 
protections that you have provided, the only people they can jack up 
the rents on are the working people of this country who occupy public 
housing.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out, it 
has again been missed, that housing director after housing director 
after public housing authority board member has contacted Members of 
this Congress and said, ``Please, give us some relief from the Brooke 
amendment.'' I think the chairman is in receipt of a letter from the 
National Housing Officials Association. Would the chairman inform the 
Members as to what this group's opinion is with regard to the effects 
of the Brooke amendment?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, let me respond to my friend, the 
gentleman from Louisiana. Again, Mr. Chairman, the National Association 
of Housing and Development Officials, the people that have the hands-on 
experience, that work with this problem every day----
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. The people who are going to decide how much 
rent an individual is going to pay?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. That is right.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. The very folks who are in charge?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. That is precisely right. In their letter they 
write that the Brooke amendment is a ``disincentive to work, encourages 
fraud, and offers local housing authorities little flexibility to 
reward working households.''
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, does that mean, if the 
gentleman will continue to yield, that if we keep the current system in 
place, we discourage people from getting job skills and going to work 
and maybe one day moving out of public housing? Is that the problem?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. That is precisely the problem.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, does the gentleman mean people 
live in public housing for years?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. That is precisely the issue. If our intent is 
simply to maintain or warehouse the poorest Americans, we are in the 
process of doing that again, if we adopt this amendment.

                              {time}  1230

  If our principle is to transition, to create an environment where 
people can have work and hope and opportunity and get a job and make 
their own choices, free of public subsidies and free of the artificial 
world where incomes and rents are tied together, then we will move in 
this direction.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Excuse me, because I am still having a hard 
time. We are characterizing local public housing authorities across 
this country as people who do not care about those people. By and 
large, are not most of these individuals who serve on these authorities 
either very low paid or volunteers trying to perform a public service 
to help people in their community have decent housing? Is it the belief 
that if we do what we are suggesting, as the chairman is trying to lead 
this Congress, in doing that we are going to go out into all 
communities in the country and start throwing people out of public 
housing, is that the belief?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. The gentleman is hitting the point again. We 
are saying that local people who have local vested interest, who have 
dedicated their lives to housing, will be compassionate, will watch out 
for the people that they have committed themselves to watch out for.
  The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials says, 
``We vehemently deny the accusations from some that housing authorities 
are seeking to immediately escalate rents without any regard to the 
household's ability to pay.'' They are saying, ``We commit ourselves to 
this. The reason why we are drawn to this occupation, to this job, is a 
sense of duty to watch out for the poor. We are not going to be 
devastating the poor. We are trying to give incentives to people to 
work.''
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Does the gentleman mean these people are 
telling us if somebody goes to work they want them to be able to keep 
the money?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. That is exactly what they are saying.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. I am shocked.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Millender-McDonald], our newest 
colleague.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, first, I would like to thank 
Mr. Frank for allowing me the opportunity to speak on this most 
important issue. In listening to the debate on this issue, it is clear 
to me that my colleagues in the majority truly believe in their views 
on this issue. To some extent, I would agree with the spirit of their 
views but not with the methods. In our efforts to reform public housing 
we must be careful not to hurt the very people who we are trying to 
help, the residents of public housing. Please be clear.
  Under current law, the Brooke amendment was enacted in 1969 to 
protect the most vulnerable residents of public housing from paying too 
high a percentage of their income for rent. The amendment made public 
and assisted housing affordable for very low-income families. 
Typically, poor families who are not in public housing pay more than 30 
percent of their income in rent. Currently, more than 5.3 million 
families, who are not in public or assisted housing pay more than 50 
percent of their income for rent. The limits set by the Brooke 
amendment have made public and assisted housing more affordable for 
very low-income families by preventing dramatic increases in rent. The 
practical effect of the Brooke amendment has been to cushion the 
residents of public housing against the fluctuations in the housing 
market.
  Current law also addresses the earned income adjustments that allow 
public housing authorities to encourage work through more flexible rent 
structures. Further, rent ceilings allow public housing authorities to 
price units competitively with the market and allow retention for mixed 
occupancy. The Brooke amendment is a good amendment. It is sound public 
policy. I don't see any reason to repeal it but apparently there are 
those who see fit to do so.
  Mr. Chairman, let's tell the truth about this bill. H.R. 2406 repeals 
the Brooke amendment and hurts the people we are trying to help, by 
removing the limits placed on rent charges. This is hypocritical at 
best.

  We are going to remove the caps on rent and in the same breath deny 
them an increase in the minimum wage. That equates to a backhand and a 
forehand slap to the faces of the residents of public housing. I hear 
some of my colleagues say that they value home

[[Page H4674]]

ownership and that residents of public housing will be allowed to 
purchase their units. Tell me how will those residents be able to 
afford the mortgages on those units without being able to earn a decent 
livable wage. And as the public housing units are turned into owner-
occupied housing, what will happened to the availability of the housing 
for very low-income earners. Will the market respond by building more 
affordable housing. I don't think so.
  I would say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, if we are 
going to repeal the Brooke amendment, then let's take a serious look at 
the Frank amendment. The Frank amendment sets a new 30-percent cap that 
would be the maximum limit for a family's contribution to rent. This 
amendment also establishes a flexible rent-to-income ratio that would 
permit very low-income families to pay less than 30 percent of their 
incomes in rent if the housing authority chose to implement such rent 
standards.
  When I began my career in public service, I wanted to serve my 
constituents, especially the vulnerable but not evict them. When I came 
to Washington, I wanted to strengthen families not hurt them. I have 
nine, count them, nine housing projects in a district that is just 
under 36 square miles. In those housing projects are people just like 
those of us sitting in this Chamber. The difference between us and them 
is circumstances. The people in Nickerson Gardens Imperial Courts, 
Jordan Downs, or Dana Strands struggle daily to make ends meet. They 
are not looking for a hand out, they are simply looking for a 
compassionated hand to assist them in getting by from one day to the 
next while improving their circumstance. This amendment would help my 
constituents. A 30-percent maximum cap on rents would help my public 
houising constituents. If H.R. 2406 is going to repeal the Brooke 
amendment let's replace it with the Frank amendment. This amendment is 
sound public policy. After all, we are here to serve the public and not 
our own political interest. I urge my colleagues to support the Frank 
amendment, and maintain the goal of providing affordable housing to our 
working poor.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance 
of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 4 
minutes.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I am glad the gentleman 
from New York brought out his chart; it was his chart, and he picked 
1982, not as a random number but because that is the point at which he 
believes the Brooke amendment began to have a negative effect.
  Interestingly, that is the year the Brooke amendment was changed. The 
Brooke amendment began as a limit on the overall amount that could be 
charged. It never argued for income-based rent in every case. It simply 
said no matter what your basis is, housing authority, this high and no 
higher.
  In 1981, as part of the Republican program of Ronald Reagan passed by 
a Republican conservative Democratic coalition, that was changed and it 
became both the ceiling and a floor. At that point, yes, it did have 
some unintended negative consequences. The theory was in Gramm-Latta 
that they did not want to appropriate that much more Federal money, so 
the reason they did that in 1981 was to force the housing authorities 
to take more money in than they otherwise would, and that was wrong.
  The amendment we are offering today restores the original Brooke 
amendment, the pre-1981 amendment. It says there will be an overall 
limit, and that is all it says. In fact, no one has shown any negative 
effect during that period. We are restoring the Brooke amendment to 
what it was in the 1960's and the 1970's. In other words, this argument 
that the gentleman is making about a work disincentive is dead wrong.
  As a matter of fact, under the proposal of the gentleman from New 
York we get a work disincentive, because under his amendment there is a 
30-percent cap on income for people who are on welfare, 30 percent of 
the median or below. Under his amendment, if a person gets off welfare 
and goes to work, then their rent can go up by more than their income. 
He has the disincentive.
  Why so illogical? Partly to try to get the votes, but partly because 
again this is an effort to say if we do not appropriate the money, we 
are going to get it out of the tenants.
  Do the housing authorities have any strong objection to raising the 
rents on the tenants? Surprisingly, not. But I do not believe that that 
should direct our policy. So we would simply return to the days of the 
Brooke amendment before it had any negative consequences. This is a 
ceiling. It is not a floor. It had no work disincentives in the 1960's 
and 1970's. It would have none again.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentlewoman from 
California.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Frank] has stated it and I think it should be understood. But I want to 
be clear, will the housing authorities have the ability to raise the 
rents as high as they would like to, above the 30 percent, regardless 
of ability to pay.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Yes. And under the amendment of the 
gentleman from New York, what he says is this. He said it in his 
argument: If we limit the housing authority to 30 percent we are 
saying, ``Take any factors you want into consideration, geography, 
whatever, but do not go above 30 percent.'' They will charge the tenant 
more rent that if we say to them, ``Set the rent on whatever basis you 
want but there is no cap.'' I have never before heard that imposing a 
limit in fact required people to go higher than if there was no limit.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman again.
  Ms. WATERS. Is this an attempt to get the operating expenses that 
they rescinded and cut out of the budget, trying to get as much money 
as they can from the tenant in order to offset the money that they cut 
from the budget?
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. That is absolutely right. Let me just 
say, my friend from Minnesota just suggested a point. Under their 
theory, the way to get the rents lower is to let the authorities charge 
as much as they want. I guess the way to get people to drive more 
slowly would be to remove the speed limit altogether. The gentleman 
from Minnesota is right. I voted to go to 65, but maybe if we took the 
speed limit off altogether people would go lower. This is the logic of 
the gentleman from New York.
  Remember, his amendment says if a person is on welfare and they are 
making less than 30 percent of the median, they get the protection of 
the 30-percent cap. He argues again illogically when he says, and I 
hope he will try to explain this, this is a protection, but if they are 
working it somehow would become an assault on them. I hope Ed Brooke's 
original amendment is restored.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 3 
minutes.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, we hear the same old stuff: Keep 
the status quo. Protect things the way they are. Continue to warehouse 
the poor. Continue to keep disincentives to work. Penalize the working 
poor. Raise rents on the poor. Keep things the way they are because 
that is OK.
  It is not OK. It is not acceptable. This bill begins a process of 
strengthening communities, of making communities healthy, of 
increasingly having mixed income in developments, in public housing 
developments, of encouraging people who want to work to go to work, to 
make sure that a mom who wants to work overtime can do that without 
fear of getting a 25- or 30-percent tax the day she goes to work.
  The Frank amendment destroys that opportunity. It is a disincentive 
to work. It destroys the ability to have mixed incomes. As long as they 
wed themselves to the old status quo model of tying income to rent, it 
will continue to be a disincentive to work and will continue to have 
the effect of concentrating the poorest of the poor in certain 
developments. It will continue to have the effect of being a 
disincentive to have an environment where people and children and 
families can have a life where they can have hope and opportunity and 
have a chance at a job. They can do the things that all of us want to 
do.
  We believe in partnerships. We believe in local responsibility. It is 
ironic that the gentleman from the other side of the aisle is now 
criticizing the housing authorities. For 30 years the people on the 
other side of the aisle have said that housing authorities are 
wonderful, that they should get more help, that they should be trusted 
more. But now

[[Page H4675]]

it is convenient to say, ``Let us not trust local communities anymore. 
Let us not trust local communities to make these decisions on their 
own. Let us not trust them to have the right types of income 
disregards.''
  In this bill we have 10 different protections, including a phase-in 
of rent where we have a situation where rent for some people does go 
up. We have protections that would allow and facilitate people who want 
to go out into the work force.
  The model here, it is two different visions of America, Mr. Chairman. 
One vision is a vision of maintaining the status quo, of continuing to 
condemn the people on State Street to another 30 to 40 years of 
virtually universal unemployment, of drug-infested apartments, of 
having situations where there are poorly maintained apartments, as 
opposed to another vision which would be a vision where we have mixed 
income and incentives for people to work. People would have the ability 
to use vouchers to buy their own homes if they want. Residents would be 
able to buy their own public housing if they want.
  By getting back to local involvement, local flexibility, we are in 
fact encouraging work. We are providing work incentives. The Frank 
amendment is a job killer. It is a disincentive to work. It will 
continue to concentrate the poor. It will lead to warehousing of the 
poor. Our model is a model of hope. It says that if a person is 
motivated, if they have the opportunity to go to work, they will be 
able to keep the fruits of their labor without penalty.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment, 
which would restore the Brooke amendment to H.R. 2406. H.R. 2406 
repeals this very crucial housing protection, a provision in current 
law that has for the past 25 years, ensured that low-income families 
would not be required to pay more than 30 percent of their income on 
rent. The repeal of the Brooke amendment in this housing bill, would 
have a very devastating effect on many Americans, forcing thousands out 
on the street.
  This bill reneges on our Nation's promise that Americans who are most 
in need of housing assistance can afford to receive it.
  This protection has provided a critical safety net for those in 
desperate need and have saved so many from homelessness and 
destitution.
  Mr. Chairman, even with the current protections of the Brooke 
amendment, homelessness and unacceptable living conditions continues to 
plague America. There are more than 5 million American renter 
households, not including the homeless, who have ``worst case'' housing 
needs, paying more than half of their income for rent, living in 
substandard housing, or in the most unfortunate cases, both.
  This problem afflicts the elderly, working poor families, and others 
who strive to make ends meet on the minimum wage--a minimum wage, if I 
might add, which has not kept up with inflation, and has not been 
raised since 1991, because of staunch Republican opposition.
  Securing safe, affordable housing for those who remain poor despite 
hard work, for children or for those who might be unable to make a 
living on their own due to health or other reasons, is crucial to the 
positive development of today's youth and families, the safety and 
well-being of our elderly, and for our Nation's communities as a whole.
  I have many constituents who have contacted me about their fears of 
what this bill could mean to them. One constituent, who happens to be a 
quadriplegic, informed me that should the Brooke amendment be repealed, 
he surely ``would be out on the street,'' and I am further saddened to 
say that there are many more who would be put in the same situation.
  We need to ensure that affordable housing remains available. It is 
the right thing to do and it is the smart thing to do.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge the passage of this very critical amendment in 
ensuring basic housing protections to thousands of Americans most in 
need.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak in 
support of this very important amendment, the reinstatement of the 
Brooke provision.
  A cornerstone of this country's public housing is affordability. The 
elitist notion that $50 a month is not too much to ask for in rent is 
the same notion that spurred Marie Antoinette to suggest that France's 
poor should eat cake if they had no bread.
  When you are the poor of the poor, then you have a perspective that 
few of us in this chamber have ever known or will know. That should 
not, however, stop us from having common sense about what is fair or 
what is right.
  Setting a 30-percent public housing or assisted housing maximum rent 
limit based on income is the fair and right thing to do.
  Many of us know, or have heard of the personal finance rule that 
suggests that it is not economically sound to spend more than a third 
of one's income on rent. This amendment would only make sure we do not 
ask the poor to do more than is reasonable or possible for them to do.
  This amendment would also establish a flexible rent-to-income ratio 
that would permit very low-income families to pay less than 30-percent 
of their incomes in rent. This does not make sense for those most 
vulnerable residents of government-sponsored housing. If we keep 
affordability in affordable housing we can keep families together and 
not add to this country's homeless problem.
  I would like to thank the sponsors of this amendment for their 
foresightedness in bringing this amendment before the House for 
consideration.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chairman, I want to lend my support to the efforts of 
my colleagues to restore the Brooke amendment.
  My congressional district has one of the largest concentrations of 
public housing in this Nation. Under the Frank amendment, my 
constituents' rent contribution would still be capped at a maximum of 
30 percent of their income.
  I would remind my colleagues that public housing is often the only 
affordable housing for many poor and low-income residents. While the 
manager's amendment has dramatically improved this bill, it still does 
not protect low rents for new residents of public housing who have very 
low incomes, many of them elderly or disabled. Let us not be guilty of 
using our power to harm. Let us use our power to help.
  If this amendment is not adopted residents with median household 
incomes of less than $7,000 will find themselves making choices between 
paying their rent or buying food.
  Some may feel that budgetary constraints warrant a rent increase for 
public housing residents. I would say to you that we should not balance 
the Federal housing budget on the backs of the poor. I would urge my 
colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mrs. KENNELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Frank-
Gutierrez-Hinchey amendment to restore the Brooke amendment and ensure 
that low-income families can live in affordable housing. This past 
March, the Secretary of Housing announced the results of a study 
showing that our Nation's largest cities are plagued by a lack of 
affordable housing. Over 5 million families are paying more than half 
of their income on rent or are living in severely inadequate housing; 
that figure continues to grow.
  Capping rents for tenants in public housing at 30 percent of income 
ensures that families can afford housing. For many families, it means 
not having to choose between paying rent or putting food on the table 
to feed their children.
  In my home State of Connecticut alone, 71,000 units that could be 
affected by repeal of the Brooke amendment. Residents in those units 
now have stability in their housing costs--something especially 
important in Connecticut, which has the fourth-highest rent levels in 
the Nation. Removing the cap could push some of them into the private 
market, where, according to HUD, an astounding 371,000 households 
experience housing problems, primarily cost burdens in excess of 30 
percent of income. In fact, a two-bedroom apartment in Connecticut is 
unaffordable to 53 percent of all renter households, the 11th highest 
rate in the Nation.
  Nationally, public housing residents are extremely poor, often with 
incomes of less than 20 percent of the median. Rather than bring in 
substantial revenues, raising the percentage of income paid for rent 
would likely lead to displacement and homelessness.
  The Frank amendment helps to restore the goal we all have for public 
housing: to lift tenants out of poverty, not to perpetuate it. The low 
incomes of public housing residents are not a result of the Brooke 
amendment, and repealing it may have just the opposite effect by 
driving families deeper into poverty. I urge my colleagues to support 
this important amendment. We need to help the most vulnerable of our 
population and restoring the Brooke amendment will do just that.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank], as modified.
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 196, 
noes 222, not voting 15, as follows:

[[Page H4676]]

                             [Roll No. 156]

                               AYES--196

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bishop
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Danner
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Flanagan
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lincoln
     Lipinski
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Regula
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schiff
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Walsh
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Williams
     Wilson
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                               NOES--222

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brewster
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Cooley
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis
     Deal
     DeLay
     Dickey
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Greene (UT)
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Myers
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Petri
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Roth
     Roukema
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Andrews
     de la Garza
     Frost
     Hayes
     Houghton
     Laughlin
     Molinari
     Myrick
     Paxon
     Schroeder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Torricelli
     Weldon (PA)
     Wise

                              {time}  1301

  The Clerk announced the following pair:
  On this vote:

       Mr. Andrews for, with Mr. Paxon against.

  Messrs. LEWIS of California, CHRISTENSEN, KASICH, COOLEY, and CARDIN 
changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. BLUTE changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                amendment no. 11 offered by mr. hinchey

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments to title II?
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Hinchey: Page 76, after 
     line 16, insert the following:

     Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, the 
     amount paid by an elderly family or a disabled family for 
     monthly rent for a dwelling unit in public housing may not 
     exceed 30 percent of the family's adjusted monthly income.
       Page 157, after line 26, insert the following new 
     subsection:
       (b) Limitaton.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     section, the amount paid by an assisted family that is an 
     elderly family or a disabled family, for monthly rent for an 
     assisted dwelling unit bearing a gross rent that does not 
     exceed the payment standard established under section 353 for 
     a dwelling unit of the applicable size and located in the 
     market area in which such assisted dwelling unit is located, 
     may not exceed 30 percent of the family's adjusted monthly 
     income.
       Page 158, line 1, strike ``(b)'' and insert ``(c)''.
       Page 158, line 9, strike ``(c)'' and insert ``(d)''.
       Page 159, line 1, strike ``(d)'' and insert ``(e)''.
       Page 172, line 11, before the period insert the following:

     ; except that in the case of an assisted family that is an 
     elderly family or a disabled family, the amount of the 
     monthly assistance payment shall be the amount by which such 
     payment standard exceeds the lesser of the amount of the 
     resident contribution determined in accordance with section 
     322 or 30 percent of the family's adjusted monthly income.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey] and a Member 
opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  Does the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] seek the time in 
opposition?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, yes.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey]
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this is the case of the purloined amendment. A short 
time ago I was appalled to see here in the House an attempt by the 
opposition, the other side, to steal this amendment and to offer it as 
a substitute for the Frank-Gutierrez amendment which was just before 
the House a moment ago. Fortunately, Mr. Chairman, wiser heads 
prevailed over there and that amendment was withdrawn.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment that I am offering would preserve a 
narrowly targeted version of the Brooke amendment. It would protect 
seniors and disabled residents, who are the most vulnerable members of 
our society, from further rent increases.
  Senior citizens currently comprise 42 percent of our Nation's public 
housing, and over a million seniors and disabled tenants currently 
reside in public and assisted housing. In the State of New York, for 
example, senior and disabled citizens reside in about one in two public 
housing households. In my district in the upstate region that number is 
significantly higher.
  As I have traveled around in recent months, I have heard from many 
seniors who fear the burden of higher rent payments with the proposed 
repeal of the Brook amendment as it is proposed in the current bill 
before us.

  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would point out to the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Hinchey] that the amendment goes into not only title II but

[[Page H4677]]

title III. The Chair would appreciate it if the gentleman would ask 
unanimous consent that the amendment be considered en bloc so that we 
could cover both titles.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment 
be considered en bloc.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
New York?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I 
want to note that earlier when this side made an effort to make a 
unanimous-consent request to take care of this issue, we would have 
disposed of this issue earlier if we had been afforded the same comity 
that I now offer to the other side.
  Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  Mr. CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I express my appreciation to the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Lazio], the subcommittee chairman, particularly for 
the agreement that he made with me last night that this amendment would 
be before the House shortly after the Frank amendment, and I appreciate 
that.
  Mr. Chairman, I wanted to mention that a number of seniors around the 
country, and particularly in my district and elsewhere, are concerned 
about the bill that is currently before us.
  For example, Jean Austin of Liberty, NY, wrote me earlier this year 
to say the following, and I quote:

       I read in the paper that Republicans in the House and 
     Senate want to raise rents for the elderly. Sir, I have an 
     income of $567 per month to live on. There are many people my 
     age that get far less than I do. What is going to happen to 
     them? Will they join the homeless on the streets because we 
     can't afford to keep our homes? Please, I beg you, help us.

  That is what this amendment tries to do, Mr. Chairman. It tries to 
help people like Jean Austin. Since the Great Depression, the Federal 
Government has pledged to help provide a decent standard of living for 
people during their golden years, and to protect them from poverty and 
homelessness.
  This support is symbolized by the Social Security Program, and 
affordable housing has become another key element of that promise.
  During the past year the standard of living of seniors has come under 
very serious attack. The elderly have been told that they must pay 
substantially more for medical services due to rising health care costs 
and proposed reductions in the Medicare Program. They have been faced 
with higher costs of food, utilities, and other basic items due to 
proposed broad cuts in food stamps, the Low-Income Home Energy 
Assistance Program, and other essential Federal programs.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, with the proposed elimination of the Brooke 
amendment in H.R. 2406, we are telling them that they have to pay 
substantially more to keep a roof over their heads. Under H.R. 2406, as 
amended by the manager's amendment, about one in three new elderly 
tenants would potentially be forced to pay upwards of more than $400 
per year in increased rent.
  Mr. Chairman, I include a letter from the American Association of 
Retired Persons for the Record:

                                           American Association of


                                              Retired Persons,

                                      Washington, DC, May 7, 1996.
     Hon. Maurice D. Hinchey,
     Longworth House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Hinchey: I am writing to express the 
     support of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) 
     for your amendment to H.R. 2406 which would restore limits on 
     the amount that low-income seniors and disabled must pay for 
     rent in public and assisted housing.
       AARP generally supports enhancing local housing authority 
     discretion and broadening the income mix of tenants housed in 
     public and assisted housing. Allowing more mixed income 
     housing should improve the quality of service in housing 
     communities and the responsiveness of housing providers to 
     their tenants. AARP believes, however, that H.R. 2406 goes 
     too far in removing all income targeting and all limitations 
     on the percentage of income that tenants must spend on rent.
       The Association strongly supports your amendment to restore 
     limits on the amount of income paid by the poorest and most 
     vulnerable tenants of public and assisted housing. We 
     understand the necessity of generating sufficient income to 
     maintain the housing stock in the face of diminishing federal 
     resources. Eliminating the preference rules and broadening 
     the income targeting will provide increased revenues over 
     time that should help bridge that gap. Some have suggested 
     that the current limit on rents is a disincentive to 
     employment for tenants. Whatever the merits of this argument, 
     it should be obvious that it has little applicability to the 
     elderly and disabled. Eighty percent of the elderly living in 
     public and assisted housing are women living alone whose 
     average age is in the late 70's.
       The federal government should stand by its responsibility 
     to help the poorest tenants by providing adequate operating 
     subsidies, not reducing rental assistance. Older tenants, 
     whose incomes average less than $7,500 per year, will be 
     facing less assistance from food stamps and other essential 
     services. To add major rent increases on top of these other 
     cuts will cause more problems than it will solve for local 
     housing authorities.
       AARP appreciates your leadership in offering this 
     amendment. If we can be of assistance on these or other 
     issues, please do not hesitate to have your staff contact Jo 
     Reed of our Federal Affairs staff at 434-3800.
           Sincerely,

                                           Kevin J. Donnellan,

                                                  Acting Director,
                                    Legislation and Public Policy.

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HINCHEY. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, just for the sake of clarity, I 
want to make sure that Members know and so that there is no 
misinterpretation, under the current version of the bill seniors are 
protected. The people who are in public housing right now have had 
Brooke-type ceiling protections. We do not want to mischaracterize the 
way the bill currently is.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, the gentleman is 
correct. This amendment clearly deals with new tenants coming into 
housing. There is a turnaround of about 15 percent a year in subsidized 
housing alone.
  Any senior citizen or disabled resident who is making more than 30 
percent of area median income, which is roughly equivalent to the 
earnings of a minimum-wage earner, will be left out in the cold under 
the present bill. An estimated 135,000 elderly households in public 
housing alone can be expected to be left unprotected by the present 
bill that is before the House. Another 17,000 disabled households would 
be left unprotected by the bill that is currently before the House.
  Mr. Chairman, the numbers that I am giving relate only to those who 
live in public housing. It does not begin to tell the story of the 
additional tens of thousands of elderly and disabled, frail elderly and 
disabled who are in assisted housing.
  How are these families going to afford to pay higher rents if they 
must also pay hundreds more for their health care, food, and other 
basic necessities? Many households will be forced to choose between 
housing and health care, food and medicine, and many families are going 
to end up on the street as a result if this amendment is not adopted.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment would simply preserve a narrowly tailored 
form of the current rent ceiling named for a Republican Senator, passed 
by a Republican Senate, and signed into law by a Republican President. 
It is intended to preserve a minimum standard of living for the most 
vulnerable members of our society: Our frail elderly seniors and 
disabled people who are unable to work even part-time to supplement 
their income.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge the adoption of this amendment. It is the only 
reasonable thing to do to correct a serious deficiency in the bill 
currently before the House.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the bill that we have currently before us protects 
seniors in every way that the minority has urged. It protects the 
disabled population. No senior, no person who happens to be disabled 
who happens to be in public housing will not have the protection that 
they previously had.
  The question over here is whether we will extend protection to people 
not yet in public housing, not yet using vouchers, to pursue housing 
options. In the last amendment I offered to support an effort to try 
and extend this to seniors prospectively, for future seniors to come 
in, for future people who might have disabilities to come into public 
and assisted housing.

[[Page H4678]]

  The bill as it is now is already supported by the American 
Association of Homes and Services for the Aged; American Seniors 
Housing Association; the National Apartment Association, and various 
other associations that exclusively deal with housing for seniors.
  Mr. Chairman, I am supportive of the effort to extend those 
protections further and I am happy to support this amendment. We could 
have done this through the last amendment, but through a unanimous 
consent request we failed to get the opportunity to make that offer. I 
am happy at this time to support this, and urge its adoption.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey].
  The amendment was agreed to.


    amendments no. 14 and 18 offered by mr. kennedy of massachusetts

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendments, and I 
ask unanimous consent that they be considered en bloc.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendments.
  The text of the amendments is as follows:

       Amendments No. 14 and 18 offered by Mr. Kennedy of 
     Massachusetts: Amendment No. 14: Page 76, after line 16, 
     insert the following:

     Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, the 
     amount paid by a family whose head (or whose spouse) is a 
     veteran (as such term is defined in section 203(b) of the 
     National Housing Act) for monthly rent for a dwelling unit in 
     public housing may not exceed 30 percent of the family's 
     adjusted monthly income.
       Amendment No. 18: Page 157, after line 26, insert the 
     following new subsection:
       (b) Limitation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this section, the amount paid by an assisted family whose 
     head (or whose spouse) is a veteran (as such term is defined 
     in section 203(b) of the National Housing Act) for monthly 
     rent for an assisted dwelling unit bearing a gross rent that 
     does not exceed the payment standard established under 
     section 353 for a dwelling of the applicable size and located 
     in the market area in which such assisted dwelling unit is 
     located may not exceed 30 percent of the family's adjusted 
     monthly income.
       Page 158, line 1, strike ``(b)'' and insert ``(c)''.
       Page 158, line 9, strike ``(c)'' and insert ``(d)''.
       Page 159, line 1, strike ``(d)'' and insert ``(e)''.
       Page 172, line 9, strike ``exceeds'' insert ``(A)''.
       Page 172, line 11, before the period insert the following: 
     ``, or (B) in the case of a family whose head (or whose 
     spouse) is a veteran (as such term is defined in section 
     203(b) of the National Housing Act), the lesser of the amount 
     of such resident contribution or 30 percent of the family's 
     adjusted monthly income''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] and a 
Member opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment very simply provides some basic 
protections to America's veterans. These are two amendments which would 
continue and extend the Brooke protections to the people that have 
stood up and fought for this country, that have served in our country's 
military, that in many cases--as the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. 
Montgomery] knows all too well, who is going to speak on this 
amendment--when we visit homeless shelters around America, far too 
often we see one thing that the homeless have in common, and that is 
that they served in this Nation's military.
  What we find is that there are now tens of thousands of veterans that 
are trying to get themselves back on their feet, that are learning to 
go back to work, learning skills to rid themselves of drug and alcohol 
problems, to deal with some of the psychological and other difficulties 
that they had faced throughout their lifetime, and they are back on the 
road to recovery, to becoming part of mainstream America.
  This amendment as it is currently constituted, the way that the bill 
currently works, would not provide the Brooke protections to people 
that have minimum wage jobs.

                              {time}  1315

  That means our Nation's veterans would go unprotected. I just think 
that if we are going to protect the very poor, if we are going to 
protect our senior citizens, if we are going to protect the disabled, I 
would hope that we would find it in our hearts to protect our Nation's 
veterans at the same time.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Mississippi [Mr. Montgomery], my good friend and former chairman of the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  (Mr. MONTGOMERY asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. MONTGOMERY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me.
  Really one of the biggest problems we have had with veterans is, 
again, getting them out of the homeless areas and trying to get them 
into the housing to improve their lives. We have done everything to try 
to get them off the streets. About 25 percent of the people homeless 
today on Washington, DC streets are veterans.
  Let us not put a hindrance in front of them. Let us not make it 
harder for them to get into these housing units. I know some of them 
make the minimum wage and would probably have their rates raised in 
these housing units. So I think the gentleman has got a good amendment. 
I hope the other side would accept it. I certainly support this 
amendment.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I thank General 
Montgomery for all the work he does on behalf of our Nation's veterans. 
It has been a pleasure to serve with him in the Congress, and we are 
going to continue to keep his memory alive on that committee long after 
he chooses to leave.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I wonder if I could engage the gentleman from Massachusetts in a 
colloquy over this. I certainly support his efforts to protect American 
veterans. I believe the vast majority of veterans would fall under the 
protections we have in this bill, because many of our Nation's veterans 
are now seniors, having served our country in the Korean War, and World 
War II. There are even veterans who have served in the Vietnam war and 
who are now seniors. They would all have the protections under this 
bill.
  What we are talking about is carrying this protection to younger 
veterans as opposed to older veterans. I wonder if I could turn to my 
friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts, if he could give me some 
information about how many people we might be talking about in terms of 
this veterans population, if he has any information about the 
specifics?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, as the chairman is aware, 
the one area that we do provide a veterans preference in this country 
is housing. So there are not statistics kept by HUD or local housing 
authorities in terms of veterans status. But the truth of the matter is 
that you are right, we are going to protect some veterans, some older 
veterans in terms of the senior citizens protections. You are going to 
protect some very, very poor veterans.
  But the truth is that I have worked very hard with people on your 
side of the aisle in the Committee on Veterans' Affairs to establish a 
number of programs that work in conjunction with housing authorities 
and voucher programs to make certain that we transit people out of 
homelessness and into mainstream society, those individuals. And 
thousands of them participate very much in the very programs that the 
Brooke amendment would not longer provide protections to.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, we are 
through the bill already protecting people who are what I would 
classify as the poorest of the poor. Veterans who are basically 
homeless would already be protected against dramatic rent increases in 
the way that you would suggest. The bill already covers those people. 
It already covers Americans who happen to be senior citizens, a large 
percentage of those who are veterans.

[[Page H4679]]

  I would like to work with the gentleman. I think one of the problems 
that we are going to have is to work through a methodology since HUD 
does not have the ability, a current ability, an immediate availability 
of information that would determine who the veterans are in a 
particular population to identify that.
  I would be happy to work through this with the gentleman in 
establishing a good database and ensuring that HUD has the information 
to assess who are ensuring that HUD has the information to assess who 
are veterans and who are not and who needs to be protected.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will 
continue to yield, I appreciate the gentleman's offer for a study. I am 
not sure that that is what is called for here.
  I think what we ought to be doing is trying to make sure that we 
provide this as a basic protection to our Nation's veterans. I think 
that might cost a small amount of money to make sure that those 
veterans do not have their rents jacked up, just as they are on their 
way to recovery.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. The issue for me is not the money on this. I 
am not asking for a study. I am simply saying, I look forward to 
working with you so that HUD has sufficient information to implement 
this plan.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I appreciate the gentleman's offer to 
go out and gather additional information. I very much believe that this 
is a basic minimum protection which we can take care of in the next few 
minutes. I would hope that the rest of the Members of the Congress of 
the United States would support the amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendments offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  The amendments were agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to title II?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent 
that it now be in order to consider amendment No. 17 without prejudice 
to other amendments in title II.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.


        amendment no. 17 offered by mr. kennedy of massachusetts

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Kennedy of Massachusetts: 
     Page 152, after line 2, insert the following new subsection:
       (b) Income Targeting.--Of the families initially assisted 
     under this title by a local housing and management authority 
     in any year, not less than 75 percent shall be families whose 
     incomes do not exceed 30 percent of the area median income, 
     as determined by the Secretary with adjustments for smaller 
     and larger families. The Secretary may establish income 
     ceiling higher or lower than 30 percent of the area median 
     income on the basis of the Secretary's findings that such 
     variations are necessary because of unusually high or low 
     family incomes.
       Page 152, line 3, strike ``(b)'' and insert ``(c)''.
       Page 152, line 18, strike ``(c)'' and insert ``(d)''.
       Page 153, line 11, strike ``(d)'' and insert ``(e)''.
       Page 153, line 16, strike ``(c)'' and insert ``(d)''.
       Page 154, line 11, strike ``(e)'' and insert ``(f)''.
       Page 155, line 16, strike ``(f)'' and insert ``(g)''.
       Page 156, line 1, strike ``(g)'' and insert ``(h)''.
       Page 156, line 15, strike ``(h)'' and insert ``(i)''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] and a 
Member opposed will each be recognized for 30 minutes.
  Does the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] seek to control the time 
in opposition?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I do.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] will be 
recognized for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment goes to the heart of how we are going to 
take care of the working people and the poor of this country. This 
amendment goes to the heart of the changes that take place in this 
bill. We have seen the Congress in the last few minutes repeal the 
protections of the Brooke amendment. Now the question becomes whether 
or not, on top of that, we are going to also repeal the targets of the 
protections that we provide by virtue of the housing vouchers and 
public housing units that are given by the people of this country, 
whether or not those should go to the working people and the poor of 
America or whether they should go on up the income stream to a point 
where people whose incomes are 300 or 400 percent above the poverty 
line will all of a sudden become eligible.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill does a perverse thing. We cut the amount of 
money going into public housing dramatically. We cut the amount of 
money going into the voucher program dramatically, but we then increase 
the eligibility of the families that will be qualified for these 
housing units by a factor of three or four. So three or four times as 
many people, if this bill is passed unamended, will be eligible for a 
lesser number of housing units.
  Now, to add insult to injury, we then are eliminating the basic 
fundamental protections that say that the majority of those housing 
units ought to go to the most vulnerable people in this society. This 
is a concept that an organization as conservative as the Heritage 
Foundation has endorsed. It is one thing to say, let us not concentrate 
poor people in these monstrosities that we have seen paraded on the 
House floor in the form of these various pictures. But the housing 
voucher program does not warehouse the poor. The housing voucher 
program simply gives individuals a housing voucher. That voucher can be 
taken anywhere that individual chooses to live.
  Mr. Chairman, the statistics on where they choose to live are rather 
enlightening. Most voucher holders, nearly all of whom meet the current 
targeting requirements in the law, live in neighborhoods where less 
than 25 percent of the households are considered poor. Forty percent of 
the voucher holders live in neighborhoods where less than 10 percent of 
the neighborhood is poor.
  So this is not a question of warehousing poor people, as I am sure we 
are going to hear the opposite side suggest. This is simply a question 
of whether or not we are going to target the resources, the meager 
resources that we put into public housing, that we put into the voucher 
program, to go to those in greatest need.
  We have seen an unbelievable number of very poor people in this 
country grow over the course of the last 15 years. The statistics are 
alarming. The number of homeless Americans, the number of people 
without any shelter has grown substantially. We have actually cut out 
almost 500,000 units of housing in the United States of America that 
goes to very poor people. At the same time, if you go up the income 
stream a little bit, not that people are well off, but if you go up the 
income stream just a little bit to people within 300 or 400 percent of 
the poverty line, you are going to find that there are over half a 
million new units of housing for those people's needs. It is already 
enough.
  But to suggest in this bill that we eliminate the Brooke amendment 
and then we come back and say that we are no longer going to target 
this housing to the very poor, I think, is a very dangerous policy 
which in fact will go out and create homelessness in America.
  Mr. Chairman, we are verging on a brave new world where we turn to 
the people of America, we blame public housing authorities, we blame 
the voucher program for creating this warehousing of the poor. We then 
cut the money that goes into trying to assist them and then we come 
back and say we are going to jack up the eligibility requirements, 
which means that there is one group of losers. That group of losers 
happens to be the most vulnerable people in this country.
  So, yes, all the housing authorities will like these changes, 
because, of course, it insulates them from having to take care of the 
most vulnerable

[[Page H4680]]

people in the country. But what is it, why are we here in the Congress? 
Where are we, what kinds of public policies are we trying to 
incorporate? It is not just to look out after those that can look out 
after themselves. It is to have a compassionate country, to look out 
after the vulnerable.
  My goodness, we cannot just blame these housing monstrosities, blame 
everything that we do as a country to look out after poor people and 
say, look, none of it ever works and, therefore, we turn our backs on 
the poor and say we are not going to do anything to help them. Let us 
have some compassion in how we choose to deal with these problems. The 
voucher program does not warehouse the poor. The voucher program will 
not lose money for the Federal Government.
  Let us continue to provide the voucher program, with the targeting 
that says to make sure that the most vulnerable people in this country 
get the resources, the meager resources that we have allocated in this 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, again, the argument is between local control and 
community control and continuing to have a Washington-based, one-size-
fits-all solution for every community in the Nation.
  The other side of the aisle continues to argue that every community 
in the Nation ought to live under the same rules, regardless of whether 
that means moving to the lowest common denominator, regardless of 
individual characteristics of communities throughout our Nation, 
regardless of the quality of the neighborhoods and the quality of the 
life of the people that are impacted.
  We are saying in this bill, Mr. Chairman, that 50 percent or half of 
the vouchers and certificates that are available most go to the poorest 
of the poor, those below 60 percent of median income. If a housing 
authority wants to give 100 percent of their vouchers and certificates 
to people below 30 percent or below 20 percent or with no income at 
all, they can do it. There is no prohibition to that.
  What we are saying is that housing authorities need to have 
flexibility. Why should a family who is at the point of 32 percent of 
median income be denied a voucher, which would be the case under the 
Kennedy amendment? Why should a family who is at 35 percent of median 
income, as opposed to 30 percent or 29 percent, be denied the ability 
to have a voucher?
  Mr. Chairman, the Kennedy amendment, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Kennedy], who I have a great deal of respect for, ties the hands 
of housing authorities, inhibits flexibility, prohibits local control. 
We are saying that there may be situations where people who are 
pursuing work may need more flexibility. They should be able to be 
retained in public housing without being thrown out or not being able 
to be afforded a voucher because they are somehow at 31 or 32 or 35 or 
38 percent of median income as opposed to 29 or 30 percent.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters].

                              {time}  1330

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, this is very, very interesting. My friend, 
the chairman of the committee, has just expanded, would like to expand, 
rental assistance so that they pull in more people making more money, 
up to $40,000 that they could make under his proposal. One would be 
able to earn $40,000 and get rental assistance.
  What he does not do is protect those, no, he does not protect those 
who really need it, who make very little money, 30 percent of median 
income, and this is very interesting. At the same time that he is 
talking about reducing Government's involvement in peoples' lives, at 
the same time that they are talking about shrinking Government, he just 
opened it up so that people earning $40,000 could avail themselves of 
rental assistance. Yet we know that it is those who earn very little 
money who need it, those who earn very little money that can go out in 
the marketplace and find a home, those women and children who 
desperately need to get assistance. He is squeezing them out of the 
market.
  This is unbelievable. I am surprised that he would take this 
approach. It is indeed not to be supported.

  The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] is saying let us 
protect the poorest of the poor, let us make sure that 75 percent of 
those who earn very little money, who are only at 30 percent, will have 
the ability to go out and get assisted and have a place for them and 
their children to live.
  I think, again, the chairman may be a little bit confused about the 
direction that his legislation is taking. It is very simple. Does the 
gentleman want to expand it, get more people at higher incomes? Does 
the gentleman want to protect the poorest of the poor? Does the 
gentleman want to make sure that families who would have no other 
place, no way to get assistance, are protected or in this legislation? 
The answer to that, I think most people will conclude, is that we want 
to protect those who do not have the ability to purchase housing.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, once again we are talking about insuring that people 
who are working who have, possibly, disabilities, people who are 
seniors, Americans who are seniors, also have the ability to get 
choice-based vouchers.
  The gentlewoman said this would potentially go to people making 
$40,000 a year. There is not a neighborhood, an area of the country, 
that would be able to get vouchers under this provision at $40,000 a 
year.
  The national median is about $38,000 a year in terms of median 
income. We are saying at least half of those people, half of the 
vouchers, must go to Americans at 60 percent of that, or $22,000.
  If the housing authority wanted to target all of its vouchers to the 
people at the bottom 10 percent, they have the ability to do that.
  What we are saying is that we are going to allow for safety provision 
in respect to the concern that many have that at least half of all the 
vouchers must go to the bottom 60 percent of the population.
  It is eminently fair.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, on a factual basis, let 
me just read to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] the fact that 
Los Angeles, Long Beach, 80 percent of median is $40,000; New York City 
is $39,200. The gentleman's own district is $40,000.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, what the 
bill, what our bill, has is 60 percent of median income, not medium 
income, not 80 percent of median income. It is 60 percent of median 
income.
  Now, without saying that a housing authority could not target all of 
its assistance to the bottom 10 percent, I know the gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Baker] wanted to----
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would 
yield just so I can understand the amendment, my understanding was that 
it only limited 50 percent of the units to go to the incomes at 60 
percent of median.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reclaiming my time, at least 60 percent of the 
units. We could have 100 percent of the units at 30 percent, 20 
percent, or 10 percent.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 20 
seconds.
  The gentleman is correct that he gives the housing authorities the 
right to take in poor people, but the gentleman has also pointed out 
time and time again over the course of the last several hours the fact 
that housing authorities are in need of funds. The only way they can 
get those funds is by bringing in upper-income people. And so, 
therefore, none of the housing projects, none of the housing 
authorities, are going to, in fact, take advantage of this opportunity 
that the chairman has provided.
   Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California 
[Ms. Roybal-Allard].
  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the 
amendment of the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy's amendment, 
which maintains income targeting at levels that protect very-low-income 
families in the section 8

[[Page H4681]]

tenant-based assistance program. The Kennedy amendment is necessary to 
address the provisions in this bill that detrimentally impact the lives 
of thousands of very-low-income families who rely on section 8 housing 
assistance.
  Today, current law ensures that all new vouchers and 25 percent of 
all certificates are provided to very-low-income families. The 
legislation before us, however, allows housing authorities to set their 
own targets as long as 50 percent of vouchers go to individuals earning 
60 percent or less of area median income. This means that in cities 
like Los Angeles, those earning 250 times the poverty level, or put 
another way, as the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters] has 
stated, families of four earning $40,000 a year, would qualify for half 
of the city's housing vouchers, leaving many low-income families 
without vouchers and forced to pay market rents or, worse, become 
homeless.
  This is not the intent of public and assisted housing.
  Furthermore, although achieving income mix is an important goal, the 
weakening of income targeting in the voucher system is unnecessary 
because tenants are already free to move to areas of their own 
choosing.
  The success of the current program is evidenced by the fact that most 
section 8 tenants live in neighborhoods where less than one-quarter of 
the residents are poor.
  Reducing income targeting for voucher holders has no basis.
  Although provisions in the manager's amendment help to improve the 
bill, it still does not have the guarantees of Mr. Kennedy's amendment. 
By insuring that at least 75 percent of vouchers go to families earning 
less than 30 percent of area median income, Mr. Kennedy's amendment 
will allow for an income mix while maintaining assistance for those who 
need it most.
  Mr. Kennedy's amendment upholds the intent and integrity of our 
Nation's assisted housing program. I encourage all my colleagues from 
both sides of the aisle to vote for the Kennedy amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  We have had discussions, several discussions, with the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] in terms of trying to work out a compromise 
that meets the primary concerns that he has and I share, and I would 
yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts to describe his understanding 
of the agreement that we have just entered into.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. My understanding is that my friend, the 
gentleman who is chairman of this committee, has offered on assisted 
housing to raise the limit, to strike the 75 percent and include 40 
percent, which would, I believe, be a significant improvement in the 
number of units that would be targeted to lower income people, and on 
public housing he has agreed to raise the limit from 30 to 35 percent 
that would go to very-low-income people. And I think that that is an 
improvement as well, and I appreciate the gentleman.
  Is that the gentleman's understanding of what we just talked about?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. Before the gentleman does that, is there an agreement 
that someone is proposing?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. There is not as yet an agreement that 
we are proposing, Mr. Chairman. We are in a situation where we are 
clarifying our understanding.
  The CHAIRMAN. If that is the case, then the gentleman from New York 
still has 45 seconds remaining.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
correctly states my understanding as well on what I am willing to 
support. I appreciate his cooperation and collaboration.
  I would ask for guidance from the Chair whether we need to consider 
this en bloc in terms of making the amendment and what the correct 
process is.
  The CHAIRMAN. What the Chair would request and the reason the Chair 
suspended the action just a moment ago is that we would like to have 
the agreement in writing so either as an amendment to the existing 
amendments en bloc or a clean substitute so that we might accurately be 
able to reflect the intent of the agreement legislatively.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. It would be my proposal that, 
reflecting the agreement that the two of us just stated, that our 
staffs get together and try to write out the language. We will submit 
it to the parliamentarian to make certain that it is parliamentarily 
correct, and in the interim I would suggest that we continue to have 
the debate on some of the larger issues that pertain as well and would 
continue to pertain to the issue.
  The CHAIRMAN. In the interest of time, the Chair would ask whether or 
not the gentleman would like to ask unanimous consent to withdraw this 
amendment, to go on the other amendments, if there is indeed an 
agreement?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I would, but the trouble 
is that my amendment is next as well.
  We will do this quickly, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from new York [Ms. 
Velazquez].
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Kennedy 
amendment. The far-right minority has inserted a shameful anti-family, 
anti-senior, anti-child provision into the housing bill.
  H.R. 2406 includes an extreme measure that would eliminate Federal 
preferences requiring public housing authorities to give the most needy 
families a place to live.
  As the Representative of a district with one of the highest 
concentration of public housing, I know firsthand how important income 
targeting is for the working poor. Yet this legislation will leave 
thousands of homeless families and seniors with no hope of finding a 
place to live.
  Without income targeting, families marking up to $40,000 a year would 
have access to public housing while homeless elderly, single mothers 
with children, and the poorest families will be left to live out in the 
streets.
  With such high stake, I cannot think of any justifiable reason to 
limit poor people's access to public housing. The Kennedy amendment 
will ensure that public housing in available for people who need it 
most. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject such 
harsh provisions and vote in favor of the Kennedy amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I think we are on the verge of working out an 
understanding that the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy], and 
I have reached in terms of appropriate levels of income targeting that 
would also provide for substantial flexibility on the part of local 
communities to make choices and attain the ultimate goal of income mix 
which is so important in terms of viability in our Nation's 
communities.
  I am thinking about different discussions I have had over the last 
few years, particularly those over the past 2 years as chairman of this 
housing committee. I remember one in particular with a young lady who 
was a resident of a Job Corps center in south Bronx, a very 
underprivileged areas.
  Mr. Chairman, she was about 19 years old, and I remember her saying 
to me, ``Mr. Lazzio, you know, I never knew how to write a check before 
I got here, I never knew how to open up a checking account, I never 
understood how to create a resume or even what a resume was until I got 
to this place, and I am learning the tools to transition back into the 
marketplace.''
  Mr. Chairman, one of the reasons why there are far too many Americans 
who are able to say the same thing is because we are concentrating 
poverty in certain areas; we are not achieving the income mix that most 
of America is lucky enough and privileged enough to know.

                              {time}  1345

  In an effort to try to achieve a healthier income mix, I think we are 
moving in the right direction in terms of the agreement that I believe 
we are going to enter into with the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Kennedy].
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from 
Minnesota.

[[Page H4682]]

  Mr. VENTO. First of all, Mr. Chairman, I concur with the gentleman in 
terms of the concentration of low-income persons in public housing. 
Earlier, when the gentleman had a chart on the floor in the past 
amendment, I had wanted to point out one of the other phenomena was the 
absolute focusing in the early 1980's in terms of trying to serve the 
lowest income persons in public housing. That also attributed to that 
decline in income, because obviously there are various reasons why 
people have low income. It may be a cultural problem.
  For instance, in the district I represent, I have a big influx of 
Southeast Asians, the Hmong. They simply have not all been able to 
afford or gain jobs that pay a lot of income. Their concentration in 
public housing, incidentally, has in fact contributed to that type of 
phenomenon.
  Then the other issue is, of course, the affordability of owner-
occupied housing, which would be all of our preferences. But these 
factors have, in fact, been trying to get a mix. The concern that I had 
with the gentleman's amendment was not the issue of trying to get a 
mix. Indeed, the gentleman is right, local authorities could go down to 
very low-income levels. But the phenomenon was, the option was that 
they may also do what I would characterize as creaming.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, if I could reclaim my time, I 
hope the gentleman will support the agreement and compromise that we 
are working out together. Also, again, one of the core principles that 
we are trying to advance here is that it is one of our responsibilities 
here in this body, this House, to assure that we do not just warehouse 
the poor, but that we help transform them.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento].
  Mr. VENTO. I appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts yielding 
time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I think unfortunately what has happened is that low-
income persons have ended up concentrated in the public or assisted 
housing programs. Frankly, Mr. Chairman, as I said yesterday, the 
housing with most problems in my district is not the public and 
assisted housing, but it is the private multifamily dwellings which are 
overcrowded and which have such severe problems. So it is quite the 
converse.
  As I was saying, there are good housing authorities and there are 
some that are not so good. We hope that by virtue of this bill, the 
gentleman, with his insights, will in fact accomplish a miracle and 
make those not so good housing authorities much improved. The fact is 
that some are going to improve and some may not. One way they may solve 
their problem is by just creaming. If we do not have income targeting, 
housing authorities will take those clients that are most likely to be 
successful and that have higher incomes. That then leaves others who do 
not get the housing assistance with the nonprofits, with the 
Government, and on the street in some cases.
  Unfortunately, when we think about it, in 1975 we had very little 
homelessness. Today we have a significant amount. Things have changed.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my 
friend, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Flake].
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, this is an important portion of the bill. I think it is 
a good thing to see the chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking 
member come together with an agreement that I think is much fairer than 
the original legislation proposed in the committee markup. Clearly, I 
think there are those who really do not understand, or do understand 
and really do not give credence to the fact, that many persons who 
would get vouchers under many of the programs that have been proposed, 
regardless of whether the voucher indicates they could go to any 
community and trade their voucher in for housing, would be at a major 
disadvantage in that there are communities, there are places, where 
people would not open their doors readily to them. They would not 
respond, for instance, to families that have children because it has 
been a history that in many instances, those homes would not be able to 
maintain not only the stand of their value, but also in many instances 
there would be destruction of those homes.
  It seems to me that as we consider the amendment that is now proposed 
between the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] and the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy], we have moved closer to the direction of 
assuring that there is a possibility of those persons who are at the 
lowest income level being able to have access to affordable housing, 
while at the same time creating an opportunity for persons who can move 
into these houses, who have jobs, to be able to create the necessary 
kind of environment.
  Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether the gentleman remembers, but 
several years ago my MINKS program, which was a demonstration project 
which was tried in Chicago and other places, essentially spoke to the 
kind of concern that the gentleman raised here. It is not that 
Democrats do not understand that necessity for trying to have a mixed 
population base, but we do not want to be in a position where a local 
housing authority can in fact have so much authority that it puts those 
persons out who have the greatest needs, while trying to market itself 
to bring into those developments individuals who can go to the market 
and get adequate housing and can afford to pay for it.
  So I hope that we will all support the agreement that the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] and the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Lazio] are supporting now.
  Mr KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Gonzalez], the former chairman of our 
committee.
  Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Chairman, historically, public and assisted housing 
units were available to every applicant whose income was up to 80 
percent of median income.
  This policy was changed by the Gramm-Latta Act of 1981, which 
restricted eligibility almost entirely to those earning less than 50 
percent of median income.
  In this amendment we are addressing a separate issue. We are talking 
about trying to achieve more economic mix in our privately owned 
affordable housing, a house here and a house there.
  And we are talking about providing sufficient resources to move 
people who have little housing choice in decent and affordable housing.
  Most of the families below 30 percent of medium income, the poorest 
of the poor, cannot find affordable housing. They have worst case 
housing needs.
  It is only reasonable that most of the choice-based housing 
assistance should be available to those who most need it.
  The bill as it now stands would simply discourage the working poor 
from seeking self-sufficiency, and it would also bar the doors to those 
who are in the greatest need. That kind of approach is completely 
contradictory and cannot work.
  I urge adoption of the Kennedy amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I would just ask the distinguished ranking member, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy], if he believes that we have 
the agreement technically perfected.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. If the gentleman would go ahead and 
read the amendment, we will react to it.


amendment offered by mr. lazio of new york to amendment no. 17 offered 
                    by mr. kennedy of massachusetts

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte). The Clerk will report the 
amendment to the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Lazio of New York to Amendment No. 
     17 offered by Mr. Kennedy of Massachusetts:
       Page 1 of the amendment, line 3, strike ``75 percent'' and 
     insert ``40 percent''.
       At the end of the amendment insert the following:
       In section 222 of the bill (as amended by the manager's 
     amendment), strike subsection (c) (relating to income mix) 
     and insert the following new subsection:
       (c) Income Mix.--
       (1) LHMA income mix.--Of the public housing dwelling units 
     of a local housing and

[[Page H4683]]

     management authority made available for occupancy after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act not less than 35 percent 
     shall be occupied by low-income families whose incomes do not 
     exceed 30 percent of the area median income, as determined by 
     the Secretary with adjustments for smaller and larger 
     families, except that the Secretary, may for purposes of this 
     subsection, establish income ceiling higher or lower than 30 
     percent of the median for the area on the basis of the 
     Secretary's findings that such variations are necessary 
     because of unusually high or low family incomes.
       (2) Prohibition of concentration of low-income families.--A 
     local housing and management authority may not comply with 
     the requirements under paragraph (1) by concentrating very 
     low-income families (or other families with relatively low 
     incomes) in public housing dwelling units in certain public 
     housing developments or certain buildings within 
     developments. The Secretary may review the income and 
     occupancy characteristics of the public housing developments, 
     and the buildings of such developments, of local housing and 
     management authorities to ensure compliance with the 
     provisions of this paragraph.

  Mr. LAZIO of New York (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask 
unanimous consent that the amendment to the amendment be considered as 
read and reprinted in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from new York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, this amendment represents the 
agreement between myself and the distinguished ranking member, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy], that would effectively 
target the poorest people.
  The original amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Kennedy] would have targeted 75 percent of the choice-based 
vouchers and certificate to those below 30 percent. My amendment would 
amend that and would insert in its place ``40 percent,'' so 40 percent 
of all the vouchers and certificates would be targeted to those below 
30 percent of median income, which is, of course, the poorest of the 
poor.
  Mr. Chairman, I do not think we are going to do the en bloc amendment 
right now.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, my understanding from the 
parliamentarian was that we could in fact do both the amendments in 
combination. Maybe we can just ask the Chairman whether or not we can 
do that. I thought the amendment as drafted accomplished both: a 40-
percent limit on the vouchers to people with incomes under 30 percent 
of income, and 35 percent of the units of public housing to go to 
people within 30 percent of median income.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, the 
gentleman correctly reflects the amendment, the agreement that we 
entered into and the amendment that is at the desk that in fact does do 
both. I had just one page in front of me.
  The amendment to the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] would actually amend that 75 percent to 
read 40 percent of the vouchers and certificates would go to the bottom 
30 percent of the population, and in terms of public housing, not less 
than 35 percent of the units in public housing would go to families 
whose incomes do not exceed 30 percent of the area medium income, which 
I believe represents the understanding between the gentleman from 
Massachusetts and myself and preserves both of our principles of 
equity, and also flexibility at the same time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Lazio] seek to have his amendment adopted as a modification by 
unanimous consent to the Kennedy amendment?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I do make that unanimous consent request.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to modifying the Kennedy 
amendment by the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Lazio] ?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Kennedy amendment is so modified.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] as modified.
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there further amendment to title II of 
the bill?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word. Because of the fact that we had anticipated using a full hour on 
the previous amendment, and then a second amendment that I was going to 
offer that had been collapsed, the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. 
Velazquez] has been contacted to come over from her office to offer her 
amendment. She is on her way.
  If we could just discuss, I think, some of the important aspects that 
are contained in this bill, I want to, as I say, commend the chairman 
of the subcommittee, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], for some 
of the provisions which are going to allow this bill to make certain 
that bad public housing will be closed by the Secretary, to get rid of 
bad public housing projects at the same time. I saw the Secretary last 
evening and he mentioned the fact that he has been able to shut down 
over 30,000 individual housing units over the course of the last year. 
For that I think he ought to be commended.
   Mr. Chairman, I understand that my good friend, the gentleman from 
Minnesota [Mr. Vento], has an amendment which he is now prepared to 
offer.


                 amendment no. 36 offered by mr. vento

  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to offer amendment 
No. 36 out of order at this time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] for the consideration of an 
amendment under title V at this stage of the reading of the bill?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Without objection, we will go to 
consideration of the gentleman's amendment without prejudice to other 
title II amendments.
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 36 offered by Mr. Vento: Page 239, line 11, 
     strike ``fiscal year 1996'' and insert ``fiscal years 1997, 
     1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001''.
       Page 239, line 25, after the period insert`` '.''.
       Page 240, strike lines 1 through 4.
       Page 240, strike line 17 and the matter following such line 
     and insert the following:

     ``Sec. 5130 Funding.''


             modification of amendment offered by mr. vento

  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Modification of amendment offered by Mr. Vento: In the 
     instruction for Page 239, line 11, strike out ``, 1998'' and 
     all that follows, and insert ``and 1998''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Minnesota?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Chairman, 
the original discussion I had with the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. 
Vento], and I believe we just had consultations with the staff, is that 
the agreement was to extend this through 1997 and 1998.
  Mr. VENTO. If the gentleman will yield, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman 
is correct.
   Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the Clerk strike out the 
``1999'' as well.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Without objection, that change will be 
considered as read.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of 
objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the modification 
offered by the gentleman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1400

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte). The amendment is so 
modified.

[[Page H4684]]

  Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, May 8, 1996, the 
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] will control 5 minutes, and a 
member opposed will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento].
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, obviously there is an opportunity here with the 
acceptance of the modified Kennedy amendment I am targeting. I thank my 
colleague from New York for his work, and my colleague from 
Massachusetts.
  This is a simple amendment. I think that most Members have come to 
realize the importance of trying to provide funding for activities that 
relate to drug and crime prevention in and around or in public housing. 
Recently we revised that to provide an extension outside of public 
housing. This amendment would do that.
  This COMPAC program is an improved drug elimination program that 
expires under this bill at the end of this fiscal year, 1996. We had 
initially thought that the amendment should be for the full 
authorization of the bill which is years. So I had sought to in fact 
provide a 5-year authorization for COMPAC. But in consultation with the 
subcommittee chairman, he felt that a 2-year authorization would be 
best for this program so that it would be before us in the next 
Congress, and I concurred with that. That is why we modified the 
amendment accordingly.
  I just wanted to explain that I initially had offered this amendment 
in the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, and at that point 
we were not ready to make this particular decision. But this is a very 
successful program in terms of trying to, in fact, expend some monies 
in and around public housing, giving the authorities a regularized 
funding for crime prevention.
  Up until this point it has been based on a categorical program. This 
will put it on a block grant proposal, which I think is appealing to 
the new majority. We had actually proposed and passed this last year in 
the 103d Congress as a block granted program to provide regular funding 
for this important function.
  Under this amendment, 85 percent of the appropriate funds would be 
allocated to the largest housing authorities, with 10 percent going to 
smaller housing authorities, usually in exurban or suburban or rural 
areas, and 5 percent to the private sector and assisted housing areas.
  I just would point out the success of this program in Providence, RI, 
in Denver, CO, certainly in my own district and in other areas.
  This amendment would extend the improved drug elimination program 
that expires under this bill at the end of this fiscal year. The 
current Public Housing Drug Elimination Program [PHDEP] provides a 
range of prevention and education programs to encourage residents to 
join together to fight crime and foster a safe environment for public 
housing youth. The activities it has fostered include: community 
policing, employing security guards, supporting resident patrols, youth 
sports, recreation and education activities as alternative to gang 
activities, and other physical plant improvements like street lights.
  I offered an amendment in the Banking Committee last November to 
continue the drug elimination program and to refocus it to include the 
deterrence of all types of criminal activities in and around public and 
assisted housing; 85 percent of appropriated funds would be allocated 
on a formula basis between those authorities that manage 250 or more 
units of housing to address or prevent significant crime problems. The 
remaining funds are available for competition for smaller housing 
authorities and other federally assisted housing.

  Some may suggest that this program can just as easily be funded out 
of general operating assistance--a position that in the long-run, won't 
hold. Housing authorities are already facing a sort of Hobson's choice 
when it comes to programs and activities. Crime prevention activities 
requires continuity and consistent funding. Crime prevention activities 
help preserve the valuable housing stock and the mission of housing 
authorities. These activities deserve Federal prioritization. Further, 
COMPAC funds would provide credible measurable Federal funds to 
leverage support and other funding from local agencies.
  Let me tell you of some of the successes of this program that our 
communities cannot afford to sacrifice:
  Providence, RI: Used the funds for drug prevention youth activities, 
resident screening, enhanced security with resident crime watches and a 
partnership with local police. Law enforcement activities have 
increased 37 percent over fiscal year 1994 in fiscal year 1995. Total 
arrests have increased more than 85 percent in the same period. 
Property crimes have decreased by 15 percent.
  Denver, CO: Used the fund to establish storefront centers which 
provide visible, nonthreatening activity centers for residents with 
community outreach and other program activities. Centers are staffed by 
residents and police officers. Between 1993 and 1994, there was a 26-
percent reduction in the number of crimes reported in Denver's public 
housing communities.
  St. Paul, MN: The No. 1 large PHA in the country, St. Paul's Public 
Housing Authority, has had an extremely successful and positive 
experience with the drug elimination program. Their A Community 
Outreach Policing Program [ACOP] has built bridges between the 
community and the police department. Lines of communication have opened 
and trust has been built through police officers, interpreters, and 
social workers that have gotten to know housing residents and staff 
through youth activities, crisis intervention, and traditional law 
enforcement efforts. The Boys and Girls Club of St. Paul has offered 
youth activities: field trips, tutoring, computer activities, drug 
education, summer camp, and other counseling and guidance.
  When the St. Paul PHA did not win a grant in the last round of 
funding, the authority had to choose to cuts staff positions in order 
to keep the program that was so well received by the community and 
residents alike. That situation will face each and every authority 
should this program disappear entirely and there are only so many staff 
positions that can be cut before the critical community activities of 
the program are lost or the housing resource is jeopardized by under 
staffing and cut services.
  My colleagues, we heard support for maintaining this program over the 
past year from witnesses testifying on behalf of Indian Housing and 
from the National Assisted Housing Management Association. Evaluations 
of the program, including an in-depth study by Abt Associates, have 
found that many grantees have achieved significant success. The current 
program received $290 million in appropriations from this Congress in 
1996, not because it didn't work, but because it does work.
  If my amendment is enacted, COMPAC will be able to compete for the 
limited appropriations as an authorized program. The program would 
assure that we maintain existing housing stock. We can't maintain just 
physical facilities but instead must address the conduct of those 
within and around public housing. COMPAC should continue to be a 
resource to help communities with crime and drug prevention and to 
improve the quality of life for public housing residents and their 
surrounding neighborhoods.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  With that said, and since there is agreement with the amendment, I 
want to thank my colleagues for their support of it and yield to the 
chairman of the committee.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from 
Minnesota. I appreciate his collaboration, cooperation, and the comity 
in which we were able to work this out to reflect his interest and 
mine, as we go forward to the next 2 or 3 years for a program that has 
funded many important, many worthwhile items that have had the result 
of protecting people in public and assisted housing.
  So it is my pleasure to be able to come to an agreement with the 
gentleman. I am in support of this amendment and I urge my colleagues 
to support it, as well.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Kennedy], the ranking member.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I want to just pay very 
strong compliments to my good friend from Minnesota, Mr. Vento, who has 
just done a tremendous job not only on this amendment but on so many 
housing issues over the year.
  He has led the fight in this House of Representatives over the last 
decade to look out for the homeless people of this country. He knows 
housing law like no other individual in the Congress, and he has paid 
closer attention to some of the goings on over at HUD like no other 
Member of Congress. He deserves tremendous respect from both sides of 
the aisle for the contributions he has made.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. I have had my sucrose 
level for the day now.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask the Members for their support and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment, as

[[Page H4685]]

modified, offered by the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento].
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.


           amendments no. 33 and 34 offered by ms. velazquez

  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendments en bloc.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendments.
  The text of the amendments is as follows:

       Amendments No. 33 and 34 offered by Ms. Velazquez:
       Amendment No. 33: Page 77, strikes lines 6 through 14 and 
     insert the following:
       (A) except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C), shall 
     be an amount determined by the authority, which shall not 
     exceed $25;
       (B) in cases in which a family demonstrates that payment of 
     the amount determined under subparagraph (A) would create 
     financial hardship on the family, as determined pursuant to 
     guidelines which the Secretary shall establish, shall be an 
     amount less than the amount determined under subparagraph (A) 
     (as determined pursuant to such guidelines); and
       (C) in such other circumstances as may be provided by the 
     authority, shall be an amount less than the amount determined 
     under subparagraph (A).
       Amendment No. 34: Page 157, line 10, after the semicolon 
     insert ``and''.
       Page 157, strike lines 11 through 18 and insert the 
     following new paragraph:
       (2)(A) except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C), 
     shall be an amount determined by the authority, which shall 
     not exceed $25;
       (B) in cases in which a family demonstrates that payment of 
     the amount determined under subparagraph (A) would create 
     financial hardship on the family, as determined pursuant to 
     guidelines which the Secretary shall establish, shall be an 
     amount less than the amount determined under subparagraph (A) 
     (as determined pursuant to such guidelines); and
       (C) in such other circumstances as may be provided by the 
     authority, shall be an amount less than the amount determined 
     under subparagraph (A).

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to consideration of the 
amendments during title II?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the Committee on 
Wednesday, May 8, 1996, the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velazquez] 
and a Member opposed each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velazquez].
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2406 is the latest attack on poor families, the 
elderly and children. This bill includes provisions that will threaten 
every American's most basic and human need: Access to affordable 
housing.
  Already across this Nation 5 million households spend more than half 
of their income on rent. This legislation increases that burden by 
imposing a minimum rent of $25 to $50 a month. Although that may not 
seem like much, it is a fortune for many residents who have no income.
  My amendment ensures that needy Americans are not evicted from their 
homes by limiting the maximum rent to no more than $25. Additionally, 
my amendment provides a hardship exemption in cases where poor 
Americans have no income, protecting children, seniors and the disabled 
from being thrown out in the streets. I will urge its adoption.
  The faces behind my amendment are the most vulnerable members of our 
society. More than half are single mothers with children. They are 
families climbing out of homelessness and people trying to lift 
themselves out of a life substance abuse. They are teetering on the 
brink of pulling themselves up. My amendment holds out the hand that 
would steady them.
  In many States a mother and her one child may only receive $130 a 
month to live off of. Keeping in mind how expensive basic living 
necessities like diapers, toothpaste or even soap are, a $50 minimum 
rent is simply too high for many poor families to afford.
  The consequences of today's actions will create an underclass of 
people too poor to even live in public housing. Worse yet, with 
reduction for homeless shelters, the poorest of the poor will have no 
place to go. For a Nation that is supposed to be a leader in the 
industrial world, that is appealing and disgraceful.
  Mr. Chairman, we are asking too high a price from the poor. I call on 
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for the Velazquez 
amendment and end this cruel measure.


                         parliamentary inquiry

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, what was filed as the two of Ms. 
Velazquez' amendments are considered en bloc, am I correct?
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. They are en bloc.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. That is the Chair's understanding.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I thank the Chair.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does the gentleman from New York rise in 
opposition?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] is 
recognized for 10 minutes.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for her concern 
and her attention to this issue.
  Let me begin by saying that for those people who are so poor that 
they cannot afford a minimum $25 rent, we have provided in our 
manager's amendment a hardship exemption. We worked this issue out with 
the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Henry 
Cisneros, to allow a safety valve for people who are so poor that they 
cannot even afford $25.
  But Mr. Chairman, we believe that everybody should pay something. We 
believe that is part of transforming a society. We believe that within 
the confines of allowing for hardship exemptions, that we ought to have 
minimum rents.
  As a matter of fact, current law as passed through the last 
appropriations, the omnibus appropriations bill, fixes the need for 
minimum rents. What we do here is to go beyond that and allow for a 
hardship exemption.
  We also suggested the hardship exemption ought to be controlled by 
local communities, not by the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development hundreds of miles away in a centralized bureaucratic 
building where he is going to decide how much of an exemption people 
should have.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I just want to make an inquiry, in terms of the 
manager's amendment, where in your amendment does it state that it will 
require the housing authority to grant an exemption?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I will reclaim my time and I 
will try and identify that part as I continue to speak here.
  As I said, Mr. Chairman, everybody should pay something but we should 
also protect the most vulnerable people. We have done that through a 
number of different ways, including working with members of the 
minority and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Gonzalez], and making sure 
that any possible minimum rent increase is phased in, so there are 
phase-in protections.
  But we cannot transform a culture if we expect people to live without 
any reciprocity, without paying anything at all. We expect everybody to 
pay minimum rents because that pool of money helps provide more 
opportunities for more people to have access to apartments.
  The more that we say that people should not have to do anything, 
should not have any minimum rent, whether it is $25 or $30 or whether 
through hardship exemption it is reduced to $10 or $5, the more than we 
are continuing to perpetuate a culture that suggests that people should 
be able to get, Americans should be able to get an apartment for 
virtually nothing, not pay the utility bills, not pay for any rent, 
live for nothing and not have to budget anything, having to budget for 
an apartment, having to budget for their household, having to budget 
for, if they are a home owner, if they were lucky enough to be a home 
owner, is part of transforming themselves and moving back into the work 
force.
  We are trying to do that through minimum rents which we think are 
very modest, with exceptional hardship exemptions, with the ability to 
transition and phase in.
  For the purpose of trying to respond to the gentlewoman's concern, I 
draw

[[Page H4686]]

her attention to page 33 of the manager's amendment, beginning on the 
bottom of the page, lines 24 and 25, all the way through page 34, line 
10 or 11. If the gentlewoman would like, if it is helpful, I will read 
from that if she does not have that.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I could read it to the gentleman, but it does not say 
that it will require. It says that the housing authority may. That does 
not mean that we require them to grant an exemption, and that is 
precisely the difference between my amendment and the manager's 
amendment. Mine requires the housing authority top grant an exemption, 
yours gives them an option.

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Reclaiming my time, I suggest that a housing 
must grant an exemption to everybody, which I believe is what the 
gentlewoman is saying, is to completely eliminate the meaning of having 
a minimum rent. We are saying that in certain circumstances that the 
housing authority will have the discretion to provide for an exemption.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  I do agree with the chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and 
Community Opportunity that everybody in public housing should pay. My 
amendment does not relate to that. My amendment, what it does is to 
protect those most vulnerable who do not have any money to pay, and we 
need to protect those people from being thrown out in the streets.
  My amendment requires the housing authority to grant an exemption. 
Your amendment does not provide for that, and that is why we need to 
protect those people who are disabled, who do not have any money, who 
are coming from homelessness, from being thrown out in the streets.

                              {time}  1415

  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois 
[Mr. Jackson].
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
Velazquez amendment, which sets a minimum of zero to $25 and a waiver 
for our Nation's most vulnerable who are caught in situations of 
extreme difficulty or hardship.
  We must oppose the idea of minimum rent for those who cannot afford 
it. HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros has already indicated that the 
recently implemented $25 rents are already causing great hardship for 
roughly 175,000 families in public and assisted housing nationwide.
  In my State of Illinois, 2,338 families living in public housing, 
1,377 households that receive certificates and vouchers, and 749 
families living in section 8 housing, for a total of 4,464 families, 
have already been negatively affected with the addition of the $25 
minimum. These are people who are already straining to meet their 
families' needs and who are already sometimes choosing between food, 
medicine, and housing, necessities that we obviously take for granted.
  The chairman of the subcommittee says that everyone should pay 
something. Who can argue with that? Except in my State, that would mean 
an average yearly rental increase of $569, a 32-percent increase, which 
would affect 19,100 public housing families. It would mean an average 
yearly increase of $584, or a 23-percent increase, for 5,100 elderly in 
Illinois. It would mean an average increase of $569, or a 19-percent 
increase for 1,100 disabled people.
  Mr. Chairman, the poor in our Nation do not need any more regulations 
in their minimum rents. They need a livable wage.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for offering this 
critical amendment, and I urge Members to support it.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Baker], a member of the 
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his 
courtesy. I think this amendment really goes to the heart of the debate 
over how public housing should be managed in America. There is probably 
nothing more volatile with working families in America today than the 
thought that someone would be in need and not have a helping hand 
extended. Virtually everybody I talk to says if they are suffering, 
uneducated and want an education, if they are homeless and want to be 
safe in the evenings, we should do those things. All we ask is that 
those individuals extend the courtesy to us of trying to improve their 
own situation.
  But when you have people who live in house trailers, working a 
construction job, and moms at home trying to educate and care for those 
children, and you told them well, I tell you what, since you are having 
a bad month, I am the trailer park operator, I am just going to not 
worry about rent this month even though you are paying $25, where is 
the equity in that family who works to pay taxes from daylight until 
dark, who cares for the kids, who pays for the expenses at the grocery 
stores, who pays the rent on the house trailer, to say to them we are 
going to tax you at higher and higher rates and put money in government 
programs so there will be individuals who cannot read, but will not go 
to school; people without work, who will not get job skills?
  This is a revolution. It is a dramatic change in the philosophy of 
how we are going to try to help people. We are simply going to say you 
try, we will try. If you make the effort, we will give you the 
resources. But no longer are we going to say we are going to tax 
working families in America and provide free housing for individuals, 
with free utilities, with access to food programs, when you will not 
insist that your children remain in school, when dad will not go to a 
drug rehab program, and mom not get out and try to get her own job to 
help.
  In many cases, a small helping hand is not giving more money; it is 
giving opportunity, the opportunity for that individual to regain their 
own dignity and honor, the decency of work, the ability to get an 
education, and to walk in the front door and say to his children, here 
are your tennis shoes, I worked for them, I earned them, and I want to 
give them to you to provide for a better America. It is regrettable, it 
is despicable that we have generations of families who have grown up on 
programs of social dependency, and the only model they have is that dad 
no longer lives at home, mom goes to the mailbox and gets a check, and 
they live in public housing where they literally board themselves in 
behind the door at night because they are afraid of someone breaking in 
during the evening and stealing what little they have.

  We have to find a way to give dignity decency, and safety back to 
these individuals. And the safeguard for those who are worried that 83 
cents a day, $25 a month, is too much a commitment to ask from someone 
who has got a shelter for their family? The housing authority may, upon 
a demonstration of hardship, grant a waiver to that family and not 
require them to pay that onerous 83 cents a day rent, for whatever 
period of time the housing authority determines is necessary. But 
nowhere should we say that anyone is entitled to free housing forever. 
Make some demonstration that you want to improve your personal 
circumstance and we will be there to help you. We will make sure that 
the drug dealers are out of your housing authority. We will make sure 
that your kids have a safe school to go to. We will make sure there is 
a job training program available to you, so you can get that job. But 
America is saying to us, stop throwing money away at faster and faster 
rates because we are not helping, we are in fact making it worse.
  Ms. VELAQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. I just would like to say that what is despicable is a single 
mother with one child in Louisiana, who gets a $130 check from AFDC, is 
thrown out into the street, and the gentleman cannot understand what 
$25 represents for her and her child.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the 
gentlewoman yielding me time. I stand in strong support of her 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I think it has been interesting to listen to some of 
the plantation owner mentality we are hearing from the other side of 
the aisle. The notion that these individuals are somehow desiring to 
stay in the circumstances that they are in by their

[[Page H4687]]

own choice represents a complete misunderstanding of who qualifies for 
minimum rents. We already have, by virtue of the fact that we have the 
Brooke amendment, which no longer exists, deleted. What happens is all 
of those incentives that the Republicans so very much want to whip the 
poor into shape are now in place in the housing bill.
  What this says is that if you have high medical expenses, if you 
happen to have a sick child, if you happen to have some extraordinary 
circumstances where you do not have the funds to be able to even pay a 
minimum rent, the 30 percent is not good enough. We are going to come 
back in and we are going to hammer not the very poor, but the very, 
very poor.
  That is what the heart of this amendment does. This amendment tries 
to say that there is a group of very, very poor people. I understand 
that maybe the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Baker] does not know very 
many of them, but the truth of the matter is that there are others in 
this Chamber, the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velaquez] among them, 
that work with these individuals each and every day, and she deserves 
and they deserve a right to get the housing that they need.
  Ms. VELAQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
New York [Mr. Owens].
  (Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether the gentleman here 
comes from a farm State or not, but the people in my district want to 
know how you have a situation where farmers' home loan mortgages are 
forgiven. Over a 5-year period, the Department of Agriculture forgave 
$11 billion; $11 billion were forgiven in farmers' home loan mortgages. 
They want to know how our Government does such things, and then worries 
about people who do not have $25.
  I met a lady just last Monday, I have known her for a long time, I 
did not know she was in such hard times, 85 years old she is. She has 
always been a tenacious entrepreneur all her life. She has never worked 
for anybody else. She does not have Social Security. She once owned a 
home, she lost it. She once had two children, they are dead now. 
Eighty-five years old. She has no income. Zero income.
  When we say 30 percent of your income, the Brooke amendment we fought 
for, 30 percent, 30 percent of nothing is nothing, of course. But most 
of us, nobody in this Congress pays 30 percent of their income for 
rent. Nobody pays 30 percent of their income for rent. That is enough 
of a standard that is imposed on the poor that nobody else has to live 
up to.
  Certainly anybody who has come to the point where they absolutely 
have no income, and there are many people who, for very good reasons, 
they are not drunkards or dope addicts, there is nothing wrong with 
them, they are hard-working Americans, at the ends of their lives, down 
and out, they need some help.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the United States Housing Act 
(H.R. 2406). This bill would, in effect, lead to the dismantling of the 
Federal Government's role in providing safe, decent, and affordable 
housing to its citizens. H.R. 2406 does a good job of corroding what 
the Republican leadership in the other chamber has termed, ``one of the 
last bastions of socialism''--public housing. Agriculture, which 
funnels billions of dollars to agribusiness, is neve seen as socialism; 
but now public housing is bastardized as the last bastion of socialism. 
Using such euphemisms as local flexibility, income diversity, and 
resident security, H.R. 2406 would shamefully take from our poorer and 
more vulnerable citizens the basic right to sleep comfortably at night. 
I support many of the amendments offered today, including the Velaquez 
amendment.
  My Republican colleagues need to be reminded that U.S. public housing 
policy is embarrassingly inequitable. Despite the low-income housing 
needs of this country, only 20 percent of housing outlays is allocated 
for providing housing assistance and subsidies to families in need. The 
other 80 percent is tax expenditures enjoyed by wealthier families who 
are able to deduct mortgage interest, property taxes, capital gains, 
and other investor homeowner perks from their tax liabilities. The 
result of this unjust, inequitable housing policy: Over 70 percent of 
the families who qualify for low-income housing assistance, are not 
receiving it. This means that the richest Nation in the world has 
allowed, and will continue to allow, more than 20 million families to 
simply deal with substandard housing conditions with serious building 
code violations such as dangerous electrical wiring and inadequate 
plumbing; exorbitant rents; and even homelessness.
  H.R. 2406 reflects a blatant disregard for those Americans who truly 
need assistance. Using income diversity as a goal, the manager's 
amendment would reserve only 30 percent of public housing units for 
those earning 30 percent or less of the median income in an area. Under 
current law, 85 percent of public housing units must be provided to 
low-income families. In most communities, 30 percent of the area's 
median income is roughly equivalent to the poverty line. However, the 
Republican solution to diversify the public-housing population is too 
extreme. To reserve such a small percentage of public housing to our 
poorest families, when they need it the most, is unforgivable. Again, 
the affront to the less-fortunate is evident in this Congress.
  H.R. 2406 would further eliminate the caps on rent paid by seniors 
and working families. The Brooke amendment, which sets a maximum 
percentage that tenants could be charged for rent, 30 percent of 
adjusted gross income, would be abolished. The manager's amendment 
would maintain the 30 percent cap only for current elderly and disabled 
tenants, and current residents earning 30 percent or less of an area's 
median income. It is clearly insufficient. Any elderly or disabled 
person who is lucky enough to secure public housing after enactment of 
this bill, would be forced to sacrifice food, medicine, and other 
necessities for rent.
  Furthermore, H.R. 2406 would allow housing authorities to set minimum 
rents at $25 to $50 a month, without any exception for hardship cases. 
To individuals who make more than $100,000 per year, a minimum rent of 
$25 to $50 may seem reasonable. Such reasoning illustrates how far 
removed from reality supporters of this bill really are from the people 
they represent. For the State of New York, a $50 minimum rent would 
affect 900 households, and a $25 minimum rent would affect 1,828 
households. For homeless families utilizing special rent assistance, 
but who have no income, this minimum rent would be a hardship. For 
large families receiving AFDC in low-benefit States, this minimum rent 
would be a hardship. For families, elderly and disabled households 
awaiting determination of eligibility for public benefits, this minimum 
would be a hardship. Yes, many of the people that we represent have 
little to no income at all; and this Congress should be compassionate 
enough to grant these families some leeway.

  Support the Valazquez amendment to set a minimum rent of $0 to $25; 
and to allow for a waiver in cases of extreme hardship.
  And in an interesting twist, H.R. 2406 would mandate that all able-
bodied, non elderly individuals work in some capacity for the local 
housing authority. In a despicable regard for the value of the work 
that such persons may perform, H.R. 2406 would exempt these workers' 
wages from the Davis-Bacon prevailing-wage requirement. The assurance 
that a job is a real job that pays a living wage and provides certain 
benefits is on the attack, again. I ask my colleagues to stand up to 
this typical Republican contempt for the American work ethic.
  Last year, some Republicans promised to mount an aggressive campaign 
to eliminate the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. 
Recognizing that such action would be politically damaging, this year, 
the Republicans have weakened the agency's responsibilities, and 
eliminated numerous federal controls. Thus, they have defeated the 
economic, social, and historical purpose of the Federal Government's 
direct role in developing affordable housing. Yes, HUD will still be 
around, but 60 years of it's work will have been ignored. H.R. 2406 has 
little to do with ensuring housing for the low income. I challenge my 
colleagues to vote against this apparent disdain for nonwealthy 
Americans; and support the Valazquez amendment.
  Ms. VALAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Florida [Ms. Brown].
  (Ms. BROWN of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
Valazquez amendment, which sets a minimum rent of up to $25, and allows 
for a waiver to be granted in cases of extreme hardship.
  In Florida, a $50 minimum rent will affect 2.100 households. This 
would mean an average annual rent increase of $340. That may not seem 
like a lot of money to some of my wealthy colleagues in Congress, but 
for some of our Nation's public housing residents, that could mean the 
difference between buying a child a warm winter coat, or buying that 
same child the correct-size shoes. This truly is a matter of having 
food on the table, clothes on their backs, and a roof over their heads.

[[Page H4688]]

  Public housing in our Nation is the last resort for many of our 
citizens. It is the final safety net before low-income folks end up 
homeless and on the street. If we can make some responsible and 
appropriate changes in the current law to improve public housing, by 
all means, let's do it.
  Many of the people who reside in public housing are low-income 
veterans. Forty-one percent of residents in public and assisted housing 
are seniors or are disabled. The remainder are families with children.
  This Congress should be doing everything it can to provide safe, 
affordable, units for our Nation's low-income citizens. That's the kind 
thing to do. That's the compassionate thing to do. That's the right 
thing to do. Support the amendment.
  Ms. VALAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee].
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the 
gentlewoman from New York for her wisdom.
  Mr. Chairman, I heard my colleague on the other side of the aisle say 
this is a revolution. It is a revolution, and the only wounded and 
dying are poor people. It is well known and the Texas Low Income 
Housing Coalition and the Border Low-Income Housing Coalition has sent 
me some very interesting facts. Nationwide public housing residents 
have extremely low incomes, averaging only 17 percent of the median. 
The rest are zero. We recognize that it is important to have affordable 
housing, to have mixed housing units where there are affordable housing 
units living among those very poor. If you do not take this amendment 
that the gentlewoman has offered, in Texas alone you will be affecting 
18,200 households. I did not say people, I said 18,200 households. To 
the least of our brothers and sisters, can we not say if you have zero 
income, if you worked all your life, if all has come down crashing on 
you, you have the opportunity to have housing?
  What is the look on our faces when we see homeless persons? We ask 
the question, ``What have they done wrong? Why don't they get a job?'' 
We do not know their circumstances. And the reason we have homeless 
persons is because there are 15,000 of them waiting on lists in Texas 
and other places around the country to get into public housing. There 
is a need to ensure that the poorest among us can pay a minimal amount, 
have a clean house, a clean place to live, and, yes, they will keep it 
up. I support the gentlewoman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment.
  Affordable housing fills a void in our society for our less fortunate 
citizens who would not have homes without subsidies. H.R. 2406 is 
seriously lacking as it is currently written. It kills off the Brooke 
amendment which insured the affordability of public housing.
  In my State of Texas, as the bill is currently written, if a minimum 
rent of $50 was charged it would affect 18,200 households, who would be 
hit by an average annual rent increase of $267--this is a lot for very 
poor people. A minimum rent of $25 would affect 15,749 households, for 
those using certificates, vouchers, and project-based section 8 
housing, and is far more terrible.
  The elitist of this body would say that $25 or $50 is not very much 
to ask for a place to live, but those of us who know the plight of the 
poor in our States, cities, and districts know better.

         Texas Low Income Housing Coalition and Border Low Income 
           Housing Coalition
                               Austin and Laredo, TX, May 6, 1996.
     Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Lee: Your vote this Wednesday on the 
     ``U.S. Housing Act of 1995'' will set a new course for 
     federal public housing in this country. We seek your support 
     for preservation of the Brooke Amendment and the enactment of 
     strong low income targets when this bill moves to the floor 
     of the House. We ask that you vote against the provisions of 
     H.R. 2406 which repeal the Brooke Amendment.
       H.R. 2406 repeals the Brooke Amendment for all residents of 
     public housing and recipients of Section 8 tenant based 
     rental assistance. This repeal is a dramatic departure from 
     25 years of housing policy during which time a tenant's rent 
     contribution has been linked to the tenant's income. Since 
     1981 public housing and rental assistance programs have set 
     tenant rent at 30% of the resident's adjusted gross income. 
     The House bill repeals this important protection and puts in 
     its place language which will permit public housing 
     management agencies to set rents as they deem it appropriate.
       Nationwide public housing residents have extremely low 
     incomes averaging only 17% of the median income of the area 
     where they live. Contrary to what proponents of repeal might 
     suggest, the Brooke Amendment did not cause poverty in public 
     housing. Our organizations strongly oppose the repeal of the 
     Brooke Amendment and the eradication of meaningful income 
     targets because of the harm this would do to low income 
     Texans.
       Changes in the occupancy of public housing occurred long 
     before the enactment of the Brooke Amendment in 1970. Social 
     changes in the 1950s and 1960s caused major alterations in 
     the prevalence of very poor families living in public 
     housing. This was compounded by the tendency of localities to 
     situate projects in poorer, isolated or otherwise undesirable 
     areas. The people left behind in the public housing projects 
     after the demographic shifts of the post-war era were largely 
     the long term poor. A federal cap on rents at 30% of income 
     is just as important today, to ensure that no family is too 
     poor to live in public housing. There is no market rate 
     housing available to families with such low incomes.
       H.R. 2406 would also allocate only 25% of new admissions to 
     families with incomes below 30% of median. The majority of 
     available units could go to families earning up to 80% of the 
     area median. We also oppose this provision. All of the 
     Section 8 rental assistance subsidy could be targeted to 
     families up to 80% of the area median. According to HUD's 
     list of median incomes for 1996, 80% of the median for a 
     family of four in Dallas, Houston and San Antonio is $38,650, 
     $36,800 and $28,800 respectively. The government does not 
     need to provide public housing to families with incomes this 
     high. That job should be left to the private market.
       The resolution of these two fundamental issues will 
     determine who these units will serve for the foreseeable 
     future. Your support for a 30% cap on rents and appropriate 
     income targeting will be crucial to preserving these 
     subsidized housing opportunities for the Texas families that 
     so urgently need them.
           Sincerely,
     John Henneberger,
       Chair, Texas Low Income Housing Coalition.
     Rafael Torres,
       Convenor, Border Low Income Housing Coalition.

  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, the poor across this country have already been asked to 
pay an extraordinarily high price. Essential programs like Medicare, 
Medicaid, and Workforce have all been put on the chopping block. At a 
time when society's most vulnerable are seeing a reduction in their 
benefits, an increasing amount of rent to pay is cruel, heartless and 
shameful.
  If we do not adopt the Velazquez amendment, thousands of our Nation's 
poorest families will no longer be able to afford public housing. For 
the most part, they will be mothers and children, women and children, 
that will be thrown into the streets with no place to go.
  We here in Congress should not be creating this underclass. It is a 
shame that what we are doing here today is creating an underclass of 
poor people that cannot afford even to live in public housing. If we do 
not want the poorest of the poor to live in public housing, just say 
it. Stop playing games, and let us end this charade.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remainder of 
my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I will tell my colleagues what is cruel, what is 
heartless, and what is shameful. It is defending the status quo. It is 
continuing to condemn Americans throughout the country, especially in 
our inner-cities, to continue life in poverty, despair, and 
disillusion.
  We are trying to transform our society, Mr. Chairman. We are trying 
to do that in a compassionate way. We understand this will not happen 
overnight. We understand this bill will not change the problems that 
have made these challenges so complex and sometimes overwhelming with 
the strike of a pen. But it begins the process of progress, of 
returning local control, of encouraging work and providing work 
incentives, of providing for mixed-income populations in public and 
assisted housing so that the working poor will no longer be taxed, will 
no longer be punished, and they will be permitted to stay in public 
housing.

[[Page H4689]]

  Mr. Chairman, we here are saying that it is not the Secretary of the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development sitting in his office in 
Washington who will decide what an exemption will be, although we 
provide for an exemption, Mr. Chairman. We say that every family should 
pay at least a minimum rent of $25 to $50, and that is the current law. 
There is already a minimum rent in place through the appropriations 
process. What we are adding to that, Mr. Chairman, is an escape valve, 
a hardship exemption so that those Americans who cannot even make the 
rent of $25 for their family's apartment will be able to appeal to 
their local community and be able to receive an exemption, an 
exception, so that rent can be lowered or completely waived.
  We know that there are some Americans out there that will not be able 
to make the minimum rent. That is why we have the hardship exemption 
that was worked out with the administration. But we are going well 
beyond that. We are trying to eliminate the concept of having the 
minimum rent, and having the minimum rent is as basic as eliminating 
the work disincentives in the Brooke amendment. I urge a ``no'' vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired. The question is on the amendments 
offered by the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velazquez].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BAKER of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and 
pending that I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, further proceedings on the 
amendments offered by the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Velazquez] 
will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
  Are there further amendments to title II?
  If not, the Clerk will designate title III.
  The text of title III is as follows:
TITLE III--CHOICE-BASED RENTAL HOUSING AND HOMEOWNERSHIP ASSISTANCE FOR 
                          LOW-INCOME FAMILIES
                         Subtitle A--Allocation

     SEC. 301. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE HOUSING ASSISTANCE AMOUNTS.

       To the extent that amounts to carry out this title are made 
     available, the Secretary may enter into contracts with local 
     housing and management authorities for each fiscal year to 
     provide housing assistance under this title.

     SEC. 302. CONTRACTS WITH LHMA'S.

       (a) Condition of Assistance.--The Secretary may provide 
     amounts under this title to a local housing and management 
     authority for a fiscal year only if the Secretary has entered 
     into a contract under this section with the local housing and 
     management authority, under which the Secretary shall provide 
     such authority with amounts (in the amount of the allocation 
     for the authority determined pursuant to section 304) for 
     housing assistance under this title for low-income families.
       (b) Use for Housing Assistance.--A contract under this 
     section shall require a local housing and management 
     authority to use amounts provided under this title to provide 
     housing assistance in any manner authorized under this title.
       (c) Annual Obligation of Authority.--A contract under this 
     title shall provide amounts for housing assistance for 1 
     fiscal year covered by the contract.
       (d) Enforcement of Housing Quality Requirements.--Each 
     contract under this section shall require the local housing 
     and management authority administering assistance provided 
     under the contract--
       (1) to ensure compliance, under each housing assistance 
     payments contract entered into pursuant to the contract under 
     this section, with the provisions of the housing assistance 
     payments contract included pursuant to section 351(c)(4); and
       (2) to establish procedures for assisted families to notify 
     the authority of any noncompliance with such provisions.

     SEC. 303. ELIGIBILITY OF LHMA'S FOR ASSISTANCE AMOUNTS.

       The Secretary may provide amounts available for housing 
     assistance under this title to a local housing and management 
     authority only if--
       (1) the authority has submitted a local housing management 
     plan to the Secretary for such fiscal year and applied to the 
     Secretary for such assistance;
       (2) the plan has been determined to comply with the 
     requirements under section 107 and the Secretary has not 
     notified the authority that the plan fails to comply with 
     such requirements;
       (3) the authority is accredited under section 433 by the 
     Housing Foundation and Accreditation Board;
       (5) no member of the board of directors or other governing 
     body of the authority, or the executive director, has been 
     convicted of a felony; and
       (6) the authority has not been disqualified for assistance 
     pursuant to subtitle B of title IV.

     SEC. 304. ALLOCATION OF AMOUNTS.

       (a) Formula Allocation.--
       (1) In general.--When amounts for assistance under this 
     title are first made available for reservation, after 
     reserving amounts in accordance with subsection (c) and 
     section 109, the Secretary shall allocate such amounts, only 
     among local housing and management authorities meeting the 
     requirements under this title to receive such assistance, on 
     the basis of a formula that is established in accordance with 
     paragraph (2) and based upon appropriate criteria to reflect 
     the needs of different States, areas, and communities, using 
     the most recent data available from the Bureau of the Census 
     of the Department of Commerce and the comprehensive housing 
     affordability strategy under section 105 of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (or any consolidated 
     plan incorporating such strategy) for the applicable 
     jurisdiction. The Secretary may establish a minimum 
     allocation amount, in which case only the local housing and 
     management authorities that, pursuant to the formula, are 
     provided an amount equal to or greater than the minimum 
     allocation amount, shall receive an allocation.
       (2) Regulations.--The formula under this subsection shall 
     be established by regulation issued by the Secretary. 
     Notwithstanding sections 563(a) and 565(a) of title 5, United 
     States Code, any proposed regulation containing such formula 
     shall be issued pursuant to a negotiated rulemaking procedure 
     under subchapter of chapter 5 of such title and the Secretary 
     shall establish a negotiated rulemaking committee for 
     development of any such proposed regulations.
       (b) Allocation Considerations.--
       (1) Limitation on reallocation for another state.--Any 
     amounts allocated for a State or areas or communities within 
     a State that are not likely to be used within the fiscal year 
     for which the amounts are provided shall not be reallocated 
     for use in another State, unless the Secretary determines 
     that other areas or communities within the same State (that 
     are eligible for amounts under this title) cannot use the 
     amounts within the same fiscal year.
       (2) Effect of receipt of tenant-based assistance for 
     disabled families.--The Secretary may not consider the 
     receipt by a local housing and management authority of 
     assistance under section 811(b)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act, or the amount received, in 
     approving amounts under this title for the authority or in 
     determining the amount of such assistance to be provided to 
     the authority.
       (3) Exemption from formula allocation.--The formula 
     allocation requirements of subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     any assistance under this title that is approved in 
     appropriation Acts for uses that the Secretary determines are 
     incapable of geographic allocation, including amendments of 
     existing housing assistance payments contracts, renewal of 
     such contracts, assistance to families that would otherwise 
     lose assistance due to the decision of the project owner to 
     prepay the project mortgage or not to renew the housing 
     assistance payments contract, assistance to prevent 
     displacement or to provide replacement housing in connection 
     with the demolition or disposition of public and Indian 
     housing, assistance for relocation from public housing, 
     assistance in connection with protection of crime witnesses, 
     assistance for conversion from leased housing contracts under 
     section 23 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as in 
     effect before the enactment of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974), and assistance in support of the 
     property disposition and loan management functions of the 
     Secretary.
       (c) Set-Aside for Indian Housing Assistance.--The Secretary 
     shall allocate, in a manner determined by the Secretary, a 
     portion of the amounts made available in each fiscal year for 
     assistance under this title for assistance for Indian housing 
     authorities.
       (d) Recapture of Amounts.--
       (1) Authority.--In each fiscal year, from any budget 
     authority made available for assistance under this title or 
     section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as in 
     effect before the enactment of this Act) that is obligated to 
     a local housing and management authority but remains 
     unobligated by the authority upon the expiration of the 8-
     month period beginning upon the initial availability of such 
     amounts for obligation by the authority, the Secretary may 
     deobligate an amount, as determined by the Secretary, not 
     exceeding 50 percent of such unobligated amount.
       (2) Use.--The Secretary may reallocate and transfer any 
     amounts deobligated under paragraph (1) only to local housing 
     and management authorities in areas that the Secretary 
     determines have received less funding than other areas, based 
     on the relative needs of all areas.

     SEC. 305. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES.

       (a) Fee for Ongoing Costs of Administration.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish fees for the 
     costs of administering the choice-based housing assistance 
     program under this title.
       (2) Fiscal year 1996.--
       (A) Calculation.--For fiscal year 1996, the fee for each 
     month for which a dwelling unit is covered by a contract for 
     assistance under this title shall be--
       (i) in the case of a local housing and management authority 
     that, on an annual basis, is administering a program for not 
     more than 600 dwelling units, 6.5 percent of the base amount; 
     and
       (ii) in the case of an authority that, on an annual basis, 
     is administering a program for more than 600 dwelling units--

       (I) for the first 600 units, 6.5 percent of the base 
     amount; and
       (II) for any additional dwelling units under the program, 
     6.0 percent of the base amount.

[[Page H4690]]

       (B) Base amount.--For purposes of this paragraph, the base 
     amount shall be the higher of--
       (i) the fair market rental established under section 8(c) 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect 
     immediately before the date of the enactment of this Act) for 
     fiscal year 1993 for a 2-bedroom existing rental dwelling 
     unit in the market area of the authority, and
       (ii) the amount that is the lesser of (I) such fair market 
     rental for fiscal year 1994 or (II) 103.5 percent of the 
     amount determined under clause (i),

     adjusted based on changes in wage data or other objectively 
     measurable data that reflect the costs of administering the 
     program, as determined by the Secretary. The Secretary may 
     require that the base amount be not less than a minimum 
     amount and not more than a maximum amount.
       (3) Subsequent fiscal years.--For subsequent fiscal years, 
     the Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register, 
     for each geographic area, establishing the amount of the fee 
     that would apply for local housing and management authorities 
     administering the program, based on changes in wage data or 
     other objectively measurable data that reflect the costs of 
     administering the program, as determined by the Secretary.
       (4) Increase.--The Secretary may increase the fee if 
     necessary to reflect the higher costs of administering small 
     programs and programs operating over large geographic areas.
       (b) Fee for Preliminary Expenses.--The Secretary shall also 
     establish reasonable fees (as determined by the Secretary) 
     for--
       (1) the costs of preliminary expenses, in the amount of 
     $500, for a local housing and management authority, but only 
     in the first year that the authority administers a choice-
     based housing assistance program under this title, and only 
     if, immediately before the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the authority was not administering a tenant-based rental 
     assistance program under the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 (as in effect immediately before such date of 
     enactment), in connection with its initial increment of 
     assistance received;
       (2) the costs incurred in assisting families who experience 
     difficulty (as determined by the Secretary) in obtaining 
     appropriate housing under the programs; and
       (3) extraordinary costs approved by the Secretary.
       (c) Transfer of Fees in Cases of Concurrent Geographical 
     Jurisdiction.--
       (1) In general.--In each fiscal year, if any local housing 
     and management authority provides tenant-based rental 
     assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 or housing assistance under this title on behalf of a 
     family who uses such assistance for a dwelling unit that is 
     located within the jurisdiction of such authority but is also 
     within the jurisdiction of another local housing and 
     management authority, the Secretary shall require the 
     authority issuing such assistance to transfer the amount 
     provided under paragraph (2) to the closest eligible 
     authority that is approved to administer the program and is 
     not designated as a troubled authority under section 
     431(a)(2)(D).
       (2) Administrative fee.--The amount provided under this 
     paragraph is, with respect to each such family described in 
     subsection (a)--
       (A) in the case of assistance under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, the amount received under section 
     8(q) of such Act that is attributable to the administrative 
     fee under such section for such family for the portion of the 
     fiscal year during which such family resides in the dwelling 
     unit described in paragraph (1); and
       (B) in the case of housing assistance under this title, an 
     amount of the grant amounts received under this title that is 
     equal to the administrative fee for a family established 
     under section 305 for such fiscal year, as adjusted based on 
     the portion of the fiscal year during which such family 
     resides in the dwelling unit described in paragraph (1).

     SEC. 306. AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated for 
     providing local housing and management authorities with 
     housing assistance under this title, $1,861,668,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.
       (b) Assistance for Disabled Families.--
       (1) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated, for choice-based housing assistance under 
     this title to be used in accordance with paragraph (2), 
     $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1997, and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each subsequent fiscal year.
       (2) Use.--The Secretary shall provide amounts made 
     available under paragraph (1) to local housing and management 
     authorities only for use to provide housing assistance under 
     this title for nonelderly disabled families (including such 
     families relocating pursuant to designation of a public 
     housing development under section 227 and other nonelderly 
     disabled families who have applied to the authority for 
     housing assistance under this title).
       (3) Allocation of amounts.--The Secretary shall allocate 
     and provide amounts made available under paragraph (1) to 
     local housing and management authorities as the Secretary 
     determines appropriate based on the relative levels of need 
     among the authorities for assistance for families described 
     in paragraph (1).

     SEC. 307. CONVERSION OF SECTION 8 ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--Any amounts made available to a local 
     housing and management authority under a contract for annual 
     contributions for assistance under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect before the enactment 
     of this Act) that have not been obligated for such assistance 
     by such authority before such enactment shall be used to 
     provide assistance under this title, except to the extent the 
     Secretary determines such use is inconsistent with existing 
     commitments.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any 
     amounts made available under a contract for housing 
     constructed or substantially rehabilitated pursuant to 
     section 8(b)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     in effect before October 1, 1983.
   Subtitle B--Choice-Based Housing Assistance for Eligible Families

     SEC. 321. ELIGIBLE FAMILIES AND PREFERENCES FOR ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Low-Income Requirement.--Housing assistance under this 
     title may be provided only on behalf of a family that--
       (1) at the time that such assistance is initially provided 
     on behalf of the family, is determined by the local housing 
     and management authority to be a low-income family; or
       (2) qualifies to receive such assistance under any other 
     provision of Federal law.
       (b) Reviews of Family Incomes.--
       (1) In general.--Reviews of family incomes for purposes of 
     this title shall be subject to the provisions of section 904 
     of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act 
     of 1988 and shall be conducted upon the initial provision of 
     housing assistance for the family and thereafter not less 
     than annually.
       (2) Procedures.--Each local housing and management 
     authority administering housing assistance under this title 
     shall establish procedures that are appropriate and necessary 
     to ensure that income data provided to the authority and 
     owners by families applying for or receiving housing 
     assistance from the authority is complete and accurate.
       (c) Preferences for Assistance.--
       (1) Authority to establish.--Any local housing and 
     management authority that receives amounts under this title 
     may establish a system for making housing assistance 
     available on behalf of eligible families that provides 
     preference for such assistance to eligible families having 
     certain characteristics.
       (2) Content.--Each system of preferences established 
     pursuant to this subsection shall be based upon local housing 
     needs and priorities, as determined by the local housing and 
     management authority using generally accepted data sources, 
     including any information obtained pursuant to an opportunity 
     for public comment as provided under section 107(e) or under 
     the requirements applicable to comprehensive housing 
     affordability strategy for the relevant jurisdiction.
       (d) Treatment of Assisted Families Who Move Out of 
     Jurisdiction of LHMA.--
       (1) In general.--A local housing and management authority 
     may, in the discretion of the agency and notwithstanding any 
     preferences under subsection (c), provide housing assistance 
     for eligible families (or a certain number of such families) 
     who have moved into the jurisdiction of the authority and on 
     whose behalf such assistance was being provided, at the time 
     of such move, by the authority for the jurisdiction from 
     which the family moved.
       (2) Assistance under 1937 act.--Notwithstanding any 
     provision of this title, a local housing and management 
     authority who, upon the date of the enactment of this Act, is 
     providing assistance under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 for a family pursuant to subsection (r) 
     of such section shall continue to provide such assistance (or 
     housing assistance under this title) in accordance with such 
     section until the local housing and management authority for 
     the jurisdiction to which the family moved provides housing 
     assistance on behalf of the family pursuant to paragraph (1) 
     of this subsection or otherwise or the authority terminates 
     such assistance for other reasons.
       (e) Treatment of Families on Waiting List Who Move Out of 
     Jurisdiction of LHMA.--
       (1) Move to jurisdiction with open waiting list.--Except as 
     provided in paragraph (2), if an eligible family (A) applies 
     for choice-based housing assistance while residing within the 
     jurisdiction of a local housing and management authority, (B) 
     moves outside of the jurisdiction of the authority before 
     such assistance is provided on behalf of the family, and (C) 
     applies for housing assistance from the local housing and 
     management authority for the jurisdiction to which the family 
     moves, such authority shall consider the application to have 
     been made upon the date that the family applied for 
     assistance with the authority in whose jurisdiction the 
     family previously resided.
       (2) Move to jurisdiction with closed waiting list.--If the 
     local housing and management authority for the jurisdiction 
     to which an eligible family described in paragraph (1) moves 
     is not generally accepting applications for housing 
     assistance, such jurisdiction shall accept the application of 
     such family but shall treat the application as having been 
     made on the date on which it is actually made. 
     Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, a local housing and 
     management authority may (at the discretion of the authority) 
     provide that any application by an eligible family whose move 
     to the jurisdiction not accepting applications for assistance 
     was made because of a verifiable employment opportunity shall 
     be subject to the provisions of paragraph (1).
       (f) Authority to Deny Assistance to Certain Families Who 
     Move.--A local housing and management authority may establish 
     criteria for denying housing assistance, and pursuant to such 
     criteria may deny such assistance, to an eligible family who 
     has moved from the jurisdiction of another authority, who 
     received housing assistance from the authority for such other 
     jurisdiction, and whose assistance was terminated by such 
     other authority for reasons other than income ineligibility 
     or the change of residence.
       (g) Loss of Assistance Upon Termination of Tenancy.--A 
     local housing and management

[[Page H4691]]

     authority may, to the extent such policies are described in 
     the local housing management plan of the authority and 
     included in the lease for a dwelling unit, establish policies 
     providing that an assisted family whose tenancy is terminated 
     for serious violations of the terms or conditions of the 
     lease shall--
       (1) lose any right to continued housing assistance; and
       (2) immediately become ineligible for housing assistance 
     under this title for a period not exceeding 3 years from the 
     date of the termination of the housing assistance.
       (h) Confidentiality for Victims of Domestic Violence.--A 
     local housing and management authority shall be subject to 
     the restrictions regarding release of information relating to 
     the identity and new residence of any family receiving 
     housing assistance who was a victim of domestic violence that 
     are applicable to shelters pursuant to the Family Violence 
     Prevention and Services Act. The authority shall work with 
     the United States Postal Service to establish procedures 
     consistent with the confidentiality provisions in the 
     Violence Against Women Act of 1994.

     SEC. 322. RESIDENT CONTRIBUTION.

       (a) In General.--An assisted family shall contribute on a 
     monthly basis for the rental of an assisted dwelling unit an 
     amount that the local housing and management authority 
     determines is appropriate with respect to the family. The 
     amount of the minimum monthly rental contribution--
       (1) shall be based upon factors including the adjusted 
     income of the family and any other factors that the authority 
     considers appropriate;
       (2) shall be not less than $25;
       (3) shall include any portion of the cost of utilities for 
     the dwelling unit for which the resident is responsible; and
       (4) may be increased annually by the authority, except that 
     no such annual increase may exceed 10 percent of the amount 
     of the minimum monthly contribution in effect for the 
     preceding year.

     In any case in which the monthly rent charged for a dwelling 
     unit pursuant to the housing assistance payments contract 
     exceeds the payment standard (established under section 353) 
     for the dwelling unit, the assisted family residing in the 
     unit shall contribute (in addition to the amount of the 
     monthly rent contribution otherwise determined under this 
     subsection for such family) such entire excess rental amount.
       (b) Rental Contribution for Elderly and Disabled 
     Families.--In establishing the amount of monthly rental 
     contributions under this section for disabled families and 
     elderly families residing in assisted dwelling units, a local 
     housing and management authority shall waive the 
     applicability of any provision of subsection (a) that may be 
     necessary to establish such contributions that are reasonable 
     based on the adjusted incomes of such families.
       (c) Treatment of Changes in Rental Contribution.--
       (1) Notification of changes.--A local housing and 
     management authority shall promptly notify the owner of an 
     assisted dwelling unit of any change in the resident 
     contribution by the assisted family residing in the unit that 
     takes effect immediately or at a later date.
       (2) Collection of retroactive changes.--In the case of any 
     change in the rental contribution of an assisted family that 
     affects rental payments previously made, the local housing 
     and management authority shall collect any additional amounts 
     required to be paid by the family under such change directly 
     from the family and shall refund any excess rental 
     contribution paid by the family directly to the family.
       (d) Phase-In of Rent Contribution Increases.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), for 
     any family that is receiving tenant-based rental assistance 
     under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 upon 
     the initial applicability of the provisions of this title to 
     such family, if the monthly contribution for rental of an 
     assisted dwelling unit to be paid by the family upon such 
     initial applicability is greater than the amount paid by the 
     family under the provisions of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 immediately before such applicability, any such 
     resulting increase in rent contribution shall be--
       (A) phased in equally over a period of not less than 3 
     years, if such increase is 30 percent or more of such 
     contribution before initial applicability; and
       (B) limited to not more than 10 percent per year if such 
     increase is more than 10 percent but less than 30 percent of 
     such contribution before initial applicability.
       (2) Exception.--The minimum rent contribution requirement 
     under subsection (a)(2) shall apply to each family described 
     in paragraph (1) of this subsection, notwithstanding such 
     paragraph.

     SEC. 323. RENTAL INDICATORS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish and issue 
     rental indicators under this section periodically, but not 
     less than annually, for existing rental dwelling units that 
     are eligible dwelling units. The Secretary shall establish 
     and issue the rental indicators by housing market area (as 
     the Secretary shall establish) for various sizes and types of 
     dwelling units.
       (b) Amount.--For a market area, the rental indicator 
     established under subsection (a) for a dwelling unit of a 
     particular size and type in the market area shall be a dollar 
     amount that reflects the rental amount for a standard quality 
     rental unit of such size and type in the market area that is 
     an eligible dwelling unit.
       (c) Effective Date.--The Secretary shall cause the proposed 
     rental indicators established under subsection (a) for each 
     market area to be published in the Federal Register with 
     reasonable time for public comment, and such rental 
     indicators shall become effective upon the date of 
     publication in final form in the Federal Register.
       (d) Annual Adjustment.--Each rental indicator in effect 
     under this section shall be adjusted to be effective on 
     October 1 of each year to reflect changes, based on the most 
     recent available data trended so that the indicators will be 
     current for the year to which they apply, in rents for 
     existing rental dwelling units of various sizes and types in 
     the market area suitable for occupancy by families assisted 
     under this title.

     SEC. 324. LEASE TERMS.

       Rental assistance may be provided for an eligible dwelling 
     unit only if the assisted family and the owner of the 
     dwelling unit enter into a lease for the unit that--
       (1) provides for a single lease term of 12 months and 
     continued tenancy after such term under a periodic tenancy on 
     a month-to-month basis;
       (2) contains terms and conditions specifying that 
     termination of tenancy during the term of a lease shall be 
     subject to the provisions set forth in section 325; and
       (3) is set forth in the standard form, which is used in the 
     local housing market area by the owner and applies generally 
     to any other tenants in the property who are not assisted 
     families, together with any addendum necessary to include the 
     many terms required under this section.

     A lease may include any addenda appropriate to set forth the 
     provisions under section 325.

     SEC. 325. TERMINATION OF TENANCY.

       (a) General Grounds for Termination of Tenancy.--Each 
     housing assistance payments contract under section 351 shall 
     provide that the owner of any assisted dwelling unit assisted 
     under the contract may, before expiration of a lease for a 
     unit, terminate the tenancy of any tenant of the unit, but 
     only for--
       (1) violation of the terms and conditions of the lease, 
     violation of applicable Federal, State, or local law, or 
     other good cause; or
       (2) any activity, engaged in by the tenant, any member of 
     the tenant's household, or any guest or other person under 
     the tenant's control, that--
       (A) threatens the health or safety of, or right to peaceful 
     enjoyment of the premises by, other tenants or employees of 
     the owner or manager of the housing;
       (B) threatens the health or safety of, or right to peaceful 
     enjoyment of their residences by, persons residing in the 
     immediate vicinity of the premises; or
       (C) is criminal activity (including drug-related criminal 
     activity).
       (b) Manner of Termination.--Each housing assistance 
     payments contract shall provide that the owner shall conduct 
     the termination of tenancy of any tenant of an assisted 
     dwelling unit under the contract in accordance with 
     applicable State or local laws, including providing any 
     notice of termination required under such laws.

     SEC. 326. ELIGIBLE OWNERS.

       (a) Ownership Entity.--Rental assistance under this title 
     may be provided for any eligible dwelling unit for which the 
     owner is any public agency, private person or entity 
     (including a cooperative), nonprofit organization, agency of 
     the Federal Government, or local housing and management 
     authority.
       (b) Ineligible Owners.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), a local 
     housing and management authority may not enter into a housing 
     assistance payments contract (or renew an existing contract) 
     covering a dwelling unit that is owned by an owner who is 
     debarred, suspended, or subject to limited denial of 
     participation under part 24 of title 24, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.
       (2) Prohibition of sale to related parties.--The Secretary 
     shall establish guidelines to prevent housing assistance 
     payments for a dwelling unit that is owned by any spouse, 
     child, or other party who allows an owner described in 
     paragraph (1) to maintain control of the unit.
       (3) Rule of construction.--This subsection may not be 
     construed to prohibit, or authorize the termination or 
     suspension, of payment of housing assistance under a housing 
     assistance payments contract in effect at the time such 
     debarment, suspension, or limited denial of participation 
     takes effect.

     SEC. 327. SELECTION OF DWELLING UNITS.

       (a) Family Choice.--The determination of the dwelling unit 
     in which an assisted family resides and for which housing 
     assistance is provided under this title shall be made solely 
     by the assisted family, subject to the provisions of this 
     title.
       (b) Deed Restrictions.--Housing assistance may not be used 
     in any manner that abrogates any local deed restriction that 
     applies to any housing consisting of 1 to 4 dwelling units. 
     Nothing in this section may be construed to affect the 
     provisions or applicability of the Fair Housing Act.

     SEC. 328. ELIGIBLE DWELLING UNITS.

       (a) In General.--A dwelling unit shall be an eligible 
     dwelling unit for purposes of this title only if the local 
     housing and management authority to provide housing 
     assistance for the dwelling unit determines that the dwelling 
     unit--
       (1) is an existing dwelling unit that is not located within 
     a nursing home or the grounds of any penal, reformatory, 
     medical, mental, or similar public or private institution; 
     and
       (2) complies--
       (A) with applicable State or local laws, regulations, 
     standards, or codes regarding habitability of residential 
     dwellings that--
       (i) are in effect for the jurisdiction in which the 
     dwelling unit is located;
       (ii) provide protection to residents of the dwellings that 
     is equal to or greater than the

[[Page H4692]]

     protection provided under the housing quality standards 
     established under subsection (b); and
       (iii) that do not severely restrict housing choice; or
       (B) in the case of a dwelling unit located in a 
     jurisdiction which does not have in effect laws, regulations, 
     standards, or codes described in subparagraph (A), with the 
     housing quality standards established under subsection (b).

     Each local housing and management authority providing housing 
     assistance shall identify, in the local housing management 
     plan for the authority, whether the authority is utilizing 
     the standard under subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (2) 
     and, if the authority utilizes the standard under 
     subparagraph (A), shall certify in such plan that the 
     applicable State or local laws, regulations, standards, or 
     codes comply with the requirements under such subparagraph.
       (b) Determinations.--
       (1) In general.--A local housing and management authority 
     shall make the determinations required under subsection (a) 
     pursuant to an inspection of the dwelling unit conducted 
     before any assistance payment is made for the unit.
       (2) Failure to inspect.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), if 
     the inspection and the determinations referred to in 
     paragraph (1) are not made before the expiration of the 7-day 
     period beginning upon a request by the resident or landlord 
     to the local housing and management authority--
       (A) the dwelling unit shall be considered to be an eligible 
     dwelling unit for purposes of this title; and
       (B) the assisted family may occupy the dwelling unit, and 
     assistance payments for the unit may be made before necessary 
     repairs are completed, it the owner agrees to make such 
     repairs within 15 days.
       (c) Federal Housing Quality Standards.--The Secretary shall 
     establish housing quality standards under this subsection 
     that ensure that assisted dwelling units are safe, clean, and 
     healthy. Such standards shall include requirements 
     relating to habitability, including maintenance, health 
     and sanitation factors, condition, and construction of 
     dwellings, and shall, to the greatest extent practicable, 
     be consistent with the standards established under section 
     232(b). The Secretary shall differentiate between major 
     and minor violations of such standards.
       (d) Annual Inspections.--Each local housing and management 
     authority providing housing assistance shall make an annual 
     inspection of each assisted dwelling unit during the term of 
     the housing assistance payments contracts for the unit to 
     determine whether the unit is maintained in accordance with 
     the requirements under subsection (a)(2). The authority shall 
     submit the results of such inspections to the Secretary and 
     the Inspector General for the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development and such results shall be available to the 
     Housing Foundation and Accreditation Board established under 
     title IV and any auditor conducting an audit under section 
     432.
       (e) Inspection Guidelines.--The Secretary shall establish 
     procedural guidelines and performance standards to facilitate 
     inspections of dwelling units and conform such inspections 
     with practices utilized in the private housing market. Such 
     guidelines and standards shall take into consideration 
     variations in local laws and practices of local housing and 
     management authorities and shall provide flexibility to 
     authorities appropriate to facilitate efficient provision of 
     assistance under this title.
       (f) Rule of Construction.--This section may not be 
     construed to prevent the provision of housing assistance in 
     connection with supportive services for elderly or disabled 
     families.

     SEC. 329. HOMEOWNERSHIP OPTION.

       (a) In General.--A local housing and management authority 
     providing housing assistance under this title may provide 
     homeownership assistance to assist eligible families to 
     purchase a dwelling unit (including purchase under lease-
     purchase homeownership plans).
       (b) Requirements.--A local housing and management authority 
     providing homeownership assistance under this section shall, 
     as a condition of an eligible family receiving such 
     assistance, require the family to--
       (1) demonstrate that the family has income from employment 
     or other sources (other than public assistance), as 
     determined in accordance with requirements established by the 
     authority; and
       (2) meet any other initial or continuing requirements 
     established by the local housing and management authority.
       (c) Downpayment Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--A local housing and management authority 
     may establish minimum downpayment requirements, if 
     appropriate, in connection with loans made for the purchase 
     of dwelling units for which homeownership assistance is 
     provided under this section. If the authority establishes a 
     minimum downpayment requirement, except as provided in 
     paragraph (2) the authority shall permit the family to use 
     grant amounts, gifts from relatives, contributions from 
     private sources, and similar amounts as downpayment amounts 
     in such purchase.
       (2) Direct family contribution.--In purchasing housing 
     pursuant to this section subject to a downpayment 
     requirement, each family shall contribute an amount of the 
     downpayment, from resources of the family other than grants, 
     gifts, contributions, or other similar amounts referred to in 
     paragraph (1), that is not less than 1 percent of the 
     purchase price.
       (d) Ineligibility Under Other Programs.--A family may not 
     receive homeownership assistance pursuant to this section 
     during any period when assistance is being provided for the 
     family under other Federal homeownership assistance programs, 
     as determined by the Secretary, including assistance under 
     the HOME Investment Partnerships Act, the Homeownership and 
     Opportunity Through HOPE Act, title II of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1987, and section 502 of the 
     Housing Act of 1949.
    Subtitle C--Payment of Housing Assistance on Behalf of Assisted 
                                Families

     SEC. 351. HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS CONTRACTS.

       (a) In General.--Each local housing and management 
     authority that receives amounts under a contract under 
     section 302 may enter into housing assistance payments 
     contracts with owners of existing dwelling units to make 
     housing assistance payments to such owners in accordance with 
     this title.
       (b) LHMA Acting As Owner.--A local housing and management 
     authority may enter into a housing assistance payments 
     contract to make housing assistance payments under this title 
     to itself (or any agency or instrumentality thereof) as the 
     owner of dwelling units, and the authority shall be subject 
     to the same requirements that are applicable to other owners, 
     except that the determinations under section 328(a) and 
     354(b) shall be made by a competent party not affiliated with 
     the authority or the owner, and the authority shall be 
     responsible for any expenses of such determinations.
       (c) Provisions.--Each housing assistance payments contract 
     shall--
       (1) have a term of not more than 12 months;
       (2) require that the assisted dwelling unit may be rented 
     only pursuant to a lease that complies with the requirements 
     of section 324;
       (3) comply with the requirements of section 325 (relating 
     to termination of tenancy);
       (4) require the owner to maintain the dwelling unit in 
     accordance with the applicable standards under section 
     328(a)(2); and
       (5) provide that the screening and selection of eligible 
     families for assisted dwelling units shall be the function of 
     the owner.

     SEC. 352. AMOUNT OF MONTHLY ASSISTANCE PAYMENT.

       The amount of the monthly assistance payment for housing 
     assistance under this title on behalf of an assisted family 
     shall be as follows:
       (1) Units having gross rent less than payment standard.--In 
     the case of a dwelling unit bearing a gross rent that does 
     not exceed the payment standard established under section 353 
     for a dwelling unit of the applicable size and located in the 
     market area in which such assisted dwelling unit is located, 
     the amount by which the gross rent for the dwelling unit 
     exceeds the amount of the resident contribution determined in 
     accordance with section 322.
       (2) Units having gross rent exceeding payment standard.--In 
     the case of a dwelling unit bearing a gross rent that exceeds 
     the payment standard established under section 353 for a 
     dwelling unit of the applicable size and located in the 
     market area in which such assisted dwelling unit is located, 
     the amount by which such payment standard exceeds the amount 
     of the resident contribution determined in accordance with 
     section 322.

     SEC. 353. PAYMENT STANDARDS.

       (a) Establishment.--Each local housing and management 
     authority providing housing assistance under this title shall 
     establish payment standards under this section for various 
     areas, and sizes and types of dwelling units, for use in 
     determining the amount of monthly housing assistance payment 
     to be provided on behalf of assisted families.
       (b) Use of Rental Indicators.--The payment standard for 
     each size and type of housing for each market area shall be 
     an amount that is not less than 80 percent, and not greater 
     than 120 percent, of the rental indicator established under 
     section 323 for such size and type for such area.
       (c) Review.--If the Secretary determines, at any time, that 
     a significant percentage of the assisted families who are 
     assisted by a large local housing and management authority 
     and are occupying dwelling units of a particular size are 
     paying more than 30 percent of their adjusted incomes for 
     rent, the Secretary shall review the payment standard 
     established by the authority for such size dwellings. If, 
     pursuant to the review, the Secretary determines that such 
     payment standard is not appropriate to serve the needs of the 
     low-income population of the jurisdiction served by the 
     authority (taking into consideration rental costs in the 
     area), as identified in the approved community improvement 
     plan of the authority, the Secretary may require the local 
     housing and management authority to modify the payment 
     standard. For purposes of this subsection, the term ``large 
     local housing and management authority'' means a local 
     housing and management authority that provides housing 
     assistance on behalf of 1250 or more assisted families.

     SEC. 354. REASONABLE RENTS.

       (a) Establishment.--The rent charged for a dwelling unit 
     for which rental assistance is provided under this title 
     shall be established pursuant to negotiation and agreement 
     between the assisted family and the owner of the dwelling 
     unit.
       (b) Reasonableness.--
       (1) Determination.--A local housing and management 
     authority providing rental assistance under this title for a 
     dwelling unit shall, before commencing assistance payments 
     for a unit, determine whether the rent charged for the unit 
     exceeds the rents charged for comparable units in the 
     applicable private unassisted market.
       (2) Unreasonable rents.--If the authority determines that 
     the rent charged for a dwelling unit exceeds such comparable 
     rents, the authority shall--
       (A) inform the assisted family renting the unit that such 
     rent exceeds the rents for comparable unassisted units in the 
     market; and

[[Page H4693]]

       (B) refuse to provide housing assistance payments for such 
     unit.

     SEC. 355. PROHIBITION OF ASSISTANCE FOR VACANT RENTAL UNITS.

       If an assisted family vacates a dwelling unit for which 
     rental assistance is provided under a housing assistance 
     payments contract before the expiration of the term of the 
     lease for the unit, rental assistance pursuant to such 
     contract may not be provided for the unit after the month 
     during which the unit was vacated.
            Subtitle D--General and Miscellaneous Provisions

     SEC. 371. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this title:
       (1) Assisted dwelling unit.--The term ``assisted dwelling 
     unit'' means a dwelling unit in which an assisted family 
     resides and for which housing assistance payments are made 
     under this title.
       (2) Assisted family.--The term ``assisted family'' means an 
     eligible family on whose behalf housing assistance payments 
     are made under this title or who has been selected and 
     approved for housing assistance.
       (3) Choice-based.--The term ``choice-based'' means, with 
     respect to housing assistance, that the assistance is not 
     attached to a dwelling unit but can be used for any eligible 
     dwelling unit selected by the eligible family.
       (4) Eligible dwelling unit.--The term ``eligible dwelling 
     unit'' means a dwelling unit that complies with the 
     requirements under section 328 for consideration as an 
     eligible dwelling unit.
       (5) Eligible family.--The term ``eligible family'' means a 
     family that meets the requirements under section 321(a) for 
     assistance under this title.
       (6) Homeownership assistance.--The term ``homeownership 
     assistance'' means housing assistance provided under section 
     329 for the ownership of a dwelling unit.
       (7) Housing assistance.--The term ``housing assistance'' 
     means assistance provided under this title on behalf of low-
     income families for the rental or ownership of an eligible 
     dwelling unit.
       (8) Housing assistance payments contract.--The term 
     ``housing assistance payments contract'' means a contract 
     under section 351 between a local housing and management 
     authority (or the Secretary) and an owner to make housing 
     assistance payments under this title to the owner on behalf 
     of an assisted family.
       (9) Local housing and management authority.--The terms 
     ``local housing and management authority'' and ``authority'' 
     have the meaning given such terms in section 103, except that 
     the terms include--
       (A) a consortia of local housing and management authorities 
     that the Secretary determines has the capacity and capability 
     to administer a program for housing assistance under this 
     title in an efficient manner;
       (B) any other entity that, upon the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, was administering any program for tenant-based 
     rental assistance under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect before the enactment of 
     this Act), pursuant to a contract with the Secretary or a 
     public housing agency; and
       (C) with respect to any area in which no local housing and 
     management authority has been organized or where the 
     Secretary determines that a local housing and management 
     authority is unwilling or unable to implement this title, or 
     is not performing effectively--
       (i) the Secretary or another entity that by contract agrees 
     to receive assistance amounts under this title and enter into 
     housing assistance payments contracts with owners and perform 
     the other functions of local housing and management authority 
     under this title; or
       (ii) notwithstanding any provision of State or local law, a 
     local housing and management authority for another area that 
     contracts with the Secretary to administer a program for 
     housing assistance under this title, without regard to any 
     otherwise applicable limitations on its area of operation.
       (10) Owner.--The term ``owner'' means the person or entity 
     having the legal right to lease or sublease dwelling units. 
     Such term includes any principals, general partners, primary 
     shareholders, and other similar participants in any entity 
     owning a multifamily housing project, as well as the entity 
     itself.
       (11) Rent.--The terms ``rent'' and ``rental'' include, with 
     respect to members of a cooperative, the charges under the 
     occupancy agreements between such members and the 
     cooperative.
       (12) Rental assistance.--The term ``rental assistance'' 
     means housing assistance provided under this title for the 
     rental of a dwelling unit.

     SEC. 372. RENTAL ASSISTANCE FRAUD RECOVERIES.

       (a) Authority To Retain Recovered Amounts.--The Secretary 
     shall permit local housing and management authorities 
     administering housing assistance under this title to retain, 
     out of amounts obtained by the authorities from tenants that 
     are due as a result of fraud and abuse, an amount (determined 
     in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary) equal 
     to the greater of--
       (1) 50 percent of the amount actually collected; or
       (2) the actual, reasonable, and necessary expenses related 
     to the collection, including costs of investigation, legal 
     fees, and collection agency fees.
       (b) Use.--Amounts retained by an authority shall be made 
     available for use in support of the affected program or 
     project, in accordance with regulations issued by the 
     Secretary. If the Secretary is the principal party initiating 
     or sustaining an action to recover amounts from families or 
     owners, the provisions of this section shall not apply.
       (c) Recovery.--Amounts may be recovered under this 
     section--
       (1) by an authority through a lawsuit (including settlement 
     of the lawsuit) brought by the authority or through court-
     ordered restitution pursuant to a criminal proceeding 
     resulting from an authority's investigation where the 
     authority seeks prosecution of a family or where an authority 
     seeks prosecution of an owner;
       (2) through administrative repayment agreements with a 
     family or owner entered into as a result of an administrative 
     grievance procedure conducted by an impartial decisionmaker 
     in accordance with section 110; or
       (3) through an agreement between the parties.

     SEC. 373. STUDY REGARDING GEOGRAPHIC CONCENTRATION OF 
                   ASSISTED FAMILIES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study of the 
     geographic areas in the State of Illinois served by the 
     Housing Authority of Cook County and the Chicago Housing 
     Authority and submit to the Congress a report and a specific 
     proposal, which addresses and resolves the issues of--
       (1) the adverse impact on local communities due to 
     geographic concentration of assisted households under the 
     tenant-based housing programs under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect immediately before 
     the enactment of this Act) and under this title; and
       (2) facilitating the deconcentration of such assisted 
     households by providing broader housing choices to such 
     households.

     The study shall be completed, and the report shall be 
     submitted, not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
       (b) Concentration.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``concentration'' means, with respect to any area within a 
     census tract, that--
       (1) 15 percent or more of the households residing within 
     such area have incomes which do not exceed the poverty level; 
     or
       (2) 15 percent or more of the total affordable housing 
     stock located within such area is assisted housing.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there amendments to title III?


                Amendment No. 47 Offered by Mr. Sanders

  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 47 offered by Mr. Sanders: Page 145, line 23, 
     strike ``6.5 percent'' and insert ``7.65 percent''.
       Page 146, lines 4 and 5, strike ``6.5 percent'' and insert 
     ``7.65 percent''.
       Page 146, line 7, strike ``6.0 percent'' and insert ``7.0 
     percent''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of May 8, 1996, 
the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders] will be recognized for 5 
minutes in support of his amendment, and the gentleman from New York 
[Mr. Lazio] will be recognized for 5 minutes in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders].
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me begin by thanking the Republican leadership 
here, because my understanding is that they will be accepting this 
amendment. In truth, this is a tripartisan amendment. It has support 
from the gentlewoman from New Jersey [Mrs. Roukema] and other 
Republicans, as well as many Democrats.
  Mr. Chairman, many Members of Congress have criticized public housing 
and believe that Americans should be able to decide for themselves how 
best to spend their housing allowance. These critics should be 
supporters of the Section 8 program, but this laudable program is not 
reaching everyone that is eligible for assistance.
  About 1.5 million people receive section 8 assistance, but close to 
that same amount are on the waiting list. In my home State of Vermont, 
the waiting list is over 3 years long. In some areas, applicants wait 
for more than 10 years.
  Unfortunately, this bill contains a provision that would make these 
waiting periods even longer. I am talking about the major cuts in fees 
for administering the Section 8 program. If the bill had been in place 
for fiscal year 1996, housing authorities would have received, on 
average, 23 percent less to administer the tenant-based Section 8 
program. Nationally, according to HUD, we are talking about a $182 
million cut in section 8 administration.
  In California alone, that cut amounts to almost $30 million; in New 
York, over $21 million; and in New Jersey, over $7 million. In my small 
State of Vermont, we would lose $318,000.
  Mr. Chairman, the simple fact of the matter is that this cut goes far 
too deep. If we believe in section 8 housing, then we must allocate 
enough money for the program to be administered effectively. Otherwise, 
we are killing this program through a backdoor method and I do not 
think that that is

[[Page H4694]]

what the majority of Members want to do.
  There is widespread support for section 8, and I do not believe that 
anyone really wants to hurt it. This bill provides for a two-tier 
formula where public housing authorities get a fee based on 6.5 percent 
of fair market value for the first 600 units and 6 percent of fair 
market value for the rest.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a huge cut from the fiscal year 1995 and fiscal 
year 1996, when fees were based on 8.2 percent of fair market value. 
HUD estimates that over 90 percent of the agencies that administer 
Section 8 housing will lose more than 15 percent of their 
administrative funds. On average, it will be an estimated 23-percent 
cut per agency.

  Mr. Chairman, I am offering a compromise amendment that puts the fee 
level about halfway in between where the funds are today and where they 
would be under the provisions of the bill. The two-tiered formula would 
remain, but the 6 percent number would be raised to 7 percent and the 
6.5 percent number would be raised to 7.65. It is a compromise between 
the 8.2 percent formula used today and the 6 and 6.5 percent levels 
recommended in the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I should point out that that is the formula recommended 
by HUD and HUD supports this amendment. The National Association of 
Housing and Redevelopment Officials are also strong supporters of this 
amendment.
  Frankly, Mr. Chairman, many of us had believed that this amendment 
was going to be accepted as part of the manager's amendment and we were 
surprised that it was not. If it is adopted, fees would still be cut an 
estimated 10.5 percent. That is a big cut. That is a major cut. But it 
would not devastate the administration of the program as the proposed 
cuts do. This is a compromise position, and my hope is that it would be 
supported by all Members.
  Mr. Chairman, let me conclude by stating that every State in the 
country is severely affected by the provisions stated in this bill. It 
provides for an estimated 23 percent cut in Section 8 administrative 
fees. That is much too high.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to please support the compromise 
position and vote ``yes.''
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend Chairman Lazio for his 
hard work on this thoughtful and forward thinking proposal to reform 
our public housing system, and ask the chairman to consider accepting 
the amendment offered by Congressman Sanders.
  H.R. 2406 significantly reforms the public housing programs and 
requires our public housing authorities to take on significant new 
responsibilities. At a time when we are making such monumental changes 
in the public housing assistance program, we should be careful not to 
reduce the fees to a level that could seriously undermined the ability 
of the authorities to do their job in an efficient and effective 
manner.
  As the bill currently stands, my State would be forced to absorb a 
23-percent reduction in administrative fees, and your own State New 
York will take a 24-percent reduction. Everyone that administers 
section 8 would be hurt--over 90 percent of the 2,300 agencies 
administering section 8 programs would lose more than 15 percent of 
their fees.
  While I strongly support spending reductions and want to reach the 
goal of a balanced budget, I am concerned about the impact of such a 
large reduction on the agencies that administer section 8 tenant-based 
rental housing assistance programs.
  The Sanders amendment would still require a reduction in spending. 
However, while the current proposal included in H.R. 2406 would require 
an overall reduction of 23.6 percent in fiscal year 1996; the Sanders 
amendment would require only a 10.5-percent reduction in administrative 
fees. This puts the fee level about halfway between where the funds are 
today and where they would be under the provisions of the bill. The 
two-tiered formula would remain, but instead of 6.5 percent for the 
first 600 units, and 6 percent for additional units, the fee would be 
7.65 percent and 7 percent respectfully.
  This amendment deserves the support of the chairman, and I urge your 
support.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I urge the passage of this amendment, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders].
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to title III?


        amendment no. 16 offered by mr. kennedy of massachusetts

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Kennedy of Massachusetts: 
     Page 150, strike line 3 and all that follows through line 25, 
     insert the following:
       (b) Additional Assistance.--
       (1) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated, for choice-based housing assistance under 
     this title--
       (A) to be used in accordance with paragraph (2)(A), 
     $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1997, and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each subsequent fiscal year; and
       (B) to be used in accordance with paragraph (2)(B), 
     $195,000,000 for fiscal year 1997, and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each subsequent fiscal year.
       (2) Use.--
       (A) Nonelderly disabled families.--The Secretary shall 
     provide amounts made available under paragraph (1)(A) to 
     local housing and management authorities only for use to 
     provide housing assistance under this title for nonelderly 
     disabled families (including such families relocating 
     pursuant to designation of a public housing development under 
     section 227 and other nonelderly disabled families who have 
     applied to the authority for housing assistance under this 
     title).
       (B) Welfare and homeless families.--The Secretary shall 
     provide amounts made available under paragraph (1)(B) to 
     local housing and management authorities only for use to 
     provide housing assistance under this title for, as 
     determined by the Secretary, the following families:
       (i) Families participating in programs that link housing 
     assistance to State and local welfare reform strategies for 
     the purposes of assisting families making the transition from 
     welfare to work and empowering families to choose housing in 
     locations that offer the best access to jobs, education, 
     training, and other services needed to achieve long-term 
     self-sufficiency.
       (ii) Homeless families with children.
       (iii) Other eligible families.
       (3) Allocation of amounts.--The Secretary shall allocate 
     and provide amounts made available under paragraph (1) to 
     local housing and management authorities as the Secretary 
     determines appropriate based on the relative levels of need 
     among the authorities for assistance for families described 
     in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2) and such other 
     relevant factors as the Secretary deems appropriate.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] and a 
Member opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment deals with what I think is a critical 
shortage, and I am sure the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], my 
friend and chairman of the committee, will agree that there is an 
unprecedented aspect of this bill which we have not discussed as yet, 
and that is that this is the first time in some 15 years that we have 
zeroed out or limited the number of new vouchers that will be provided 
for by our Government to the people in greatest need.
  Mr. Chairman, we have had so much debate over the course of the last 
several years about how we are going to help people transition from 
welfare to work. The truth of the matter is if we are really interested 
in getting people out of welfare and into work, we have to recognize 
that we are going to need to deal with some short-term housing needs.
  This amendment would provide for those short-term housing needs by 
virtue of a $195 million allocation for welfare and homeless families 
where they are involved solely in programs linking work and welfare, 
and/or other homeless families with children that would qualify.
  This tries to deal with the fact that if we simply level off the 
number of Section 8 vouchers that we are providing, and do not take 
into account the fact that there are now many more people that are 
going to need those vouchers, particularly if they are in a transition 
from welfare to work, that we give rhetoric to the whole idea of the 
transition but we do not put the dollars that are necessary to fulfill 
the hopes and dreams of people that actually want to get off of the 
welfare system and get back into full-fledged

[[Page H4695]]

American society in the sense of being able to participate and being 
able to go out and make some money and have a self-sustaining home and 
family life.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I would hope that we could have an agreement. I 
fully recognize that trying to get an additional authorization of 
appropriations of $50 million for locating the elderly and the 
nonelderly and tenants dislocated because of project changes that we 
have talked about that might occur as a result of the over 30,000 units 
that are going to be destroyed because of the flexibilities that we are 
building into this bill, it would be very difficult to actually obtain 
given the make up of the House of Representatives and the fact that we 
have seen the housing budget of the country cut by 25 percent.
  So, trying to actually get more money in this bill is probably a very 
difficult thing. If we offered an amendment and called for a vote, the 
truth of the matter is we would probably lose it. But I would like to 
enter into a dialog with my good friend and chairman, the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Lazio], with the hopes that he would commit himself 
in the conference that will be generated between this body and the 
other body to make certain that we try to leverage as many new Section 
8 vouchers as we possibly can.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman has suggested, 
we have actually in our bill allowed for the issuance or the 
authorization for the issuance of new vouchers over and above those 
that currently exist and those that get turned in. We authorize the 
issuance of further vouchers.
  Mr. Chairman, as we go through the conference process, I would assure 
the gentleman that I will continue to support strongly the authority 
for new incremental vouchers, and I will also support that through the 
budget process wherever possible.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I 
appreciate the gentleman's offer. I point out that we are holding out 
the promise of being able to transition from welfare to work. If all we 
do is give the promise without the necessary dollars to actually allow 
people to get out of public housing and get back on track, then it is a 
false hope and we end up destroying lives rather than helping to 
improve them.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with the gentleman from 
New York.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to title III?


               amendment no. 32 offered by mr. traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that it now be 
in order to consider amendment No. 32, without prejudice to other 
amendments in title III.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio:
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 32 offered by Mr. Traficant: At the end of 
     title V of the bill, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 504. USE OF AMERICAN PRODUCTS.

       (a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products.--It 
     is the sense of the Congress that, to the greatest extent 
     practicable, all equipment and products purchased with funds 
     made available in this Act should be American made.
       (b) Notice Requirement.--In providing financial assistance 
     to, or entering into any contract with any entity using funds 
     made available in this Act, the head of each Federal agency, 
     to the greatest extent practicable, shall provide to such 
     entity a notice describing the statement made in subsection 
     (a) by the Congress.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the unanimous-consent agreement of May 8, 
1996, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant] will be recognized for 5 
minutes, and a Member in opposition will be recognized for 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].

                              {time}  1445

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This is a straightforward amendment, buy American amendment. If we 
are going to get people off welfare and into work, there is only one 
way to do it. That is to create a few jobs. If the products are made in 
America by American workers who get a paycheck, who pay taxes, that is 
a pretty good way and a pretty good start to doing it. This is not a 
fancy amendment, but in our housing programs they buy sinks, they buy 
toilets. They buy plumbing materials. They buy electrical supplies. 
There is an awful lot of procurement.
  And for the Members of the House to understand something, it came to 
my attention just this week, that certain legislative offices here at 
the Capitol got brand new televisions that were made in Malaysia. The 
question I have is, how many people in Malaysia pay taxes to Uncle Sam?
  I am for all of this internationalism. I am hoping that we will pass 
H.R. 447, the 1-800 buy America program that whenever any citizen is 
going to make a purchase over $250, they could call that buy American 
number and say, what product is made in America. Hopefully there will 
be some products made in America. There will be some jobs. I appreciate 
the fact no one objected to this being taken out of order. I would ask 
that it be included in the bill and saved in the conference.
  I yield to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], a good friend 
doing a good job on this tough bill.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, beam me up, Scottie. We would 
not have an American housing bill without a buy American amendment by 
my friend, the gentleman from Ohio. I want to say that I am happy to 
support the gentleman's amendment, urge its adoption, thank the 
gentleman for coming to the floor, continuing to remind us of the buy 
American pattern.
  I hope Americans that are watching this continue to stay focused on 
buying American goods wherever possible and that we encourage that in 
our public and assisted housing as well.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there a Member seeking time in opposition to the 
amendment?
  If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to title III?


                 amendment no. 6 offered by mr. filner

  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Filner:
       Page 170, after line 3, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 330. ASSISTANCE FOR RENTAL OF MANUFACTURED HOMES.

       (a) Authority.--Nothing in this title may be construed to 
     prevent a local housing and management authority from 
     providing housing assistance under this title on behalf of a 
     low-income family for the rental of--
       (1) a manufactured home that is the principal residence of 
     the family and the real property on which the home is 
     located; or
       (2) the real property on which is located a manufactured 
     home, which is owned by the family and is the principal 
     residence of the family.
       (b) Assistance for Certain Families Owning Manufactured 
     Homes.--
       (1) Authority.--Notwithstanding section 351 or any other 
     provision of this title, a local housing and management 
     authority that receives amounts under a contract under 
     section 302 may enter into a housing assistance payment 
     contract to make assistance payments under this title to a 
     family that owns a manufactured home, but only as provided in 
     paragraph (2).
       (2) Limitations.--In the case of a low-income family that 
     owns a manufactured home, rents the real property on which it 
     is located, and to whom housing assistance under this title 
     has been made available for the rental of such property, the 
     local housing and management authority making such assistance 
     available shall enter into a contract to make housing 
     assistance payments under this title directly to the family 
     (rather than to the owner of such real property) if--
       (1) the owner of the real property refuses to enter into a 
     contract to receive housing assistance payments pursuant to 
     section 351(a);
       (2) the family was residing in such manufactured home on 
     such real property at the time such housing assistance was 
     initially made available on behalf of the family;
       (3) the family provides such assurances to the agency, as 
     the Secretary may require, to

[[Page H4696]]

     ensure that amounts from the housing assistance payments are 
     used for rental of the real property; and
       (4) the rental of the real property other-wise complies 
     with the requirements for assistance under this title.

     A contract pursuant to this subsection shall be subject to 
     the provisions of section 351 and any other provisions 
     applicable to housing assistance payments contracts under 
     this title, except that the Secretary may provide such 
     exceptions as the Secretary considers appropriate to 
     facilitate the provision of assistance under this subsection.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from California [Mr. Filner] and a Member 
opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California [Mr. Filner].
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  My amendment could be called the mobile homeowners protection 
amendment, because it calls for fairness and equity for thousands of 
our citizens who live in mobile homes. Currently, as you know, housing 
assistance payments are made to landlords of rental property, not to 
the tenants. And in most cases, this makes sense. For example, an 
apartment renter having received a housing assistance payment could 
move without using the money for rent. But we have a very unique 
situation with residents of mobile homes. Most own their own home and 
rent the land on which it sits.
  Contrary to the name, mobile home, they are really not free to move 
quickly. It is both laborious and expensive to do so. For example, in 
San Diego County, where many of my constituents live in mobile homes, 
it costs a minimum of $10,000 to move a mobile home.
  In fact, in San Diego County, they can barely move at all because 
there are very few empty spaces and they are held captive to the whims 
of the park owners from whom they rent a space to park their homes.
  Mr. Chairman, when park owners decide they will not accept housing 
assistance payments, the mobile home residents are stuck because the 
law says their participation is voluntary and there is nothing that the 
department of HUD can do to force owners to accept payments for 
residents.
  In fact, recently HUD told a couple of my constituents who had 
section 8 eligibility whose park owner would not accept it, just move. 
Well, as I have said before, they cannot move.
  So my amendment will fix that. It is a simple change in the law which 
will allow housing assistance payments to go to the tenants of mobile 
home parks, the people who must rent their land upon which to put their 
mobile home. This amendment will not increase costs. It will not force 
mobile home park residents to accept new residents because mobile home 
residents who qualify for rental assistance do so because they have 
either grown older or become disabled. They are already residents of 
these mobile home parks by my amendment.
  This amendment will provide fairness to our citizens who need housing 
assistance and who live in mobile home parks.
  Mr. Chairman, that explains the amendment. If there are any questions 
or comments from the honorable chairman, I would be happy to answer 
them.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FILNER. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I know the gentleman refers to 
what is referred to as a mobile home, but this amendment is far broader 
than just mobile home. In fact, manufactured homes these days, a 
combination of prefabricated homes in a number of different styles, are 
increasingly attractive, and I know the gentleman from Indiana, my 
friend, Mr. Roemer, would be quick to suggest to me that manufactured 
homes are not just mobile homes as well as other Members. I think this 
is a good amendment. I appreciate the gentleman's cooperation, working 
with both me personally and our staff. I am happy to accept and support 
this amendment.
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. I appreciate the 
correct terminology here and certainly that is what my amendment uses.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member seek time in opposition to the 
amendment?
  If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Filner].
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments to title III?
  If not, the Clerk will designate title IV.
  The text of title IV is as follows:
 TITLE IV--ACCREDITATION AND OVERSIGHT OF LOCAL HOUSING AND MANAGEMENT 
                              AUTHORITIES
         Subtitle A--Housing Foundation and Accreditation Board

     SEC. 401. ESTABLISHMENT.

       There is established an independent agency in the executive 
     branch of the Government to be known as the Housing 
     Foundation and Accreditation Board (in this title referred to 
     as the ``Board'').

     SEC. 402. MEMBERSHIP.

       (a) In General.--The Board shall be composed of 12 members 
     appointed by the President not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, as follows:
       (1) 4 members shall be appointed from among 10 individuals 
     recommended by the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development.
       (2) 4 members shall be appointed from among 10 individuals 
     recommended by the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of 
     the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the 
     Senate.
       (3) 4 members appointed from among 10 individuals 
     recommended by the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of 
     the Committee on Banking and Financial Services of the House 
     of Representatives.
       (b) Qualifications.--
       (1) Required representation.--The Board shall at all times 
     have the following members:
       (A) 2 members who are residents of public housing or 
     dwelling units assisted under title III of this Act or the 
     provisions of section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 (as in effect before the enactment of this Act).
       (B) 2 members who are executive directors of local housing 
     and management authorities.
       (C) 1 member who is a member of the Institute of Real 
     Estate Managers.
       (D) 1 member who is the owner of a multifamily housing 
     project assisted under a program administered by the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
       (2) Required experience.--The Board shall at all times have 
     as members individuals with the following experience:
       (A) At least 1 individual who has extensive experience in 
     the residential real estate finance business.
       (B) At least 1 individual who has extensive experience in 
     operating a nonprofit organization that provides affordable 
     housing.
       (C) At least 1 individual who has extensive experience in 
     construction of multifamily housing.
       (D) At least 1 individual who has extensive experience in 
     the management of a community development corporation.

     A single member of the board with the appropriate experience 
     may satisfy the requirements of more than 1 subparagraph of 
     this paragraph. A single member of the board with the 
     appropriate qualifications and experience may satisfy the 
     requirements of a subparagraph of paragraph (1) and a 
     subparagraph of this paragraph.
       (c) Political Affiliation.--Not more than 6 members of the 
     Board may be of the same political party.
       (d) Terms.--
       (1) In general.--Each member of the Board shall be 
     appointed for a term of 4 years, except as provided in 
     paragraphs (2) and (3).
       (2) Terms of initial appointees.--As designated by the 
     President at the time of appointment, of the members first 
     appointed--
       (A) 3 shall be appointed for terms of 1 year;
       (B) 3 shall be appointed for terms of 2 years;
       (C) 3 shall be appointed for terms of 3 years; and
       (D) 3 shall be appointed for terms of 4 years;
       (3) Vacancies.--Any member appointed to fill a vacancy 
     occurring before the expiration of the term for which the 
     member's predecessor was appointed shall be appointed only 
     for the remainder of that term. A member may serve after the 
     expiration of that member's term until a successor has taken 
     office. A vacancy in the Board shall be filled in the manner 
     in which the original appointment was made.
       (e) Chairperson.--The Board shall elect a chairperson from 
     among members of the Board.
       (f) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Board shall 
     constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
       (g) Voting.--Each member of the Board shall be entitled to 
     1 vote, which shall be equal to the vote of every other 
     member of the Board.
       (h) Prohibition on Additional Pay.--Members of the Board 
     shall serve without compensation, but shall be reimbursed for 
     travel, subsistence, and other necessary expenses incurred in 
     the performance of their duties as members of the Board.

     SEC. 403. FUNCTIONS.

       The purpose of this subtitle is to establish the Board as a 
     nonpolitical entity to carry out the following functions:
       (1) Evaluation of deep subsidy programs.--Measuring the 
     performance and efficiency of all ``deep subsidy'' programs 
     for housing assistance administered by the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development, including the public housing 
     program under title II and the programs for tenant- and 
     project-based rental assistance under title III and section 8 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect before 
     the enactment of this Act).
       (2) Establishment of lhma performance benchmarks.--
     Establishing standards and

[[Page H4697]]

     guidelines under section 431 for use by the Secretary in 
     measuring the performance and efficiency of local housing and 
     management authorities and other owners and providers of 
     federally assisted housing in carrying out operational and 
     financial functions.
       (3) Accreditation of lhma's.--Establishing a procedure 
     under section 431(b) for accrediting local housing and 
     management authorities to receive block grants under title I 
     for the operation, maintenance, and production of public 
     housing, ensuring that financial and performance audits under 
     such section are conducted annually for each local housing 
     and management authority, and reviewing such audits for 
     purposes of accreditation.
       (4) Classification of lhma's.--Classifying local housing 
     and management authorities, under to section 434, according 
     to the performance categories under section 431(a)(2).

     SEC. 404. INITIAL ESTABLISHMENT OF STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES 
                   FOR LHMA COMPLIANCE.

       (a) Deadline.--Not later than the expiration of the 12-
     month period beginning upon the completion of the 
     appointment, under section 402, of the initial members of the 
     Board, the Board shall organize its structure and operations, 
     establish the standards, guidelines, and procedures under 
     sections 431, and establish any fees under section 406. 
     Before issuing such standards, guidelines, and procedures in 
     final form, the Board shall submit a copy to the Congress.
       (b) Priority of Initial Evaluations.--After organization of 
     the Board and establishment of standards, guidelines, and 
     procedures under sections 431, the Board shall commence 
     evaluations under section 433(b) for the purpose of 
     accrediting local housing and management authorities and 
     shall give priority to conducting evaluations of local 
     housing and management authorities that are designated as 
     troubled public housing agencies under section 6(j) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect before the 
     date of the enactment of this Act) pursuant to section 
     431(d).

     SEC. 405. POWERS.

       (a) Hearings.--The Board may, for the purpose of carrying 
     out this subtitle, hold such hearings and sit and act at such 
     times and places as the Board determines appropriate.
       (b) Rules and Regulations.--The Board may adopt such rules 
     and regulations as may be necessary to establish its 
     procedures and to govern the manner of its operations, 
     organization, and personnel.
       (c) Assistance From Federal Agencies.--
       (1) Information.--The Board may secure directly from any 
     department or agency of the Federal Government such 
     information as the Board may require for carrying out its 
     functions, including local housing management plans 
     submitted to the Secretary by local housing and management 
     authorities under title II. Upon request of the Board, any 
     such department or agency shall furnish such information. 
     The Board may acquire information directly from local 
     housing and management authorities to the same extent the 
     Secretary may acquire such information.
       (2) General services administration.--The Administrator of 
     General Services shall provide to the Board, on a 
     reimbursable basis, such administrative support services as 
     the Board may request.
       (3) Department of housing and urban development.--Upon the 
     request of the chairperson of the Board, the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development shall, to the extent possible 
     and subject to the discretion of the Secretary, detail any of 
     the personnel of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development, on a nonreimbursable basis, to assist the Board 
     in carrying out its functions under this subtitle.
       (d) Mails.--The Board may use the United States mails in 
     the same manner and under the same conditions as other 
     Federal agencies.
       (e) Contracting.--The Board may, to such extent and in such 
     amounts as are provided in appropriation Acts, enter into 
     contracts with private firms, institutions, and individuals 
     for the purpose of conducting research or surveys necessary 
     to enable the Board to discharge its functions under this 
     subtitle.
       (f) Staff.--
       (1) Executive director.--The Board shall appoint an 
     executive director of the Board, who shall be compensated at 
     a rate fixed by the Board, but which shall not exceed the 
     rate established for level V of the Executive Schedule under 
     title 5, United States Code.
       (2) Other personnel.--In addition to the executive 
     director, the Board may appoint and fix the compensation of 
     such personnel as the Board considers necessary, in 
     accordance with the provisions of title 5, United States 
     Code, governing appointments to the competitive service, and 
     the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 
     of such title, relating to classification and General 
     Schedule pay rates. Such personnel may include personnel for 
     assessment teams under section 431(b).

     SEC. 406. FEES.

       (a) Accreditation Fees.--The Board may establish and charge 
     fees for the accreditation of local housing and management 
     authorities as the Board considers necessary to cover the 
     costs of the operations of the Board relating to establishing 
     standards, guidelines, and procedures for evaluating the 
     performance of local housing and management authorities and 
     performing comprehensive reviews relating to the 
     accreditation of such authorities.
       (b) Fund.--Any fees collected under this section shall be 
     deposited in an operations fund for the Board, which is 
     hereby established in the Treasury of the United States. 
     Amounts in such fund shall be available, to the extent 
     provided in appropriation Acts, for the expenses of the Board 
     in carrying out its functions under this subtitle.

     SEC. 407. REPORTS.

       The Board shall submit a report to the Congress annually 
     describing, for the year for which the report is made--
       (1) any modifications made by the Board to the standards, 
     guidelines, and procedures issued under section 431 by the 
     Board;
       (2) the results of the assessments, reviews, and 
     evaluations conducted by the Board under subtitle B;
       (3) the types and extent of assistance, information, and 
     products provided by the Board; and
       (4) any other activities of the Board.
    Subtitle B--Accreditation and Oversight Standards and Procedures

     SEC. 431. ESTABLISHMENT OF PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS AND 
                   ACCREDITATION PROCEDURES.

       (a) Performance Benchmarks.--
       (1) Performance areas.--The Housing Foundation and 
     Accreditation Board established under section 401 (in this 
     subtitle referred to as the ``Board'') shall establish 
     standards and guidelines, for use under section 434, to 
     measure the performance of local housing and management 
     authorities in all aspects relating to--
       (A) operational and financial functions;
       (B) providing, maintaining, and assisting low-income 
     housing--
       (i) that is safe, clean, and healthy, as required under 
     sections 232 and 328;
       (ii) in a manner consistent with the comprehensive housing 
     affordability strategy under section 105 of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, if appropriate;
       (iii) that is occupied by eligible families; and
       (iv) that is affordable to eligible families;
       (C) producing low-income housing and executing capital 
     projects, if applicable;
       (D) administering the provision of housing assistance under 
     title III;
       (E) accomplishing the goals and plans set forth in the 
     local housing management plan for the authority;
       (F) promoting responsibility and self-sufficiency among 
     residents of public housing developments of the authority and 
     assisted families under title III; and
       (G) complying with the other requirements of the authority 
     under block grant contracts under title II, grant agreements 
     under title III, and the provisions of this Act.
       (2) Performance categories.--In establishing standards and 
     guidelines under this section, the Board shall define various 
     levels of performance, which shall include the following 
     levels:
       (A) Exceptionally well-managed.--A minimum acceptable level 
     of performance in the areas specified in paragraph (1) for 
     classification of a local housing and management authority as 
     exceptionally well-managed, which shall indicate that the 
     authority functions exceptionally.
       (B) Well-managed.--A minimum acceptable level of 
     performance in the areas specified in paragraph (1) for 
     classification of a local housing and management authority as 
     well-managed, which shall indicate that the authority 
     functions satisfactorily.
       (C) At risk of becoming troubled.--A minimum acceptable 
     level of performance in the areas specified in paragraph (1) 
     for classification of a local housing and management 
     authority as at risk of becoming troubled, which shall 
     indicate that there are elements in the operations, 
     management, or functioning of the authority that must be 
     addressed before they result in serious and complicated 
     deficiencies.
       (D) Troubled.--A minimum level of performance in the areas 
     specified in paragraph (1) for classification of a local 
     housing and management authority as a troubled authority, 
     which shall indicate that the authority functions 
     unsatisfactorily with respect to certain areas under 
     paragraph (1), but such deficiencies are not irreparable.
       (E) Dysfunctional.--A maximum level of performance in the 
     areas specified in paragraph (1) for classification of a 
     local housing and management authority as dysfunctional, 
     which shall indicate that the authority suffers such 
     deficiencies that the authority should not be allowed to 
     continue to manage low-income housing or administer housing 
     assistance.
       (3) Accreditation standard.--In establishing standards and 
     guidelines under this section, the Board shall establish a 
     minimum acceptable level of performance for accrediting a 
     local housing and management authority for purposes of 
     authorizing the authority to enter into a new block grant 
     contract under title II or a new grant agreement under title 
     III.
       (b) Accreditation Procedure.--The Accreditation Board shall 
     establish procedures for--
       (1) reviewing the performance of a local housing and 
     management authority over the term of the expiring 
     accreditation, which review shall be conducted during the 12-
     month period that ends upon the conclusion of the term of the 
     expiring accreditation;
       (2) evaluating the capability of a local housing and 
     management authority that proposes to enter into an initial 
     block grant contract under title II or an initial grant 
     agreement under title III; and
       (3) determining whether the authority complies with the 
     standards and guidelines for accreditation established under 
     subsection (a)(3).

     The procedures for a review or evaluation under this 
     subsection shall provide for the review or evaluation to be 
     conducted by an assessment team established by the Board, 
     which shall review annual financial and performance audits 
     conducted under section 432 and obtain such information as 
     the Board may require.
       (c) Identification of Potential Problems.--The standards 
     and guidelines under subsection (a) and the procedure under 
     subsection (b) shall be established in a manner designed to 
     identify potential problems in the operations, management, 
     functioning of local

[[Page H4698]]

     housing and management authorities at a time before such 
     problems result in serious and complicated deficiencies.
       (d) Interim Applicability of PHMAP.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of this subtitle, during the period that 
     begins on the date of the enactment of this Act and ends upon 
     the date of the effectiveness of final regulations 
     establishing the standards, guidelines, and procedures 
     required under this section and section 432, the Secretary 
     shall assess the management performance of local housing and 
     management authorities in the same manner provided for public 
     housing agencies pursuant to section 6(j) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect immediately before 
     the enactment of this Act) and may take actions with respect 
     to local housing and management authorities that are 
     authorized under such section with respect to public housing 
     agencies.

     SEC. 432. ANNUAL FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE AUDIT.

       (a) Requirement.--The Secretary shall require each local 
     housing and management authority that receives grant amounts 
     under this Act in a fiscal year to have a financial and 
     performance audit of the authority conducted for the fiscal 
     year and to submit the results of the audit to the Secretary 
     and the Board. Not later than 60 days before submitting a 
     financial and performance audit to the Secretary and the 
     Board, the local housing and management authority shall 
     submit the audit to any local elected official or officials 
     responsible for appointing the members of the board of 
     directors (or other similar governing body) of the local 
     housing and management authority for review and comment. Any 
     such comments shall be submitted, together with the audit, to 
     the Secretary and the Board and the Secretary and the Board 
     shall consider such comments in reviewing the audit.
       (b) Procedures.-- The requirements for financial and 
     performance audits shall--
       (1) provide for the audit to be conducted by an independent 
     auditor selected by the authority;
       (2) authorize the auditor to obtain information from a 
     local housing and management authority, to access any books, 
     documents, papers, and records of an authority that are 
     pertinent to this Act and assistance received pursuant to 
     this Act, and to review any reports of an authority to the 
     Secretary; and
       (3) be designed to identify potential problems in the 
     operations, management, functioning of a local housing and 
     management authority at a time before such problems result in 
     serious and complicated deficiencies.
       (c) Purpose.--Audits under this section shall be designed 
     to--
       (1) evaluate the financial performance and soundness and 
     management performance of the local housing and management 
     authority board of directors (or other similar governing 
     body) and the authority management officials and staff;
       (2) assess the compliance of an authority with all aspects 
     of the standards and guidelines established under section 
     431(a)(1); and
       (3) provide information to the Secretary and the Board 
     regarding the financial performance and management of the 
     authority and to determine whether a review under section 
     225(d) or 353(c) is required.
       (d) Single Audit Act Compliance.--An audit under this 
     section shall be made in a manner so that the audit complies 
     with the requirements for audits under chapter 75 of title 
     31, United States Code.
       (e) Withholding of Amounts for Costs of Audit.--If the 
     Secretary determines that a local housing and management 
     authority has failed to take the actions required to submit 
     an audit under this section for a fiscal year, the Secretary 
     may--
       (1) arrange for, and pay the costs of, the audit; and
       (2) withhold, from the total allocation for any fiscal year 
     otherwise payable to the authority under this Act, amounts 
     sufficient to pay for the reasonable costs of conducting an 
     acceptable audit, including, if appropriate, the reasonable 
     costs of accounting services necessary to place the 
     authority's books and records in condition that permits an 
     audit.

     SEC. 433. ACCREDITATION.

       (a) Review Upon Expiration of Previous Accreditation.--The 
     Accreditation Board shall perform a comprehensive review of 
     the performance of a local housing and management authority, 
     in accordance with the procedures established under section 
     431(b), before the expiration of the term for which a 
     previous accreditation was granted under this subtitle.
       (b) Initial Evaluation.--
       (1) In general.--Before entering into an initial block 
     grant contract under title II or an initial contract pursuant 
     to section 302 for assistance under title III with any local 
     housing and management authority, the Board shall conduct a 
     comprehensive evaluation of the capabilities of the local 
     housing and management authority.
       (2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an initial 
     block grant contract or grant agreement entered into during 
     the period beginning upon the date of the enactment of this 
     Act and ending upon the date of the effectiveness of final 
     regulations establishing the standards, guidelines, and 
     procedures required under section 431 with any public housing 
     agency that received amounts under the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 during fiscal year 1995.
       (c) Determination and Report.--Pursuant to a review or 
     evaluation under this section, the Board shall determine 
     whether the authority meets the requirements for 
     accreditation under section 431(a)(3), shall accredit the 
     authority if it meets such requirements, and shall submit a 
     report on the results of the review or evaluation and such 
     determination to the Secretary and the authority.
       (d) Accreditation.--An accreditation under this section 
     shall expire at the end the term established by the Board in 
     granting the accreditation, which may not exceed 5 years. The 
     Board may qualify an accreditation placing conditions on the 
     accreditation based on the future performance of the 
     authority.

     SEC. 434. CLASSIFICATION BY PERFORMANCE CATEGORY.

       Upon completing the accreditation process under section 433 
     with respect to a local housing and management authority, the 
     Housing Finance and Accreditation Board shall designate the 
     authority according to the performance categories under 
     section 431(a)(2). In determining the classification of an 
     authority, the Board shall consider the most recent financial 
     and performance audit under section 432 of the authority and 
     accreditation reports under section 433(c) for the authority.

     SEC. 435. PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS FOR AUTHORITIES AT RISK OF 
                   BECOMING TROUBLED.

       (a) In General.--Upon designation of a local housing and 
     management authority as at risk of becoming troubled under 
     section 431(a)(2)(C), the Secretary shall seek to enter into 
     an agreement with the authority providing for improvement of 
     the elements of the authority that have been identified. An 
     agreement under this section shall contain such terms and 
     conditions as the Secretary determines are appropriate for 
     addressing the elements identified, which may include an on-
     site, independent assessment of the management of the 
     authority.
       (b) Powers of Secretary.--If the Secretary determines that 
     such action is necessary to prevent the local housing and 
     management authority from becoming a troubled authority, the 
     Secretary may--
       (1) solicit competitive proposals from other local housing 
     and management authorities and private housing management 
     agents (which may be selected by existing tenants through 
     administrative procedures established by the Secretary), to 
     prepare for any case in which such agents may be needed for 
     managing all, or part, of the housing administered by the 
     authority; or
       (2) solicit competitive proposals from other local housing 
     and management authorities and private entities with 
     experience in construction management, to prepare for any 
     case in which such authorities or firms may be needed to 
     oversee implementation of assistance made available for 
     capital improvement for public housing of the authority.

     SEC. 436. PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS AND CDBG SANCTIONS FOR 
                   TROUBLED LHMA'S.

       (a) In General.--Upon designation of a local housing and 
     management authority as a troubled authority under section 
     431(a)(2)(D), the Secretary shall seek to enter into an 
     agreement with the authority providing for improving the 
     management performance of the authority.
       (b) Contents.--An agreement under this section between the 
     Secretary and a local housing and management authority shall 
     set forth--
       (1) targets for improving performance, as measured by the 
     guidelines and standards established under section 431(a)(1) 
     and other requirements within a specified period of time, 
     which shall include targets to be met upon the expiration of 
     the 12-month period beginning upon entering into the 
     agreement;
       (2) strategies for meeting such targets;
       (3) sanctions for failure to implement such strategies; and
       (4) to the extent the Secretary deems appropriate, a plan 
     for enhancing resident involvement in the management of the 
     local housing and management authority.
       (c) Local Assistance in Implementation.--The Secretary and 
     the local housing and management authority shall, to the 
     maximum extent practicable, seek the assistance of local 
     public and private entities in carrying out an agreement 
     under this section.
       (d) Default Under Performance Agreement.--Upon the 
     expiration of the 12-month period beginning upon entering 
     into an agreement under this section with a local housing and 
     management authority, the Secretary shall review the 
     performance of the authority in relation to the performance 
     targets and strategies under the agreement. If the Secretary 
     determines that the authority has failed to comply with the 
     performance targets established for the expiration of such 
     period, the Secretary shall take the action authorized under 
     section 437(b)(2).
       (e) CDBG Sanction Against Local Government Contributing to 
     Troubled Status of LHMA.--If the Secretary determines that 
     the actions or inaction of any unit of general local 
     government within which any portion of the jurisdiction of a 
     local housing and management authority is located has 
     substantially contributed to the conditions resulting in the 
     authority being designated under section 431(a)(2)(D) as a 
     troubled authority, the Secretary may redirect or withhold, 
     from such unit of general local government any amounts 
     allocated for such unit under section 106 of such Act.

     SEC. 437. OPTION TO DEMAND CONVEYANCE OF TITLE TO OR 
                   POSSESSION OF PUBLIC HOUSING.

       (a) Authority for Conveyance.--A contract under section 201 
     for block grants under title II (including contracts which 
     amend or supersede contracts previously made (including 
     contracts for contributions)) may provide that upon the 
     occurrence of a substantial default with respect to the 
     covenants or conditions to which the local housing and 
     management authority is subject (as such substantial default 
     shall be defined in such contract) or upon designation of the 
     authority as dysfunctional pursuant to section 431(a)(2)(E), 
     the local housing and management authority shall be 
     obligated, at the option of the Secretary, to--

[[Page H4699]]

       (1) convey title in any case where, in the determination of 
     the Secretary (which determination shall be final and 
     conclusive), such conveyance of title is necessary to achieve 
     the purposes of this Act; or
       (2) deliver to the Secretary possession of the development, 
     as then constituted, to which such contract relates.
       (b) Obligation to Reconvey.--Any block grant contract under 
     title II containing the provisions authorized in subsection 
     (a) shall also provide that the Secretary shall be obligated 
     to reconvey or redeliver possession of the development, as 
     constituted at the time of reconveyance or redelivery, to 
     such local housing and management authority or to its 
     successor (if such local housing and management authority or 
     a successor exists) upon such terms as shall be prescribed in 
     such contract, and as soon as practicable after--
       (1) the Secretary is satisfied that all defaults with 
     respect to the development have been cured, and that the 
     development will, in order to fulfill the purposes of this 
     Act, thereafter be operated in accordance with the terms of 
     such contract; or
       (2) the termination of the obligation to make annual block 
     grants to the authority, unless there are any obligations or 
     covenants of the authority to the Secretary which are then in 
     default.

     Any prior conveyances and reconveyances or deliveries and 
     redeliveries of possession shall not exhaust the right to 
     require a conveyance or delivery of possession of the 
     development to the Secretary pursuant to subsection (a) upon 
     the subsequent occurrence of a substantial default.
       (c) Continued Grants for Repayment of Bonds and Notes Under 
     1937 Act.--If--
       (1) a contract for block grants under title II for an 
     authority includes provisions that expressly state that the 
     provisions are included pursuant to this subsection, and
       (2) the portion of the block grant payable for debt service 
     requirements pursuant to the contract has been pledged by the 
     local housing and management authority as security for the 
     payment of the principal and interest on any of its 
     obligations, then--
       (A) the Secretary shall (notwithstanding any other 
     provisions of this Act), continue to make the block grant 
     payments for the authority so long as any of such obligations 
     remain outstanding; and
       (B) the Secretary may covenant in such a contract that in 
     any event such block grant amounts shall in each year be at 
     least equal to an amount which, together with such income or 
     other funds as are actually available from the development 
     for the purpose at the time such block grant payments are 
     made, will suffice for the payment of all installments of 
     principal and interest on the obligations for which the 
     amounts provided for in the contract shall have been pledged 
     as security that fall due within the next succeeding 12 
     months.

     In no case shall such block grant amounts be in excess of the 
     maximum sum specified in the contract involved, nor for 
     longer than the remainder of the maximum period fixed by the 
     contract.

     SEC. 438. REMOVAL OF INEFFECTIVE LHMA'S.

       (a) Conditions of Removal.--The actions specified in 
     subsection (b) may be taken only upon--
       (1) the occurrence of events or conditions that constitute 
     a substantial default by a local housing and management 
     authority with respect to (A) the covenants or conditions to 
     which the local housing and management authority is subject, 
     or (B) an agreement entered into under section 435;
       (2) designation of the authority as dysfunctional pursuant 
     to section 431(a)(2)(E);
       (3) in the case only of action under subsection (b)(1), 
     failure of a local housing and management authority to obtain 
     reaccreditation upon the expiration of the term of a previous 
     accreditation granted under this subtitle; or
       (4) submission to the Secretary of a petition by the 
     residents of the public housing owned or operated by a local 
     housing and management authority that is designated as 
     troubled or dysfunctional pursuant to section 431(a)(2).
       (b) Removal Actions.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law or of any block grant contract under title II or any 
     grant agreement under title III, in accordance with 
     subsection (a), the Secretary may--
       (1) solicit competitive proposals from other local housing 
     and management authorities and private housing management 
     agents (which, in the discretion of the Secretary, may be 
     selected by existing public housing residents through 
     administrative procedures established by the Secretary) and, 
     if appropriate, provide for such agents to manage all, or 
     part, of the housing administered by the local housing and 
     management authority or all or part of the other functions of 
     the authority;
       (2) take possession of the local housing and management 
     authority, including any developments or functions of the 
     authority under any section of this Act;
       (3) solicit competitive proposals from other local housing 
     and management authorities and private entities with 
     experience in construction management and, if appropriate, 
     provide for such authorities or firms to oversee 
     implementation of assistance made available for capital 
     improvements for public housing;
       (4) require the authority to make other arrangements 
     acceptable to the Secretary and in the best interests of the 
     public housing residents and assisted families under title 
     III for managing all, or part of, the public housing 
     administered by the authority or the functions of the 
     authority; or
       (5) if the Secretary determines that reasonable 
     opportunities for remedy using the actions under paragraphs 
     (1) through (4) have failed or are not available, petition 
     for the appointment of a receiver for the local housing and 
     management authority to any district court of the United 
     States or to any court of the State in which any portion of 
     the jurisdiction of the local housing and management 
     authority is located, that is authorized to appoint a 
     receiver for the purposes and having the powers prescribed in 
     this section.
       (c) Emergency Assistance.--The Secretary may make available 
     to receivers and other entities selected or appointed 
     pursuant to this section such assistance as is fair and 
     reasonable to remedy the substantial deterioration of living 
     conditions in individual public housing developments or other 
     related emergencies that endanger the health, safety and 
     welfare of public housing residents or assisted families 
     under title III.
       (d) Powers of Secretary.--If the Secretary takes possession 
     of an authority, or any developments or functions of an 
     authority, pursuant to subsection (b)(2), the Secretary--
       (1) may abrogate contracts that substantially impede 
     correction of the substantial default or improvement of the 
     classification;
       (2) may demolish and dispose of assets of the authority in 
     accordance with subtitle E;
       (3) where determined appropriate by the Secretary, may 
     require the establishment of one or more new local housing 
     and management authorities;
       (4) may consolidate the authority into other well-managed 
     local housing and management authorities with the consent of 
     such well-managed authorities;
       (5) shall not be subject to any State or local laws that, 
     in the determination of the receiver, substantially impede 
     correction of the substantial default or improvement of the 
     classification; and
       (6) shall have such additional authority as a district 
     court of the United States has the authority to confer under 
     like circumstances upon a receiver to achieve the purposes of 
     the receivership.

     The Secretary may appoint, on a competitive or noncompetitive 
     basis, an individual or entity as an administrative receiver 
     to assume the Secretary's responsibility under this paragraph 
     for the administration of a local housing and management 
     authority. The Secretary may delegate to the administrative 
     receiver any or all of the powers of the Secretary under this 
     subsection. Regardless of any delegation under this 
     subsection, an administrative receiver may not require the 
     establishment of one or more new local housing and management 
     authorities pursuant to paragraph (3) unless the Secretary 
     first approves such establishment. For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term ``local housing and management 
     authority'' includes any developments or functions of a local 
     housing and management authority under any section of this 
     title.
       (e) Receivership.--
       (1) Required appointment.--In any proceeding under 
     subsection (b)(5), upon a determination that a substantial 
     default has occurred, and without regard to the availability 
     of alternative remedies, the court shall appoint a receiver 
     to conduct the affairs of the local housing and management 
     authority in a manner consistent with this Act and in 
     accordance with such further terms and conditions as the 
     court may provide. The receiver appointed may be another 
     local housing and management authority, a private management 
     corporation, the Secretary, or any other appropriate entity. 
     The court shall have power to grant appropriate temporary or 
     preliminary relief pending final disposition of the petition 
     by the Secretary.
       (2) Powers of receiver.--If a receiver is appointed for a 
     local housing and management authority pursuant to subsection 
     (b)(5), in addition to the powers accorded by the court 
     appointing the receiver, the receiver--
       (A) may abrogate contracts that substantially impede 
     correction of the substantial default or improvement of the 
     classification;
       (B) may demolish and dispose of assets of the authority in 
     accordance with subtitle E;
       (C) where determined appropriate by the Secretary, may 
     require the establishment of one or more new local housing 
     and management authorities, to the extent permitted by State 
     and local law; and
       (D except as provided in subparagraph (C), shall not be 
     subject to any State or local laws that, in the determination 
     of the receiver, substantially impede correction of the 
     substantial default or improvement of the classification.

     For purposes of this paragraph, the term ``local housing and 
     management authority'' includes any developments or functions 
     of a local housing and management authority under any section 
     of this title.
       (3) Termination.--The appointment of a receiver pursuant to 
     this subsection may be terminated, upon the petition of any 
     party, when the court determines that all defaults have been 
     cured or the local housing and management authority will be 
     able to make the same amount of progress in correcting the 
     management of the housing as the receiver.
       (f) Liability.--If the Secretary takes possession of an 
     authority pursuant to subsection (b)(2) or a receiver is 
     appointed pursuant to subsection (b)(5) for a local housing 
     and management authority, the Secretary or the receiver shall 
     be deemed to be acting in the capacity of the local housing 
     and management authority (and not in the official capacity as 
     Secretary or other official) and any liability incurred shall 
     be a liability of the local housing and management authority.

     SEC. 439. MANDATORY TAKEOVER OF CHRONICALLY TROUBLED PHA'S.

       (a) Removal of Agency.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
     of this Act, not later than the expiration of the 180-day 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the

[[Page H4700]]

     Secretary shall take one of the following actions with 
     respect to each chronically troubled public housing agency:
       (1) Contracting for management.--Solicit competitive 
     proposals for the management of the agency pursuant to 
     section 437(b)(1) and replace the management of the agency 
     pursuant to selection of such a proposal.
       (2) Takeover.--Take possession of the agency pursuant to 
     section 437(b)(2) of such Act.
       (b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``chronically troubled public housing agency'' means a public 
     housing agency that, as of the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, is designated under section 6(j)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect immediately before the 
     enactment of this Act) as a troubled public housing agency 
     and has been so designated continuously for the 3-year period 
     ending upon such date of enactment; except that such term 
     does not include any agency that owns or operates less than 
     1250 public housing dwelling units and that the Secretary 
     determines can, with a reasonable amount of effort, make such 
     improvements or remedies as may be necessary to remove its 
     designation as troubled within 12 months.

     SEC. 440. TREATMENT OF TROUBLED PHA'S.

       (a) Effect of Troubled Status on CHAS.--The comprehensive 
     housing affordability strategy (or any consolidated plan 
     incorporating such strategy) for the first year beginning 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act for the State or 
     unit of general local government in which any troubled public 
     housing agency is located shall not be considered to comply 
     with the requirements under section 105 of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act unless such plan 
     includes a description of the manner in which the State or 
     unit will assist such troubled agency in improving its 
     operations to remove such designation.
       (b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``troubled public housing agency'' means a public housing 
     agency that--
       (1) upon the date of the enactment of this Act, is 
     designated under section 6(j)(2) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (as in effect immediately before the enactment of 
     this Act) as a troubled public housing agency; and
       (2) is not a chronically troubled public housing agency, as 
     such term is defined in section 438(b) of this Act.

     SEC. 441. MAINTENANCE OF AND ACCESS TO RECORDS.

       (a) Keeping of Records.--Each local housing and management 
     authority shall keep such records as may be reasonably 
     necessary to disclose the amount and the disposition by the 
     authority of the proceeds of assistance received pursuant to 
     this Act and to ensure compliance with the requirements of 
     this Act.
       (b) Access to Documents.--The Secretary, the Inspector 
     General for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
     and the Comptroller General of the United States shall each 
     have access for the purpose of audit and examination to any 
     books, documents, papers, and records of a local housing and 
     management authority that are pertinent to this Act and 
     assistance received pursuant to this Act.

     SEC. 442. ANNUAL REPORTS REGARDING TROUBLED LHMA'S.

       The Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress 
     annually, as a part of the report of the Secretary under 
     section 8 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
     Act, that--
       (1) identifies the local housing and management authorities 
     that are designated as troubled or dysfunctional under 
     section 431(a)(2) and the reasons for such designation;
       (2) identifies the local housing and management authorities 
     that have lost accreditation pursuant to section 432; and
       (3) describes any actions that have been taken in 
     accordance with sections 433, 434, 435, and 436.

     SEC. 443. APPLICABILITY TO RESIDENT MANAGEMENT CORPORATIONS.

       The Secretary shall apply the provisions of this subtitle 
     to resident management corporations in the same manner as 
     applied to local housing and management authorities.

     SEC. 444. INAPPLICABILITY TO INDIAN HOUSING.

       The provisions of sections 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 
     438, and 442 shall not apply to public housing developed or 
     operated pursuant to a contract between the Secretary and an 
     Indian housing authority.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there amendments to title IV?
  If not, the Clerk will designate title V.
  The text of title V is as follows:
               TITLE V--REPEALS AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS

     SEC. 501. REPEALS.

       (a) In General.--The following provisions of law are hereby 
     repealed:
       (1) United states housing act of 1937.--The United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.).
       (2) Assisted housing allocation.--Section 213 of the 
     Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
     1439).
       (3) Public housing rent waivers for police.--Section 519 of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1437a-1).
       (4) Occupancy preferences and income mix for new 
     construction and substantial rehabilitation projects.--
     Subsection (c) of section 545, and section 555, of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f note).
       (5) Treatment of certificate and voucher holders.--
     Subsection (c) of section 183 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note).
       (6) Retroactive payment for annual adjustment factors.--
     Section 801 of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note).
       (7) Excessive rent burden data.--Subsection (b) of section 
     550 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437f note).
       (8) Section 8 disaster relief.--Sections 931 and 932 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1437c note).
       (9) Moving to opportunity for fair housing.--Section 152 of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f note).
       (10) Report regarding fair housing objectives.--Section 153 
     of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f note).
       (11) Section 8 community investment demonstration.--Section 
     6 of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1437f 
     note).
       (12) Special projects for elderly or handicapped 
     families.--Section 209 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 1438).
       (13) Access to pha books.--Section 816 of the Housing Act 
     of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 1435).
       (14) Miscellaneous provisions.--Subsections (b)(1), (c), 
     and (d) of section 326 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Amendments of 1981 (Public Law 97-35, 95 Stat. 
     406; 42 U.S.C. 1437f note).
       (15) Payment for development managers.--Section 329A of the 
     Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1981 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437j-1).
       (16) Purchase of pha obligations.--Section 329E of the 
     Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1981 (12 
     U.S.C. 2294a).
       (17) Procurement of insurance by pha's.--
       (A) In the item relating to ``administrative provisions'' 
     under the heading ``Management and Administration'' in title 
     II of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and 
     Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations 
     Act, 1991, the penultimate undesignated paragraph of such 
     item (Public Law 101-507; 104 Stat. 1369).
       (B) In the item relating to ``administrative provisions'' 
     under the heading ``Management and Administration'' in title 
     II of the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and 
     Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations 
     Act, 1992, the 19th through 23d undesignated paragraphs of 
     such item (Public Law 102-139; 105 Stat. 758).
       (18) Public housing childhood development.--Section 222 of 
     the Housing and Urban-Rural Recovery Act of 1983 (12 U.S.C. 
     1701z-6 note).
       (19) Indian housing childhood development.--Section 518 of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1701z-6 note).
       (20) Public housing comprehensive transition 
     demonstration.--Section 126 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note).
       (21) Public housing one-stop perinatal services 
     demonstration.--Section 521 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 1437t note).
       (22) Public housing mincs demonstration.--Section 522 of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f note).
       (23) Public housing energy efficiency demonstration.--
     Section 523 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 1437g note).
       (24) Omaha homeownership demonstration.--Section 132 of the 
     Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 
     102-550; 106 stat. 3712).
       (25) Public and assisted housing youth sports programs.--
     Section 520 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 11903a).
       (b) Savings Provision.--The repeals made by subsection (a) 
     shall not affect any legally binding obligations entered into 
     before the date of the enactment of this Act. Any funds or 
     activities subject to a provision of law repealed by 
     subsection (a) shall continue to be governed by the provision 
     as in effect immediately before such repeal.

     SEC. 502. CONFORMING AND TECHNICAL PROVISIONS.

       (a) Allocation of Elderly Housing Amounts.--Section 202(l) 
     of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q(l)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Consideration in allocating assistance.--Assistance 
     under this section shall be allocated in a manner that 
     ensures that the awards of the assistance are made for 
     projects of sufficient size to accommodate facilities for 
     supportive services appropriate to the needs of frail elderly 
     residents.''.
       (b) Eligibility for Assisted Housing.--
       (1) General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     for purposes of determining eligibility for admission to 
     assisted housing, a person shall not be considered to have a 
     disability or a handicap solely because of the prior or 
     current illegal use of a controlled substance (as defined in 
     section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act) or solely by 
     reason of the prior or current use of alcohol.
       (2) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, the term 
     ``assisted housing'' means housing designed primarily for 
     occupancy by elderly persons or persons with disabilities 
     that is assisted pursuant to this Act, the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, section 221(d)(3) or 236 of the National 
     Housing Act, section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, section 
     101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, or 
     section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act.
       (3) Continued occupancy.--This subsection may not be 
     construed to prohibit the continued

[[Page H4701]]

     occupancy of any person who is a resident in assisted housing 
     on the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Amendment to Housing and Urban-Rural Recovery Act of 
     1983.--Section 227(d)(2) of the Housing and Urban-Rural 
     Recovery Act of 1983 (12 U.S.C. 1701r-1(d)(2)) is amended by 
     inserting ``the United States Housing Act of 1996,'' after 
     ``the United States Housing Act of 1937,''.
       (d) Review of Drug Elimination Program Contracts.--
       (1) Requirement.--Notwithstanding the repeal under section 
     501(a)(26), the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall investigate all security contracts awarded by grantees 
     under the Public and Assisted Housing Drug Elimination Act of 
     1990 (42 U.S.C. 11901 et seq.) that are public housing 
     agencies that own or operate more than 4,500 public housing 
     dwelling units--
       (A) to determine whether the contractors under such 
     contracts have complied with all laws and regulations 
     regarding prohibition of discrimination in hiring practices;
       (B) to determine whether such contracts were awarded in 
     accordance with the applicable laws and regulations regarding 
     the award of such contracts;
       (C) to determine how many such contracts were awarded under 
     emergency contracting procedures;
       (D) to evaluate the effectiveness of the contracts; and
       (E) to provide a full accounting of all expenses under the 
     contracts.
       (2) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall complete the 
     investigation required under paragraph (1) and submit a 
     report to the Congress regarding the findings under the 
     investigation. With respect to each such contract, the report 
     shall (A) state whether the contract was made and is 
     operating, or was not made or is not operating, in full 
     compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and (B) for 
     each contract that the Secretary determines is in such 
     compliance in a personal certification of such compliance by 
     the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
       (3) Actions.--For each contract that is described in the 
     report under paragraph (2) as not made or not operating in 
     full compliance with applicable laws and regulation, the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall promptly 
     take any actions available under law or regulation that are 
     necessary--
       (A) to bring such contract into compliance; or
       (B) to terminate the contract.
       (e) References.--Except as provided in section 271 and 
     501(b), any reference in any other Federal law, Executive 
     order, rule, regulation, or delegation of authority, or any 
     document of or pertaining to--
       (1) public housing or housing assisted under the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 is deemed to refer to public 
     housing assisted under title II of this Act;
       (2) to assistance under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 is deemed to refer to assistance under 
     title III of this Act; and
       (3) to assistance under the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 is deemed to refer to assistance under this Act.

     SEC. 503. AMENDMENTS TO PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING DRUG 
                   ELIMINATION ACT OF 1990.

       (a) Short Title, Purposes, and Authority to Make Grants.--
     Chapter 2 of subtitle C of title V of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act 
     of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11901 et seq.) is amended by striking the 
     chapter heading and all that follows through section 5123 and 
     inserting the following:

           ``CHAPTER 2--COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS AGAINST CRIME

     ``SEC. 5121. SHORT TITLE.

       ``This chapter may be cited as the `Community Partnerships 
     Against Crime Act of 1996'.

     ``SEC. 5122. PURPOSES.

       ``The purposes of this chapter are to--
       ``(1) improve the quality of life for the vast majority of 
     law-abiding public housing residents by reducing the levels 
     of fear, violence, and crime in their communities;
       ``(2) broaden the scope of the Public and Assisted Housing 
     Drug Elimination Act of 1990 to apply to all types of crime, 
     and not simply crime that is drug-related; and
       ``(3) reduce crime and disorder in and around public 
     housing through the expansion of community-oriented policing 
     activities and problem solving.

     ``SEC. 5123. AUTHORITY TO MAKE GRANTS.

       ``The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may make 
     grants in accordance with the provisions of this chapter for 
     use in eliminating crime in and around public housing and 
     other federally assisted low-income housing projects to (1) 
     local housing and management authorities, and (2) private, 
     for-profit and nonprofit owners of federally assisted low-
     income housing.''.
       (b) Eligible Activities.--
       (1) In general.--Section 5124(a) of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act 
     of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11903(a)) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting 
     ``and around'' after ``used in'';
       (B) in paragraph (3), by inserting before the semicolon the 
     following: ``, including fencing, lighting, locking, and 
     surveillance systems'';
       (C) in paragraph (4), by striking subparagraph (A) and 
     inserting the following new subparagraph:
       ``(A) to investigate crime; and'';
       (D) in paragraph (6)--
       (i) by striking ``in and around public or other federally 
     assisted low-income housing projects''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon; and
       (E) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the following 
     new paragraphs:
       ``(7) providing funding to nonprofit public housing 
     resident management corporations and resident councils to 
     develop security and crime prevention programs involving site 
     residents;
       ``(8) the employment or utilization of one or more 
     individuals, including law enforcement officers, made 
     available by contract or other cooperative arrangement with 
     State or local law enforcement agencies, to engage in 
     community- and problem-oriented policing involving 
     interaction with members of the community in proactive crime 
     control and prevention activities;
       ``(9) programs and activities for or involving youth, 
     including training, education, recreation and sports, career 
     planning, and entrepreneurship and employment activities and 
     after school and cultural programs; and
       ``(10) service programs for residents that address the 
     contributing factors of crime, including programs for job 
     training, education, drug and alcohol treatment, and other 
     appropriate social services.''.
       (2) Other lhma-owned housing.--Section 5124(b) of the Anti-
     Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11903(b)) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``drug-related crime in housing owned by 
     public housing agencies'' and inserting ``crime in and around 
     housing owned by local housing and management authorities''; 
     and
       (ii) by striking ``paragraphs (1) through (7)'' and 
     inserting ``paragraphs (1) through (10)''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``public housing agency'' and inserting 
     ``local housing and management authority''; and
       (ii) by striking ``drug-related'' and inserting 
     ``criminal''.
       (c) Grant Procedures.--Section 5125 of the Anti-Drug Abuse 
     Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11904) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 5125. GRANT PROCEDURES.

       ``(a) LHMA's With 250 or More Units.--
       ``(1) Grants.--In each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
     make a grant under this chapter from any amounts available 
     under section 5131(b)(1) for the fiscal year to each of the 
     following local housing and management authorities:
       ``(A) New applicants.--Each local housing and management 
     authority that owns or operates 250 or more public housing 
     dwelling units and has--
       ``(i) submitted an application to the Secretary for a grant 
     for such fiscal year, which includes a 5-year crime 
     deterrence and reduction plan under paragraph (2); and
       ``(ii) had such application and plan approved by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(B) Renewals.--Each local housing and management 
     authority that owns or operates 250 or more public housing 
     dwelling units and for which--
       ``(i) a grant was made under this chapter for the preceding 
     Federal fiscal year;
       ``(ii) the term of the 5-year crime deterrence and 
     reduction plan applicable to such grant includes the fiscal 
     year for which the grant under this subsection is to be made; 
     and
       ``(iii) the Secretary has determined, pursuant to a 
     performance review under paragraph (4), that during the 
     preceding fiscal year the agency has substantially fulfilled 
     the requirements under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph 
     (4).
       ``(2) 5-year crime deterrence and reduction plan.--Each 
     application for a grant under this subsection shall contain a 
     5-year crime deterrence and reduction plan. The plan shall 
     describe, for the local housing and management authority 
     submitting the plan--
       ``(A) the nature of the crime problem in public housing 
     owned or operated by the local housing and management 
     authority;
       ``(B) the building or buildings of the local housing and 
     management authority affected by the crime problem;
       ``(C) the impact of the crime problem on residents of such 
     building or buildings; and
       ``(D) the actions to be taken during the term of the plan 
     to reduce and deter such crime, which shall include actions 
     involving residents, law enforcement, and service providers.

     The term of a plan shall be the period consisting of 5 
     consecutive fiscal years, which begins with the first fiscal 
     year for which funding under this chapter is provided to 
     carry out the plan.
       ``(3) Amount.--In any fiscal year, the amount of the grant 
     for a local housing and management authority receiving a 
     grant pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be the amount that 
     bears the same ratio to the total amount made available under 
     section 5131(b)(1) as the total number of public dwelling 
     units owned or operated by such authority bears to the total 
     number of dwelling units owned or operated by all local 
     housing and management authorities that own or operate 250 or 
     more public housing dwelling units that are approved for such 
     fiscal year.
       ``(4) Performance review.--For each fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall conduct a performance review of the 
     activities carried out by each local housing and management 
     authority receiving a grant pursuant to this subsection to 
     determine whether the agency--
       ``(A) has carried out such activities in a timely manner 
     and in accordance with its 5-year crime deterrence and 
     reduction plan; and
       ``(B) has a continuing capacity to carry out such plan in a 
     timely manner.
       ``(5) Submission of applications.--The Secretary shall 
     establish such deadlines and requirements for submission of 
     applications under this subsection.
       ``(6) Review and determination.--The Secretary shall review 
     each application submitted under this subsection upon 
     submission and shall approve the application unless the 
     application

[[Page H4702]]

     and the 5-year crime deterrence and reduction plan are 
     inconsistent with the purposes of this chapter or any 
     requirements established by the Secretary or the information 
     in the application or plan is not substantially complete. 
     Upon approving or determining not to approve an 
     application and plan submitted under this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall notify the local housing and management 
     authority submitting the application and plan of such 
     approval or disapproval.
       ``(7) Disapproval of applications.--If the Secretary 
     notifies an authority that the application and plan of the 
     authority is not approved, not later than the expiration of 
     the 15-day period beginning upon such notice of disapproval, 
     the Secretary shall also notify the authority, in writing, of 
     the reasons for the disapproval, the actions that the 
     authority could take to comply with the criteria for 
     approval, and the deadlines for such actions.
       ``(8) Failure to approve or disapprove.--If the Secretary 
     fails to notify an authority of approval or disapproval of an 
     application and plan submitted under this subsection before 
     the expiration of the 60-day period beginning upon the 
     submission of the plan or fails to provide notice under 
     paragraph (7) within the 15-day period under such paragraph 
     to an authority whose application has been disapproved, the 
     application and plan shall be considered to have been 
     approved for purposes of this section.
       ``(b) LHMA's With Fewer Than 250 Units and Owners of 
     Federally Assisted Low-Income Housing.--
       ``(1) Applications and plans.--To be eligible to receive a 
     grant under this chapter, a local housing and management 
     authority that owns or operates fewer than 250 public housing 
     dwelling units or an owner of federally assisted low-income 
     housing shall submit an application to the Secretary at such 
     time, in such manner, and accompanied by such additional 
     information as the Secretary may require. The application 
     shall include a plan for addressing the problem of crime in 
     and around the housing for which the application is 
     submitted, describing in detail activities to be conducted 
     during the fiscal year for which the grant is requested.
       ``(2) Grants for lhma's with fewer than 250 units.--In each 
     fiscal year the Secretary may, to the extent amounts are 
     available under section 5131(b)(2), make grants under this 
     chapter to local housing and management authorities that own 
     or operate fewer than 250 public housing dwelling units and 
     have submitted applications under paragraph (1) that the 
     Secretary has approved pursuant to the criteria under 
     paragraph (4).
       ``(3) Grants for federally assisted low-income housing.--In 
     each fiscal year the Secretary may, to the extent amounts are 
     available under section 5131(b)(3), make grants under this 
     chapter to owners of federally assisted low-income housing 
     that have submitted applications under paragraph (1) that the 
     Secretary has approved pursuant to the criteria under 
     paragraphs (4) and (5).
       ``(4) Criteria for approval of applications.--The Secretary 
     shall determine whether to approve each application under 
     this subsection on the basis of--
       ``(A) the extent of the crime problem in and around the 
     housing for which the application is made;
       ``(B) the quality of the plan to address the crime problem 
     in the housing for which the application is made;
       ``(C) the capability of the applicant to carry out the 
     plan; and
       ``(D) the extent to which the tenants of the housing, the 
     local government, local community-based nonprofit 
     organizations, local tenant organizations representing 
     residents of neighboring projects that are owned or assisted 
     by the Secretary, and the local community support and 
     participate in the design and implementation of the 
     activities proposed to be funded under the application.

     In each fiscal year, the Secretary may give preference to 
     applications under this subsection for housing made by 
     applicants who received a grant for such housing for the 
     preceding fiscal year under this subsection or under the 
     provisions of this chapter as in effect immediately before 
     the date of the enactment of the United States Housing Act of 
     1996.
       ``(5) Additional criteria for federally assisted low-income 
     housing.--In addition to the selection criteria under 
     paragraph (4), the Secretary may establish other criteria for 
     evaluating applications submitted by owners of federally 
     assisted low-income housing, except that such additional 
     criteria shall be designed only to reflect--
       ``(A) relevant differences between the financial resources 
     and other characteristics of local housing and management 
     authorities and owners of federally assisted low-income 
     housing; or
       ``(B) relevant differences between the problem of crime in 
     public housing administered by such authorities and the 
     problem of crime in federally assisted low-income 
     housing.''.
       (d) Definitions.--Section 5126 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act 
     of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11905) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2);
       (2) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ``section'' before 
     ``221(d)(4)'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) (as so amended) 
     as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Local housing and management authority.--The term 
     `local housing and management authority' has the meaning 
     given the term in title I of the United States Housing Act of 
     1996.''.
       (e) Implementation.--Section 5127 of the Anti-Drug Abuse 
     Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 11906) is amended by striking 
     ``Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act'' and 
     inserting ``United States Housing Act of 1996''.
       (f) Reports.--Section 5128 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 
     1988 (42 U.S.C. 11907) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``drug-related crime in'' and inserting 
     ``crime in and around''; and
       (2) by striking ``described in section 5125(a)'' and 
     inserting ``for the grantee submitted under subsection (a) or 
     (b) of section 5125, as applicable''.
       (g) Funding and Program Sunset.--Chapter 2 of subtitle C of 
     title V of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 is amended by 
     striking section 5130 (42 U.S.C. 11909) and inserting the 
     following new sections:

     ``SEC. 5130. FUNDING.

       ``(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this chapter such 
     sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 1996.
       ``(b) Allocation.--Of any amounts available, or that the 
     Secretary is authorized to use, to carry out this chapter in 
     any fiscal year--
       ``(1) 85 percent shall be available only for assistance 
     pursuant to section 5125(a) to local housing and management 
     authorities that own or operate 250 or more public housing 
     dwelling units;
       ``(2) 10 percent shall be available only for assistance 
     pursuant to section 5125(b)(2) to local housing and 
     management authorities that own or operate fewer than 250 
     public housing dwelling units; and
       ``(3) 5 percent shall be available only for assistance to 
     federally assisted low-income housing pursuant to section 
     5125(b)(3).

     ``SEC. 5131. PROGRAM TERMINATION.

       ``The program under this chapter shall terminate at the end 
     of September 30, 1996. No grants may be made under the 
     program after such date.''.
       (h) Conforming Amendments.--The table of contents in 
     section 5001 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 
     100-690; 102 Stat. 4295) is amended--
       (1) by striking the item relating to the heading for 
     chapter 2 of subtitle C of title V and inserting the 
     following:

          ``Chapter 2--Community Partnerships Against Crime'';

       (2) by striking the item relating to section 5122 and 
     inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 5122. Purposes.'';
       (3) by striking the item relating to section 5125 and 
     inserting the following new item:

``Sec. 5125. Grant procedures.'';
     and
       (4) by striking the item relating to section 5130 and 
     inserting the following new items:

``Sec. 5130. Funding.
``Sec. 5131. Program termination.''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there amendments to title V?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just understand. I know that there is a 
discussion taking place on the other side of the aisle at the moment 
over the Roemer amendment. Do we have an agreement? We have the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters] here for her amendment. That 
is amendment No. 42.


                 amendment no. 42 offered by ms. waters

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 42 offered by Ms. Waters: At the end of title 
     V, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 504. LIMITATION ON EXTENT OF USE OF LOAN GUARANTEES FOR 
                   HOUSING PURPOSES.

       Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1992 (42 U.S.C. 5308) is amended by inserting after 
     subsection (h) the following new section:
       ``(i) Limitation on Use.--Of any amounts obtained from 
     notes or other obligations issued by an eligible public 
     entity or public agency designated by an eligible public 
     entity and guaranteed under this section pursuant to an 
     application for a guarantee submitted after the date of the 
     enactment of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1992, the aggregate amount used for the purposes described in 
     clauses (2) and (4) of subsection (a), and for other housing 
     activities under the purposes described in clauses (1) and 
     (3) of subsection (a), may not exceed 10 percent of such 
     amounts obtained by the eligible public entity or agency.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters] and a Member 
opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters].
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This is really not a complicated amendment. Early on when I came to 
Congress, I discovered something called section 108 loan guarantee 
funds in HUD. These were funds that basically are used to provide 
economic development assistance to cities. It is a fund or a loan 
guarantee type program that is not scored in the budget.
  When I discovered this item, I moved to expand the opportunity for 
cities to

[[Page H4703]]

have economic development programs that would increase the job 
opportunities, that would support businesses, that would basically 
direct some attention toward commercial development.
  One of the things I have been very concerned about is the fact that 
we have put an emphasis oftentimes on developing housing and low-income 
housing, but the problem is precisely what we have created in public 
housing projects. We have provided some housing opportunities and 
basically placed poor people on top of each other without any 
businesses and without any services.
  So I thought that the use of these section 108 loan guarantee funds 
would have well served our cities if we had an opportunity to support 
business and commerce so that we do not continue to have housing and 
low-income housing without businesses in those communities that would 
provide goods and services and job opportunities.
  Section 108 loan guarantee funds I was able to expand to the tune of 
about $2 billion over 5 years. All of the cities have been applying for 
these funds. Many of the cities welcome the opportunity to have some 
funds by which they could create projects working with the business 
community to expand job opportunities, to expand entrepreneurship. But 
some of the cities have begun to use this money in ways other than 
economic development that was anticipated.
  I recognized that some of the cities have a need to be very creative 
in the way that they use these section 108 loan guarantee funds and 
they put a little bit off maybe into some infrastructure, maybe a 
little bit off into some housing. But my appeal here is to say let us 
put a cap on how much of this money can be taken and further used maybe 
for housing or anything else.
  Let us really pay attention to how we can empower communities and 
develop real economic development so that in fact the people that we 
say that we want to make independent, we create some opportunities for 
them to be independent.

  We hope, we know that small businesses, for example, create more job 
opportunities than any other entities in America. We know that, to the 
degree that we are able to develop small businesses, we expand job 
opportunities.
  I do not have oftentimes the opportunity to come to this floor and to 
really tell Members what I understand about business and economic 
development. There are those who would like to say all she and those 
others care about is welfare, all they care about is low-income 
housing, all they care about are government expenditures for the poor.
  That absolutely is not true. Many of us understand a lot more about 
business and business development and how to really support commerce 
and entrepreneurs in these communities than we often have an 
opportunity to demonstrate.
  I am here today because section 108 loan guarantee funds in HUD is a 
real opportunity to create economic development projects. This loan 
guarantee basically is given to those cities and the CDBG moneys are 
kind of used as a guarantee working with HUD. They get with local 
business persons, and they think about utilizing the resources of local 
government. Maybe there are some land opportunities. Maybe there are 
some programs in local government that they can match with some 
investment by the local entrepreneurs and this loan guarantee 
opportunity, and they come up with projects that they can locate in 
these communities and not only support business, small business and 
entrepreneurship but do job creation.
  Mr. Chairman, my colleagues must pay more attention to what the 
Government can do to help create jobs in our community. We want welfare 
to go away, we need jobs. We want people to be able to use the training 
that they are supposed to be getting through the use of our job 
training programs. There must be a job at the end of these job training 
programs. Do we want JTPA to be viable? I simply ask that my colleagues 
support me. Join hands in supporting that we limit the use of section 
108 so that the money is not siphoned off into other projects but goes 
into economic development. I ask for an aye vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member seek time in opposition to the 
amendment?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I have a great deal of sympathy for what the 
gentlewoman from California just said with respect to some of the 
points and the concerns that she has. It is a truism that, if all we 
deal with is housing in a particular community, we are failing that 
community. No community has just a housing, affordable housing problem. 
If it has an affordable housing problem, it probably also has an 
economic development problem, an education program, a job training 
problem. It has a problem in terms of access to basic banking services 
and affordable grocery markets and all the things that more affluent 
communities rely on that help make them healthy.
  Mr. Chairman, my concern is that first of all we are trying to take 
this whole subject up of CDBG and community development block programs 
and section 108 guarantee and the successor bill that will be coming 
down 2 or 3 months further down the pike in which we will begin to look 
at this very closely to ensure that there is maximum flexibility and 
the maximum ability to target resources to ensure that there is a 
relationship between the economic development and the affordable 
housing that we have.
  However, I have grave concerns about the way this particular 
amendment has been drafted because it targets and mandates that only 10 
percent of the money can be used for housing. In certain communities, 
especially those in more rural areas, the need for infrastructure for 
development of an entire block are more trying to be developed at the 
same time, the need to have a cost-effective development require the 
section 108 guarantee program.
  Mr. Chairman, it is exactly why we have this program, to front end 
the money because it is more cost effective to do it up front as 
opposed to doing it year after year after year. When you are doing a 
housing development, you need to put in new streets, new lights, new 
utilities. You need that section 108 program to go forward.
  If we had more flexibility in this amendment, I think it would be 
worthy of closer consideration. But to say to communities that only 10 
percent of the money can be used for housing and 90 percent can be used 
for economic development, without frankly identifying exactly how that 
money can be spent, without proper consideration by the committee or 
having hearings, I have a concern and a problem with that.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly must oppose this amendment, but I do not 
oppose the concern of the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters]. I 
do not oppose the gentlewoman's commitment on this. I think she is 
right in terms of her concept, and I pledge to her that I am willing to 
continue to work closely with her to make sure the communities are 
integrated more closely, especially commerce with respect to affordable 
housing.
  We are in the process, Mr. Chairman, of trying to negotiate something 
that I think will provide some flexibility. I mean to speak to a 
particular point while some of the staffs are trying to work out some 
of the technical aspects of a possible compromise here that will allow 
for both economic and home ownership opportunities and the use of 
section 108 for developing homes.
  Let me say also the need for commercial development; later on there 
is going to be an amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. 
Hayworth] which provides an opportunity for Native American houisng, 
and one of the most important parts of that amendment, which was a bill 
that was filed earlier, introduced earlier, by myself and many Members 
of our side of the aisle was to provide not only maximum flexibility in 
respect for the nation-nation relationship in terms of Native American 
Indian country, but also to provide for the first time the same type of 
loan guarantee program that has brought home ownership and economic 
development to so many communities in America.

[[Page H4704]]

  The relationship between economic development and housing, especially 
affordable housing, is a strong one. As I say, no community has just an 
affordable housing program. If people had the capability to have jobs, 
it would enable them to have an income so they can make their own 
choices, and we would not have those same needs for affordable housing. 
Unfortunately, we do not have the same relationship and targeting that 
is necessary. Those are mostly locally based solutions in the end. 
Organizations like List and Enterprise are doing that throughout the 
country, creating a synergy where commercial enterprise and housing is 
built together, planned together. Local communities are involved in the 
outcome and the strategies in getting there, and that is exactly the 
right model that we ought to be following because that is the 
successful model.
  The first year and a half of my chairmanship, one of the things I did 
was to back up and to say let us find out what is going on right out 
there. One of the things that is right, one of the successes that is 
happening throughout our country, is in self-help housing, is an 
integrated commercial and residential development, mostly by entities 
like List and Enterprise.
  Let me suggest that if we can work out a compromise on this to allow 
for both economic development and home ownership opportunities through 
this section 108 program, I think we will preserve both of our 
principles of flexibility and also providing for the initiative to have 
more economic development.


            modification of amendment offered by ms. waters

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify my 
amendment to accommodate the concerns of the chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Modification of amendment offered by Ms. Waters: in the 
     proposed new subsection (i) of section 108 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992, strike out ``10 percent'' 
     and insert ``50 percent''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman 
from California that the amendment be modified?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered 
by the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters].
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to title V?


                 amendment no. 45 offered by mr. durbin

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 45 offered by Mr. Durbin: At the end of title 
     V of the bill, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 515. PROHIBITION AGAINST ILLEGAL POSSESSION OR DISCHARGE 
                   OF FIREARMS IN PUBLIC HOUSING ZONES.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds and 
     declares that--
       (A) crime, particularly crime involving firearms, is a 
     pervasive, nationwide problem;
       (B) crime at the local level is exacerbated by the 
     interstate movement of firearms;
       (C) firearms and ammunition move easily in interstate 
     commerce and illegal firearms have been found in increasing 
     numbers in and around public housing zones;
       (D) in fact, even before the sale of a firearm, the gun, 
     its component parts, ammunition, and the raw materials from 
     which they are made have considerably moved in interstate 
     commerce;
       (E) while criminals freely move from State to State, 
     ordinary citizens and foreign visitors may fear to travel to 
     or through certain parts of the country due to concern about 
     violent crime and gun violence;
       (F) the occurrence of violent crime in public housing zones 
     has resulted in a decline in the quality of public housing in 
     our country;
       (G) this decline in the quality of public housing has an 
     adverse impact on interstate commerce and the foreign 
     commerce of the United States;
       (H) States, localities, and local housing and management 
     authorities find it almost impossible to handle gun-related 
     crime by themselves; even States, localities, and local 
     housing and management authorities that have made strong 
     efforts to prevent, detect, and punish gun-related crime find 
     their efforts unavailing due in part to the failure or 
     inability of other States or localities to take strong 
     measures; and
       (I) the Congress has power, under the interstate commerce 
     clause and other provisions of the Constitution, to enact 
     measures to ensure the integrity and safety of the Nation's 
     public housing by enactment of this section.
       (b) Prohibitions.--
       (1) Possession.--It shall be unlawful for any person, in or 
     affecting interstate or foreign commerce, to possess a 
     firearm in violation of any other Federal law or of any State 
     or local law, at a place that the person knows is in a public 
     housing zone.
       (2) Discharge.--
       (A) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person, in or 
     affecting interstate or foreign commerce, to discharge or 
     attempt to discharge a firearm, knowingly or with reckless 
     disregard for the safety of another, at a place that the 
     person knows is in a public housing zone.
       (B) Exceptions.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the 
     discharge of a firearm--
       (i) by a person employed by a local housing and management 
     authority to provide security for a public housing 
     development in the public housing zone, acting within the 
     scope of such employment; or
       (ii) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her 
     official capacity.
       (c) Penalties.--Whoever violates subsection (b) shall be 
     fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not 
     more than 5 years, or both. Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, a term of imprisonment imposed under this 
     subsection shall not run concurrently with any other term of 
     imprisonment imposed under any other provision of law. Except 
     for the authorization of a term of imprisonment of not more 
     than 5 years made in this subsection, for the purposes of any 
     other law a violation of subsection (b) shall be deemed to be 
     a misdemeanor.
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the 
     following definitions shall apply:
       (1) The terms ``firearm'', ``interstate or foreign 
     commerce'', ``person'', and ``whoever'', have the meanings 
     given such terms in section 921(a) of title 18, United States 
     Code.
       (2) The term ``public housing zone'' means in or upon--
       (A) the real property comprising the public housing 
     developments of any local housing and management authority; 
     or
       (B) any public property which is at a distance of not more 
     than 1,000 feet from property referred to in subparagraph 
     (A).
       (e) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to conduct 
     engaged in after the end of the 60-day period that begins 
     with the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (f) Gun-Free Zone Signs.--Federal, State, and local 
     authorities (including local housing and management 
     authorities) are encouraged to cause signs to be posted 
     around public housing zones giving warning of the prohibition 
     against the illegal possession of a firearm in such zones.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] and a Member 
opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin].
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope this amendment will receive bipartisan support. 
What we are trying to address in this amendment is a very serious life-
and-death problem in public housing across America.
  Several weeks ago I was taken on a tour of the Chicago housing 
projects. The people who took me on the tour pointed out buildings in 
the projects, fully occupied buildings, that were under the control of 
drug gangs. Despite the best efforts of security personnel and Chicago 
police, these gangs literally took control of housing units, 
terrorizing the residents, selling narcotics, brandishing weapons and 
firing those weapons at will.
  Anyone who wants this documented should read the story entitled 
``There Are No Children Here,'' by Alex Kotlowitz, a Wall Street 
Journal correspondent who followed the lives of two tiny children 
growing up in public housing in the city of Chicago. It is an 
incredible story.
  Mr. Chairman, the worst part of the story is the violence that takes 
place in public housing today.
  This amendment addresses clearly and plainly the question of 
possessing firearms in public housing, and it attempts to establish a 
national standard which says very simply that we prohibit the 
possession of illegal, illegal firearms in public housing and public 
housing zones, that we prohibit the reckless discharge or attempted 
discharge of any firearm in public housing, and those found guilty of 
the crime will be subject to 5 years in prison, a $5,000 fine, or both.
  Is this necessary? Let me use the city of Chicago as an example. In 
one sweep of public housing projects in the city of Chicago between 
April and June of last year, this is what they confiscated: 170 
handguns, 192 assault weapons, assault weapons, over $133,000 in cash, 
thousands of grams of controlled narcotics and substances with a street 
value in excess of $2 million.

[[Page H4705]]

  This public housing belongs to the residents, but it also belongs to 
the taxpayers of America. We owe it to the families, we certainly owe 
it to the children in that public housing, to keep their lives safe 
from harm.
  Those who would bring in illegal firearms or discharge them in public 
housing should be subject to the full brunt of the law, not just 
tenants, but those who come onto public housing grounds and take 
advantage of the poor families living there.
  I commend this amendment to all of my colleagues, Democrat and 
Republican, and reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin].
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
man consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I have several concerns, and I am compelled to oppose 
this amendment. The first concern is that this provision federalizes 
State law. On page 3, line 2, this provision makes it a Federal 
violation to violate this amendment.
  My second concern is that nowhere in this provision do we require 
criminal intent to be a factor in terms of prohibiting the use or the 
possession of firearms in an area of public housing. For example, if 
the State law allows a single mother to carry a gun and she lives in 
public housing, she can not protect herself.
  Lastly and most importantly, let me say this is not the vehicle to be 
talking about gun control. We are trying to get housing policy done 
right now. We have dramatic arguments that have been made already with 
respect to section 8 public housing income mixes, different aspects of 
protections. To interject gun arguments right now I think is frankly a 
red herring, it is not the appropriate place to be inserting this, and 
frankly I think there are a number of these concerns that most Members 
should share in terms of insuring that the intent of the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Durbin] is carried out.
  So, frankly, I think that if the gentleman were interested in really 
having something done with respect to in and around the property around 
public housing, we will be happy to try and work with him as time went 
on, but this is just the wrong vehicle.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
McCollum], the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime.
  (Mr. McCOLLUM] asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I know the gentleman who is offering this 
amendment is doing it with all good intent because I am sure, as he 
does, I share the basic premise that we should not have criminals out 
there discharging firearms or using them or possessing them in a public 
housing unit. Nobody in America wants crime to be going on in public 
housing units.
  But the problem with this amendment is that it prohibits law-abiding 
citizens from possessing firearms, from having them to defend 
themselves, or to discharge those firearms in the defense of their own 
home in a public housing unit.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McCOLLUM. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I believe the language, 
the specific language, says illegal firearms.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I only have 1 minute.
  The fact of the matter is that if he has the firearm, somebody has 
that firearm, I think that person ought to have the right to possess 
that firearm and to be able to protect it. That firearm is only going 
to be illegal maybe because New York City makes it illegal to possess 
one, something of that nature.
  The truth of the matter is we should not, as a Congress, federalize 
local ordinances, which this does, makes a Federal crime out of it if 
you violate a local ordinance in a situation like this. And in addition 
to that, I do not believe, and I do not think most of us believe, 
anybody who is a law-abiding citizen should be prohibited from having a 
firearm in their possession in a public housing unit.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I find this incredible. I offer an amendment which 
prohibits the possession of illegal firearms, illegal firearms, in 
public housing, and it is being resisted by the Republican majority. 
Illegal firearms.
  Do we want to end crime in this country with sensible gun regulation?
  Every time we raise the issue of firearms on this floor, will we have 
people go into a panic?
  We are talking about illegal firearms. We are talking about the 
discharge of firearms in public housing, terrorizing families and their 
children. We are talking about drug gangs.
  Mr. Chairman, the resistance to this amendment tells me that many of 
the people who are opposing it have not even been to these public 
housing projects and spoken to the families.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Kennedy].
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, let me just quote from 
the law that the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] has proposed: 
``to posses a firearm in violation of any other federal law or any 
State or local law at a place that person knows.''
  The fact of the matter is this is restricted to illegal firearms. How 
can our colleagues possibly suggest that we ought to allow illegal 
firearms use in public housing? This is plain and simple, black and 
white.
  This is, once again, the hidden arm at the NRA at work on the floor 
of the House of Representatives, once again gutting basic protections 
of the vulnerable people of this country.
  I strongly support the Durbin amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from the State of Georgia [Mr. Barr].
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
this time to me.
  My distinguished colleague on the other side just mentioned that, 
well, he does not know if any of us have been in housing projects. Mr. 
Chairman, my colleagues are about to hear from one that has, that has 
prosecuted crimes in our housing projects, that has been to funerals of 
people who have been killed in housing projects, that has met with the 
men and women whose sons and daughters have been shot and injured in 
drive-by shootings, and we certainly agree with the gentleman that we 
should be doing everything that we can to protect those people. But 
this amendment is simply not the way to do it.
  There are page after page, volume after volume of Federal laws that 
have been enforced, that can be enforced, that should be enforced that 
protect against these people who use firearms in the commission of a 
crime.
  But, very frankly, I am not interested in making criminal a woman who 
defends herself in that housing project, the same elderly woman that my 
colleague spoke of eloquently a few moments ago that wants to use a 
firearm to protect herself and yet who may run afoul of some other law. 
I think protecting those people, giving them the right to protect 
themselves, is absolutely paramount, and I am opposed to this thinly 
veiled effort to take that right away.
  Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that each side be 
given an additional 10 minutes for debate on the amendment.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I object.
  The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.


               preferential motion offered by mr. volkmer

  Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I offer a preferential motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Volkmer moves that the Committee do now rise and report 
     the bill back to the House with the recommendation that the 
     enacting clause be stricken.

                              {time}  1515

  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Volkmer] is recognized 
for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
  Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I think it would be wise for all Members 
of this body to read this amendment,

[[Page H4706]]

especially page 3, as I did about a half an hour ago over in my office. 
I had asked my staff this morning to get a copy of this amendment, 
because the way it was reported in the digest that we received this 
morning, I had some reservations. I wanted to see the amendment.
  Lo and behold, when I read the amendment, on page 3, under the 
heading, subparagraph 2, it says: ``Discharge. In general, it shall be 
unlawful for any person in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce 
to discharge or attempt to discharge a firearm knowingly, or with 
reckless disregard for the safety of another, at a place that the 
person knows is in a public housing zone.'' that may sound harmless, 
but let us put it in actual conditions of what may happen.
  I am residing in a public housing project. I have an apartment. I 
also am a hunter. I have some guns. That is not illegal in my housing 
project. Now, about 9 or 10 o'clock at night, a drug addict needing 
money busts through my door, holding a gun aimed at me. I grab my gun. 
He fires and misses. I fire and hit him. I only wound him. Guess what, 
Mr. Chairman? He gets charged for armed robbery. I get charged under 
this, and I could get 5 years because I have discharged a firearm in a 
public housing zone, knowingly and with reckless disregard for safety, 
because I was not worried about his safety, I guarantee you.
  I am sure the gentleman did not mean that, Mr. Chairman, but that is 
they way the amendment reads.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VOLKMER. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman, I am sure, is familiar with 
the defense of self-defense.
  Mr. VOLKMER. Yes, but that is no defense to this offense.
  Mr. DURBIN. It is a common-law defense.
  Mr. VOLKMER. Not to this offense. No, it is not.
  Mr. DURBIN. Yes, sir.
  Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman wants to put it in there, 
an exception for self-defense, then I would say yes. But the gentleman 
does not have that in here. He just says anybody who knowingly and with 
intent, with reckless disregard for the safety of another.
  Mr. DURBIN. If the gentleman will yield one more time, Mr. Chairman, 
I will accept the gentleman's amendment. I would add the language 
``except in cases of self-defense.''
  Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman, why does he 
want to upgrade a local ordnance involving guns to a Federal offense?
  Mr. DURBIN. If the gentleman will further yield, I think the 
gentleman is aware of the fact that we have more than a casual interest 
in public housing in America. Federal taxpayers have a massive 
investment in public housing. What we are attempting to do, I say to my 
friend, the gentleman from Missouri, is to remove illegal firearms from 
public housing, firearms which are being used to terrorize.
  Mr. VOLKMER. That is not necessarily so.
  Mr. DURBIN. Some State laws cover it, some do not. We are trying to 
establish a national uniform standard that illegal firearms in public 
housing and the illegal discharge of those firearms is against the law.
  Mr. VOLKMER. They are not federally illegal. What you are telling me 
is if a local city body decides that there are not going to be any 
guns, as the gentleman has in Illinois, there are not going to be any 
guns in this community, none whatsoever, and I have a gun in that 
community and it is in a public housing project, I have a Federal 
offense of 5 years, not just a violation of a local ordnance.
  That is the other objection I have to it. I do not believe that we 
should make every local ordnance a Federal offense if it involves guns 
in a public housing project. No, I do not believe that.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VOLKMER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I am trying to 
understand, is the gentleman's objection.
  Mr. VOLKMER. Two objections. We cleared up one.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. If it is the one objection, that if you 
are possessing an illegal firearm and you use that illegal firearm----
  Mr. VOLKMER. Illegal because of what? Because of a local zoning 
ordinance that says you cannot have a gun in this town?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Let us go back to what the proposal 
says. It says ``in possession of a firearm violation of any State law 
or any local law.''
  Mr. VOLKMER. Any local law. That is my objection, any local law.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. What you are saying is, if you are 
possessing a gun illegally and you use that in defense of yourself----
  Mr. VOLKMER. No, that has nothing to do with this. One has nothing to 
do with the other.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the 
gentleman, what is his objection?
  Mr. VOLKMER. I am saying, you are elevating a local ordnance to a 5-
year Federal offense. We do not do it in anything else. We do not make 
a DWI, a DWI which could kill people, we do not make that a Federal 
offense.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I claim 5 minutes in opposition.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, was that not a point of 
personal privilege?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman had a preferential motion that the 
enacting clause be stricken. He is recognized under that motion for 5 
minutes. Someone in opposition to that motion is also recognized for 5 
minutes. The gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter] has claimed that.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished gentleman 
from Illinois [Mr. Hastert], the distinguished deputy whip.
  (Mr. HASTERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding to me.
  First of all, Mr. Chairman, we have a housing bill before us. There 
is a motion to change this whole system by the gentleman from Missouri, 
[Mr. Volkmer].
  Mr. Chairman, when I started to look at it, if I did not know my 
colleague, the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. Durbin], better, I would 
say this probably smacks of maybe even senatorial politics, but I am 
sure that that is not the case.
  On the other hand, when we start to look at the situation, I believe 
that the ordinance for the city of Chicago prohibits any type of 
firearm or weapon, possession and use. The State of Illinois prohibits 
certain types of weapons and use. We also have a requirement of an FOID 
card, possession, and almost a 6-week waiting period before any type of 
possession of a firearm.
  Also, there are various countries in Illinois that have, whether it 
is valid or not, county restrictions. I am not sure which law that my 
friend, the gentleman from Illinois, is going to ascribe and make that 
a Federal Law. Is it the State Law? Is it the municipal ordinances? Is 
it the county statutes?
  Mr. Chairman, I think certainly the ability of trying to figure out 
or to sort out for local and State and county officials, whether you 
are from the sheriff's office and you have that jurisdiction, or if you 
are from the Chicago city police, from that jurisdiction, or the 
Illinois State Police, from that jurisdiction, certainly they have 
conflicting jurisdictions, and really it makes a mess of the system 
that is before us, I would think probably we ought to take this 
amendment for what it is, trying to get a little plus up in an area 
that some people are not well known in, and let it go at that. I ask 
that we vote against this.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida, 
[Mr. McCollum], the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Crime.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, for I want to 
explain why we are talking about this. First of all, I do not think we 
ought to rise, but we ought to understand that under the underlying 
amendment that is here, it is not the possession of an illegal firearm 
that is the problem. It is the illegal possession. That is the language 
that says here. It says we are going to federalize all local ordinances 
that make it illegal to possess a firearm in public housing.

[[Page H4707]]

  I do not think we have any business doing that. The firearms could be 
perfectly legal. They could be lawful. They do not have to be assault 
weapons or something. As long as you possess a firearm in many 
communities, the very possession of an ordinary gun is illegal or 
unlawful in that community. Now we are going to make it a Federal crime 
if that is the case. I think that is wrong.
  Second, the fact of the matter is that under the discharge provisions 
of this, whatever we are going to do with self-defense really is 
irrelevant. I think under the Lopez decision, which we saw last year 
come down, it is unconstitutional for the Federal Government be 
involved in saying that we are going to make it a crime in every public 
housing unit in this country to discharge a firearm. We already know 
under the Supreme Court ruling you cannot do that with respect to a 
school.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia 
[Mr. Barr].
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I think this particular provision 
is a wolf in sheep's clothing. As the distinguished chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Crime correctly pointed out, its reach would be vast. 
It would be vast, indeed, because what it does by its very terms and 
its implication would be to federalize a huge category of potential 
crimes, in addition to creating a new substantive crime, in and of 
itself.
  I would urge Members to look very carefully at this, to put aside the 
self-defense language that we have heard of, because it does not go to 
the root, the heart of the problem, with this amendment. That is its 
vast scope and the federalism problems that we have, in addition to 
those other problems that the distinguished chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Crime has already pointed out that relate to its 
underlying constitutionality.
  Mr. Chairman, I would simply tell Members that there are other 
constitutional infirmities that appear on the face of this particular 
provision.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time on the motion has been used.
  Does the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Volkmer] wish to withdraw his 
motion?
  Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
motion.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Missouri.
  There was no objection.


            modification of amendment offered by mr. durbin

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to offer a 
modification to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Modification of amendment offered by Mr. Durbin:
       On page 3 line 11 of the amendment, add after the word 
     ``zone'', the following ``, except in cases of self-
     defense.''

  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Illinois?
  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I object.
  The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, would the Chair please advise me of the 
remaining time on the amendment?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] and the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] each have 1 minute remaining on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin].
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, would the Chair advise me of who has the 
right to close?
  The CHAIRMAN. The time in opposition is controlled by the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Lazio]. He would have the right to close.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself my 1 remaining minute.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope the Members and those watching this debate are 
paying close attention. I introduced an amendment which said that it is 
a Federal crime to possess illegal firearms in public housing projects, 
or to discharge firearms, except in cases of self-defense. Did Members 
notice the opposition that came to the floor? What family in America 
would argue against the proposition that you should keep illegal 
firearms out of their home and not fire them at will? Yet, when we 
raise the question of firearms on the floor of this House of 
Representatives, the gun lobby comes rolling through. You cannot 
mention those words.
  That is mindless. This has nothing to do with the second amendment. 
This is a question of common sense. American taxpayers who own public 
housing with the residents and the families who live there need the 
peace of mind and security that this amendment will bring. I hope that 
my colleagues will push aside the gun lobby once and forever, and say 
when it comes to illegal firearms, we do not want them in public 
housing projects. We do not want them anywhere.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, as designee, I claim the final minute in 
opposition to the amendment, and I yield to the gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. McCollum].
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I know that the gentleman from Illinois 
is well-intentioned. Whatever his intent is, the language that is 
written here does not express that intent. There is a possession crime 
and it is going to be federalized in here. It is a possession not of an 
illegal firearm but of any firearm. If the possession happened to be 
unlawful under a local community act, then it would become an unlawful 
Federal crime. That is a wrong procedure. We should not do it.
  In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, this amendment, no matter what the 
intent, would mean that somebody who has a permit, a lawful permit to 
carry a gun, to protect themselves, perhaps because of a stalker who 
has been after them, would no longer be allowed to discharge or possess 
that firearm in a public housing unit of this country or it would be a 
Federal crime. It is wrong. It is not the right way to proceed.
  Nobody wants criminals discharging firearms in public housing. There 
are already provisions, a Federal law, that prohibited it in the course 
of a drug transaction or that kind of thing where there is a real 
Federal nexus, but not to protect yourself in self-defense. Everybody 
ought to have the right to possess a gun to do that. Vote ``no'' on 
this amendment.

                              {time}  1530

  The CHAIRMAN. All time on this amendment has expired.


               preferential motion offered by ms. waters

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer a preferential motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Ms. Waters moves that the Committee do now rise and report 
     the bill back to the House with the recommendation that the 
     enacting clause be stricken.

  The CHAIRMAN. The motion offered by the gentlewoman from California 
[Ms. Waters] is not timely because there must be a change in the bill 
before a second motion striking the enacting clause is in order; 
therefore, the motion to strike the enacting clause is out of order at 
this point.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Durbin].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes have 
it.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that 
I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, further proceedings on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] will be 
postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
  Are there further amendments to title V?


                      amendment offered by mr. ney

  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. NEY: At the end of title V of the 
     bill, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 515. ELIGIBILITY FOR PARTICIPATION IN FEDERAL FLOOD 
                   INSURANCE PROGRAM.

       The placement of any manufactured or mobile home on any 
     site, shall not affect the eligibility of any community to 
     participate in the Federal flood insurance program under the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster 
     Protection Act of 1973 (notwithstanding that such placement 
     may fail to comply with any elevation or flood damage 
     mitigation requirements), if--
       (1) such manufactured or mobile home was previously located 
     on such site;
       (2) such manufactured or mobile home was relocated from 
     such site because of flooding that threatened or affected 
     such site; and
       (3) such replacement is conducted not later than the 
     expiration of the 180-day period

[[Page H4708]]

     that begins upon the subsidence (in the area of such site) of 
     the body of water that flooded to a level considered lower 
     than flood levels.

  Mr. NEY (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent 
that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to 
object, I reserve a point of order against the amendment. I had tried 
to raise a point of order against the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is the gentleman reserving a point of order?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Yes, I want to reserve the point of 
order.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman want to insist on the point of order 
at this point?
  Mr KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I do not want to insist on it at this 
point. I want to enter into a dialogue with the gentleman that is 
offering the amendment to clarify my understanding of what the intent 
of the amendment is.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts has the option to 
insist on or reserve the point of order at this point. If he wants to 
reserve the point of order, the Chair will then recognize the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Ney] for the purposes of explaining his amendment.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have 
to do that? Does he have the time or do I have the time?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman can reserve the point now, but at a later 
time during the consideration of the amendment he may make his point of 
order.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I am asking how long is 
he allowed? Am I allowed to speak and then to provide him the time?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman can raise the point of order at this 
point or he can reserve the point of order. If he reserves the point of 
order, he can allow the gentleman from Ohio his 5 minutes in support of 
the amendment. The gentleman from Massachusetts could insist on a point 
of order at that point. At the Chair's discretion he could speak 
against the amendment and at the conclusion of that insist on the point 
of order. Remember, there is a 10-minute allocation for any amendment 
under the agreement of May 8.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, in that case, I will 
reserve the point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Kennedy] 
reserves a point of order on the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will complete the reading of the amendment.
  The Clerk concluded the reading of the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney] will be recognized for 5 
minutes in support of his amendment, and a Member opposed will be 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney].
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, on January 20, 1996, eastern Ohio and the northern 
panhandle of West Virginia were struck with a disastrous flood. There 
are many residents in this area that are owners of mobile homes. 
Several of those homeowners transported their mobile homes to safe 
areas away from the rising water before the mobile homes were damaged.
  After this area was drained, after the flood waters receded, the 
owners then moved their homes back and in some cases attempted to move 
their homes back, because according to FEMA, these mobile homeowners 
must build expensive 12-foot-tall foundations if they want to move 
their homes back to the areas that were affected.
  Even though it was all along the Ohio River, and the northern 
panhandle of West Virginia in particular, this was called to our 
attention about this FEMA regulation by a local newspaper, the Wheeling 
Intelligencer. We were getting calls from not only Wheeling, WV, but 
Powhatan, OH, in particular. These are two areas, but I am sure this 
applies to many people along that entire Ohio River.
  In some cases the mayor in, for example, Powhatan, OH, Mayor Bell is 
forced to tell people, ``You can not bring your trailer back onto your 
land.'' Because if the mayor does not do that, aid is going to be cut 
to that municipality.
  So the intent is to let people come back onto their land. The problem 
we have got is that FEMA, however, is saying they have got to build a 
12-foot foundation, bring their mobile home back, put it on top of that 
12-foot foundation, which is ridiculous. If another flood occurs, they 
can move the mobile home off and then they can bring the mobile home 
back once the flood waters have receded.
  So there are a lot of people, Mr. Chairman, that are simply in a very 
bad position as a result of this rule.
  The amendment simply states that the placement of any manufactured or 
mobile home on any site shall not affect the eligibility of any 
community to participate in the Federal Flood Insurance Program under 
the National Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, so long as the home 
was previously located on the site, the home was relocated from the 
site because of the threat of flooding and such replacement is 
conducted no later than 180 days after a flood subsides.
  I spoke to the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] and this 
has affected his area. I feel this is a bipartisan amendment. It is my 
understanding hopefully that there will be no opposition to this but I 
just want to urge, this is very important to people in the regions 
concerned. I urge your support.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. NEY. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter 
into a dialog with the gentleman with regard to his amendment. I have 
worked very hard, along with other Members of the Committee on Banking 
and Financial Services, over the course of the last several years to 
reform the flood insurance program of this country, a program which has 
been in disastrous shape itself.
  We have often found ourselves rewarding individuals, homeowners that 
build homes in flood plains knowing that floods are going to come and 
knowing that when they do come, simply by buying relatively inexpensive 
flood insurance they can simply have his home rebuild at Federal 
taxpayers' expense. It is a horrific situation. It is one that ends up 
driving up the cost of flood insurance for everyone else and 
discouraging flood insurance for millions of Americans that otherwise 
might participate.
  As I understand the amendment that the gentleman is trying to get 
accomplished here, what he is saying is that there are people that live 
in mobile homes that live in flood plains that can anticipate floods 
are coming; that then hook their trailers up to cars or whatever, drive 
them out of the flood plains when the flood comes, and then when flood 
goes away, they take their mobile homes and drive them back into the 
flood plain. Is that correct?
  Mr. NEY. That is correct.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Does this cover those homes that do not 
move?
  Mr. NEY. It does not, Mr. Chairman. These are for the homes, this is 
word-specific, that were moved out and brought back. Right now the 
mayor has to tell the people, for example, ``You cannot bring them back 
because the aid is going to be cut off to the entire community.'' If 
they took the home out, they brought the home back after the flood, 
this applies to those individuals.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would 
continue to yield, I am just trying to understand it here now. If these 
people are all so mobile and they can anticipate the floods, then why 
do they need the flood insurance? Does the gentleman know what I mean? 
They can just hook up and get out of there.
  I would like to have a further understanding as to how we distinguish 
between the guy who could not quite get hooked up in time, and he ends 
up getting flooded out and then we pay for the insurance to rebuild his 
home.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney] has 
expired.

[[Page H4709]]

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I now have my own time, is that 
correct, Mr. Chairman?
  The CHAIRMAN. That is correct. The gentleman has 5 minutes in 
opposition to the amendment if he so chooses.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I am maintaining the 
point of order, preserving the point of order on germaneness until we 
have this understanding.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized on his own time for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to make it clear to the offerer, the individual 
offering the amendment, that I have been to West Virginia and I 
understand that there are some families that are forced to live in 
flood plains simply because in many cases the mining companies or the 
Federal Government owns all the land outside of the flood plain, and 
these individuals are forced to live there. So I want to be sensitive 
to those needs but I do not want to be irresponsible with Federal tax 
dollars and reward individuals that stay in flood plains, knowing that 
they are going to be reimbursed by the Federal Government, and abuse 
the system.
  I want to make certain that until it is clear to me, and know that 
the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin], who chaired the disaster task 
force last year, is concerned about this as well, we want to make very 
clear that we are not going to be supportive of this amendment until we 
understand what the details are.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I am happy to yield to the gentleman 
from Ohio.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, at issue here is not a matter of the insurance 
or anybody trying to scam the system. What has happened here, the 
Federal agency--by the way, I want to say FEMA did a good job in 
representing people when the President declared a disaster--but what 
has happened is someone in FEMA said, ``Okay, you bring the trailers 
back.'' This has nothing to do with an insurance measure. ``You bring 
them back, take the piece of ground and build a 12-foot cinder block 
foundation, put it up on top of there and you can come back.''
  So if they do not do that, the entire city of Wheeling, WV, the 
entire city of Powhatan, OH, lose all their aid unless they make people 
do that. It is not a matter of insurance or whether they had it or not. 
It is a matter of whether they took the trailer out, away from harm's 
way, and took it back. They cannot physically place it on their own 
land unless a 12-foot cinder block foundation has been built.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Reclaiming my time, the problem is that 
we asked FEMA in the legislation, the reform of the flood insurance 
program last year, we asked FEMA to draw up plans to make certain that 
we were not sending people back into the flood plain. If that flood 
plain is in fact 12 feet high where people are locating these homes, 
then it seems to me that FEMA was only doing its job by requiring that 
we do not in fact allow people to rebuild.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to my friend the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Durbin].
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I say to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney], 
when our task force looked into Federal disaster policy, we learned 
that in the 1950's the Federal Government assumed responsibility for 5 
percent of the cost of natural disasters. We now assume responsibility 
for 95 percent of the cost and it adds to our deficit every time.
  The policy which the gentleman is trying to subvert would allow 
people to move back in the flood plain and leave the Federal taxpayers 
liable and vulnerable again in the event of disaster. I think that is a 
mistake.
  Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentleman I know what his intent is, 
to help these families, but bringing them back into harm's way merely 
increases the exposure of the Federal Treasury and the Federal 
taxpayers.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I would be happy to yield. Let me check 
how much time we have left.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has 2 minutes remaining.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I am happy to yield to the gentleman 
from Ohio.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I will make it real quick.
  In all due respect, it does not do that. This does not cost the 
taxpayers. They have to have insurance. People are stuck, they cannot 
go back to their homes. Senior citizens are having to live with their 
families right now. They cannot go back.
  To put a good foot forward on this, I will work with the gentleman in 
the conference committee. They can be required to have insurance when 
they go back. They just simply cannot move. One day they had their 
mobile home there, there was a huge flood, and now they cannot put it 
back. They are stuck. They have do place to live.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Reclaiming my time, I very much 
appreciate and am very sensitive to the concerns that the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Ney] has described, and my good friend from West 
Virginia [Mr. Mollohan] has also spoken to me about it, although very 
briefly.
  Mr. Chairman, I would pledge to work with the gentleman, and I am 
sure that if we ask Chairman Lazio, that we can find a mechanism in 
another bill coming up if we have an opportunity to delve into this. If 
what the gentleman is suggesting is the case, where we are simply 
providing protections for mobile homeowners that are having burdensome 
requirements placed on them by FEMA that have no bearing on living in 
the flood zone and are unprecedented and unworkable, then I would 
pledge to working with the gentleman to making certain that they get 
the flood insurance that they need.

                              {time}  1545

  I do not think we ought to be doing that in this bill.
  I would ask the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], would you pledge 
working with us to make certain that we can work this out? We have to 
reauthorize the flood insurance program in any event this year.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, we 
obviously have a great deal of work to do in terms of reauthorizing the 
flood insurance program. We have had various discussions on this in the 
last Congress. I am particularly sensitive to it, representing a 
coastal area, but I know that the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney] feels 
strongly about offering this amendment. I think it is an acceptable 
amendment from my perspective. I support the amendment. I hope we can 
address your concerns as we go forward through the process conference.


                             point of order

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, the rules of the House 
provide an amendment must be germane to the subject matter of the bill 
under consideration. The subject matter of H.R. 2406 is the 
deregulation of public and tenant-based housing. Although the manager's 
amendment expands the scope of the bill, it still does not affect flood 
control matters. Therefore, I insist on my point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] raises a 
point of order against the amendment. Does the gentleman from Ohio wish 
to be heard on the point of order?
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I do. Obviously I am not pleased. I feel very 
sorry for the people.
   Mr. Chairman, I concede the point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained. 
Therefore, the amendment is not in order.
  Are there other amendments to title IV?
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would like to point out that the Chair 
incorrectly prevented the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters] from 
speaking previously, because there is a very distinct, minute, but very 
important difference between obtaining unanimous consent that a motion 
striking the enacting clause be withdrawn, and such motion being 
defeated. If such a motion is defeated, there must be a change in the 
bill by adoption of an amendment before that motion can be made again 
on the same day.

[[Page H4710]]

  Because the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Volkmer] asked unanimous 
consent to have his motion withdrawn, it was as if it did not happen. 
So the Chair made a mistake in preventing the gentlewoman from 
California from being recognized earlier. The Chair apologizes to the 
gentlewoman for that, and clarifies to the committee the situation, and 
now invites the gentlewoman to be recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I appreciate that. I 
know it was inadvertent. I appreciate the opportunity to at least 
express my views on the Durbin amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I first would like to share with this House that I have 
the highest respect for Congressman Durbin. I consider him a friend and 
I consider him a leader, and I consider him to have been the author of 
some of the best legislation that has ever been presented before this 
august body.
  However, I do rise to disagree with the amendment that the gentleman 
is offering for this legislation. I know that his intentions are good, 
and I know that he is concerned about violence and gunfire and other 
kinds of things in public housing projects.
  I also would like to say, I have absolutely nothing in common with 
the NRA. I do not like guns, I wish there were none in our society. 
However, I have a passion for fairness. This passion for fairness 
drives me not to allow there to be law created for certain segments of 
our society, even though we are trying very desperately to solve 
problems.
  It is illegal to have an illegal weapon. It is illegal to have an 
illegal weapon. Whether you live in housing projects, whether you live 
in condominiums, whether you live in cities, whether you live in rural 
communities, on farms, it does not matter. You are in violation of the 
law if you possess an illegal firearm, and that is for everybody, and 
we should not change that.
  We should not create law again for special segments of our society. 
There is absolutely no reason why we should move our concerns to 
housing projects of America and say ``Oh, but you are different. You 
are different because you live in public housing. We are going to 
create an additional law for you.''
  Somehow it is not enough for your gun to be illegal. Your gun is 
illegal, illegal, illegal, and we are going to create a whole new 
Federal crime, because you happen to live in a housing project.
  I suppose I could submit to this body a number of reasons why someone 
may find themselves in that position, but I choose not to try and make 
that argument, and I think there are some legitimate reasons why 
someone may find themselves in that unfortunate position of trying to 
defend themselves with an illegal weapon. But I choose, rather, to just 
simply deal with what I think we responsible public policymakers should 
be about. We should be about creating law for everybody. We should be 
about making sure that we do not use our power and our influence to 
single out any segment of our society and say somehow your crime is a 
worse crime than somebody else's.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. WATERS. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I greatly respect the gentlewoman from 
California and have the same admiration for her legislative record as 
she does for mine.
  Having said that though, we make a point of saying, for example, we 
are going to have drug-free school zones, gun-free school zones. We 
single out certain areas of vulnerability. The gentlewoman knows, as I 
do, many of the families in public housing today are terrorized by drug 
gangs and violent criminals who prey upon children and families that 
need extra protection. That is the reason for this amendment.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, let me just say that is 
not a good argument, and it is not synonymous when you talk about what 
we do with schools.
  As a matter of fact, let me ask you in my own way, if in fact those 
terrorists, those people holed up in Montana somewhere, who are part of 
some kind of militia, do not live in public housing projects. However, 
they live out in the rural areas. We have people who live in 
communities that have firearms, illegal and otherwise. Some of them 
right now have the attention of this Nation. They are holed up. The FBI 
is not moving in on them, they want to be sensitive in the way they 
capture them, but they are dangerous people. They are very dangerous 
and they have decided to defy every law in America. They decided they 
are going to have their guns, they are not going to pay any taxes. They 
decided they are going to shoot FBI agents and others who would dare 
challenge them about the fact they are breaking the law. But somehow, 
under your proposition, their guns would not be as illegal as the 
firearms that would be discharged in housing projects.
  It does not make good sense. I tell you, again, I do not like 
firearms, I do not like guns and I wish we did not have any. But I 
cannot sit here and allow this kind of public policy to proceed through 
this House without challenging it. Again, my passion in life is that no 
matter what the law, it is fair, that it treats everybody the same. No 
matter what the law, it does not take those who may not have the 
political clout and somehow single them out for the kind of laws that 
we would not assign to other people.
  I say to you, an illegal gun is an illegal gun, and we have laws on 
the books in the state that will take care of those who have them, who 
would discharge them, who would brandish them, who would do anything. 
And I think it should be that way. I think we should apprehend them and 
we should apply the law to the fullest extent.
  Do I think we should create a special law for public housing project 
people who would fire an arm, but leave all the militia out there in 
America discharging firearms, and somehow they would not come under the 
same law? No, I do not think so.
  Mr. Chairman, that is my argument. I think it makes good sense.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to title V?


                    amendment offered by Mr. cardin

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Cardin: Title V of the bill, 
     insert at the end of such title the following new section:

     SSEC. 515. CONSULTATION WITH AFFECTED AREAS IN SETTLEMENT OF 
                   LITIGATION.

       In negotiating any settlement of, or consent decree for, 
     any litigation regarding public housing or rental assistance 
     (under title III of this Act or the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, as in effect before the enactment of this Act) that 
     involves the Secretary and any local housing and management 
     authority, or any units of general local government, the 
     Secretary shall consult with any units of general local 
     government and local housing and management authorities 
     having jurisdictions that are adjacent to the jurisdiction of 
     the local housing and management authority involved.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the Committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin] and a Member 
opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin].
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment deals with the process that should be 
used in settling lawsuits that involve local housing authorities and 
HUD. If I might just refer briefly to the recent settlement of the 
Baltimore litigation, initially the local parties entered into a 
tentative agreement without consultation with the surrounding counties 
that were affected by the lawsuit.
  Now, many of us have concern about the Baltimore settlement, the 
underlying policy of special aid certificates. The process used denied 
the surrounding jurisdictions the opportunity to be heard. HUD slowed 
that process down, giving the surrounding counties an opportunity to 
have input, and there were improvements that were made as the process 
went forward because of consultation with the surrounding 
jurisdictions.
  This amendment puts the local parties on notice that before they 
enter into any settlement involving the local housing authorities, that 
the jurisdictions that can be affected by that settlement need to be 
consulted and that HUD will consult with local jurisdictions before 
they enter into any settlement of such a lawsuit.
  Mr. Chairman, let me tell you, I do not believe this amendment is 
controversial. HUD has no objections to it. I would urge my colleagues 
to accept this amendment.

[[Page H4711]]

  Mr. EHRLICH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CARDIN. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. EHRLICH. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding.
  Last night on this floor, Mr. Chairman, I talked about the substance 
of the ACLU lawsuit in Baltimore, the fact that special race, class, 
and location-based housing vouchers will become public policy outside 
the scope of this House, of this Congress, because of government by 
consent decree, which is what some groups in our country want to foist 
upon the people.
  This amendment goes to process. I know with respect to substance he 
agrees with me, and I certainly agree with him, and want to lend my 
support to his amendment, because as bad as the substance of the 
settlement is, the process was just as bad. The lack of notification to 
the leaders of subdivisions of the impacted areas in the Baltimore 
metropolitan area was wrong, it will always be wrong, and I certainly 
am glad to rise today to lend my support to my colleague from Baltimore 
County with respect to the poor, horrific process, that was foisted on 
the people of the Baltimore metropolitan area in the context of this 
lawsuit.
  I enjoyed my colloquy with the chairman last night, and I even look 
forward to working with my friend from Baltimore County on working with 
the policy which is the threshold issue with respect to which groups 
HUD is now foisting upon the American people, particularly metropolitan 
areas like Baltimore in the future.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member seek time in opposition to the 
amendment?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, I compliment my colleagues from Maryland for bringing 
this forward. The shame of it is that we have to resort to legislation 
to do what ought to be done by nature, which is to integrate the 
community into the decisionmaking process and to ensure that there is a 
local voice.
  But, Mr. Chairman, I support this effort. Again, I support it only 
reluctantly, because we ought not to be required to bring legislation 
to the floor to ensure that there is consultation with local 
governments. That is a basic framework. We are partners. We are not 
imposing our will. We sometimes forget that in Washington. But I 
compliment both gentlemen from Maryland, Mr. Ehrlich and Mr. Cardin, 
for bringing this amendment forward.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me point out that this is notice to the local 
parties to the lawsuits that they need to consult with the local 
jurisdictions before going forward.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin].
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Are there other amendments to title V?
  The Clerk will designate title VI.
  The text of title VI is as follows:

   TITLE VI--NATIONAL COMMISSION ON HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS COST

     SEC. 601. ESTABLISHMENT.

       There is established a commission to be known as the 
     National Commission on Housing Assistance Programs Cost (in 
     this title referred to as the ``Commission'').

     SEC. 602. MEMBERSHIP.

       (a) Appointment.--The Commission shall be composed of 9 
     members, who shall be appointed not later than 90 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act. The members shall be 
     as follows:
       (1) 3 members to be appointed by the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development;
       (2) 3 members appointed by the Chairman and Ranking 
     Minority Member of the Subcommittee on Housing Opportunity 
     and Community Development of the Committee on Banking, 
     Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Chairman and 
     Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and 
     Independent Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of 
     the Senate; and
       (3) 3 members appointed by the Chairman and Ranking 
     Minority Member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community 
     Opportunity of the Committee on Banking and Financial 
     Services of the House of Representatives and the Chairman and 
     Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and 
     Independent Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of 
     the House of Representatives.
       (b) Qualifications.--The 3 members of the Commission 
     appointed under each of paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of 
     subsection (a)--
       (1) shall all be experts in the field of accounting, 
     economics, cost analysis, finance, or management; and
       (2) shall include--
       (A) 1 individual who is an elected public official at the 
     State or local level;
       (B) 1 individual who is a distinguished academic engaged in 
     teaching or research;
       (C) 1 individual who is a business leader, financial 
     officer, management or accounting expert.

     In selecting members of the Commission for appointment, the 
     individuals appointing shall ensure that the members selected 
     can analyze the Federal assisted housing programs (as such 
     term is defined in section 604(a)) on an objective basis and 
     that no member of the Commission has a personal financial or 
     business interest in any such program.

     SEC. 603. ORGANIZATION.

       (a) Chairperson.--The Commission shall elect a chairperson 
     from among members of the Commission.
       (b) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission 
     shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, 
     but a lesser number may hold hearings.
       (c) Voting.--Each member of the Commission shall be 
     entitled to 1 vote, which shall be equal to the vote of every 
     other member of the Commission.
       (d) Vacancies.--Any vacancy on the Commission shall not 
     affect its powers, but shall be filled in the manner in which 
     the original appointment was made.
       (e) Prohibition on Additional Pay.--Members of the 
     Commission shall serve without compensation.
       (f) Travel Expenses.--Each member shall receive travel 
     expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in 
     accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United 
     States Code.

     SEC. 604. FUNCTIONS.

       (a) In General.--The Commission shall --
       (1) analyze the full cost to the Federal Government, public 
     housing agencies, State and local governments, and other 
     parties, per assisted household, of the Federal assisted 
     housing programs, and shall conduct the analysis on a 
     nationwide and regional basis and in a manner such that 
     accurate per unit cost comparisons may be made between 
     Federal assisted housing programs; and
       (2) estimate the future liability that will be borne by 
     taxpayers as a result of activities under the Federal 
     assisted housing programs before the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``Federal assisted housing programs'' means--
       (1) the public housing program under the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act);
       (2) the public housing program under title II of this Act;
       (3) the certificate program for rental assistance under 
     section 8(b)(1) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as 
     in effect before the date of the enactment of this Act);
       (4) the voucher program for rental assistance under section 
     8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect 
     before the date of the enactment of this Act);
       (5) the programs for project-based assistance under section 
     8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect 
     before the date of the enactment of this Act);
       (6) the rental assistance payments program under section 
     521(a)(2)(A) of the Housing Act of 1949;
       (7) the program for housing for the elderly under section 
     202 of the Housing Act of 1959;
       (8) the program for housing for persons with disabilities 
     under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act;
       (9) the program for financing housing by a loan or mortgage 
     insured under section 221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act 
     that bears interest at a rate determined under the proviso of 
     section 221(d)(5) of such Act;
       (10) the program under section 236 of the National Housing 
     Act;
       (11) the program for constructed or substantial 
     rehabilitation under section 8(b)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as in effect before October 1, 1983; and
       (12) any other program for housing assistance administered 
     by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development or the 
     Secretary of Agriculture, under which occupancy in the 
     housing assisted or housing assistance provided is based on 
     income, as the Commission may determine.
       (c) Final Report.--Not later than 18 months after the 
     Commission is established pursuant to section 602(a), the 
     Commission shall submit to the Secretary and to the Congress 
     a final report which shall contain the results of the 
     analysis and estimates required under subsection (a).0
       (d) Limitation.--The Commission may not make any 
     recommendations regarding Federal housing policy.

[[Page H4712]]

     SEC. 605. POWERS.

       (a) Hearings.--The Commission may, for the purpose of 
     carrying out this title, hold such hearings and sit and act 
     at such times and places as the Commission may find 
     advisable.
       (b) Rules and Regulations.--The Commission may adopt such 
     rules and regulations as may be necessary to establish its 
     procedures and to govern the manner of its operations, 
     organization and personnel.
       (c) Assistance From Federal Agencies.--
       (1) Information.--The Commission may request from any 
     department or agency of the United States, and such 
     department or agency shall provide to the Commission in a 
     timely fashion, such data and information as the Commission 
     may require for carrying out this title, including--
       (A) local housing management plans submitted to the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under section 107;
       (B) block grant contracts under title II;
       (C) contracts under section 302 for assistance amounts 
     under title III; and
       (D) audits submitted to the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development under section 403.
       (2) Administrative support.--The General Services 
     Administration shall provide to the Commission, on a 
     reimbursable basis, such administrative support services as 
     the Commission may request.
       (3) Personnel details and technical assistance.--Upon the 
     request of the chairperson of the Commission, the Secretary 
     of Housing and Urban Development shall, to the extent 
     possible and subject to the discretion of the Secretary--
       (A) detail any of the personnel of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development, on a nonreimbursable basis, to 
     assist the Commission in carrying out its duties under this 
     title; and
       (B) provide the Commission with technical assistance in 
     carrying out its duties under this title.
       (d) Information From Local Housing and Management 
     Authorities.--The Commission shall have access, for the 
     purpose of carrying out its functions under this title, to 
     any books, documents, papers, and records of a local housing 
     and management authority that are pertinent to this Act and 
     assistance received pursuant to this Act.
       (e) Mails.--The Commission may use the United States mails 
     in the same manner and under the same conditions as other 
     Federal agencies.
       (f) Contracting.--The Commission may, to the extent and in 
     such amounts as are provided in appropriations Acts, enter 
     into contracts necessary to carry out its duties under this 
     title.
       (g) Staff.--
       (1) Executive director.--The Commission shall appoint an 
     executive director of the Commission who shall be compensated 
     at a rate fixed by the Commission, but which shall not exceed 
     the rate established for level V of the Executive Schedule 
     under title 5, United States Code.
       (2) Personnel.--In addition to the executive director, the 
     Commission may appoint and fix the compensation of such 
     personnel as it deems advisable, in accordance with the 
     provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing 
     appointments to the competitive service, and the provisions 
     of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title, 
     relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates.
       (3) Limitation.--Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be effective 
     only to the extent and in such amounts as are provided in 
     appropriations Acts.
       (4) Selection criteria.--In appointing an executive 
     director and staff, the Commission shall ensure that the 
     individuals appointed can conduct any functions they may have 
     regarding the Federal assisted housing programs (as such term 
     is defined in section 604(a)) on an objective basis and that 
     no such individual has a personal financial or business 
     interest in any such program.
       (h) Advisory Committee.--The Commission shall be considered 
     an advisory committee within the meaning of the Federal 
     Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).

     SEC. 606. FUNDING.

       Of any amounts made available for policy, research, and 
     development activities of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development, there shall be available for carrying out this 
     title $750,000, for fiscal year 1997. Any such amounts so 
     appropriated shall remain available until expended.

     SEC. 607. SUNSET.

       The Commission shall terminate upon the expiration of the 
     18-month period beginning upon the date that the Commission 
     is established pursuant to section 602(a).

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there amendments to title VI?


                amendment no. 9 offered by mr. hayworth

  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. If I am correct, the gentleman's amendment affects 
various titles, including title I; is that correct?
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, that is technically correct.
  The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman ask unanimous consent that we may 
return to title I to include all titles under his amendment?
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that we return to 
title I for the purposes of offering my amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 9 offered by Mr. Hayworth:

                               H.R. 2406

       Page 9, strike line 12 and all that follows through page 
     10, line 12.
       Page 13, line 2, after ``Samoa,'' insert ``and''.
       Page 13, line 3, strike ``, and Indian tribes''.
       Page 13, lines 19 and 20, strike ``or Indian housing 
     authority''.
       Page 14, after line 8, insert the following:

     The term does not include any entity that is Indian housing 
     authority for purposes of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 (as in effect before the enactment of this Act) or a 
     tribally desingated housing entity, as such term is defined 
     in section 604.
       Page 43, after line 4, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 114. INAPPLICABILITY TO INDIAN HOUSING.

       Except as specifically provided by law, the provisions of 
     this title, and titles II, III, and IV shall not apply to 
     public housing developed or operated pursuant to a contract 
     between the Secretary and an Indian housing authority or to 
     housing assisted under the Native American Housing Assistance 
     and Self-Determination Act of 1996.
       Page 53, strike line 19 and all that follows through page 
     54, line 5.
       Page 57, line 20, strike ``and Indian''.
       Page 89, strike lines 11 through 15.
       Page 102, lines 19 and 20, strike ``, except that it does 
     not include Indian housing authorities''.
       Page 144, line 2, strike ``and Indian''.
       Page 144, strike lines 11 through 15.
       Page 144, line 16, strike ``(d)'' and insert ``(c)''.
       Page 217, strike lines 16 through 20.
       At the end of the bill, insert the following new title:
              TITLE VI--NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ASSISTANCE

     SECTION 601. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Native American Housing 
     Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996''.

     SEC. 602. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

       The Congress hereby finds that--
       (1) the Federal Government has a responsibility to promote 
     the general welfare of the Nation--
       (A) by using Federal resources to aid families and 
     individuals seeking affordable homes that are safe, clean, 
     and healthy and, in particular, assisting responsible, 
     deserving citizens who cannot provide fully for themselves 
     because of temporary circumstances or factors beyond their 
     control;
       (B) by working to ensure a thriving national economy and a 
     strong private housing market; and
       (C) by developing effective partnerships among the Federal 
     Government, State and local governments, and private entities 
     that allow government to accept responsibility for fostering 
     the development of a healthy marketplace and allow families 
     to prosper without government involvement in their day-to-day 
     activities;
       (2) there exists a unique relationship between the 
     Government of the United States and the governments of Indian 
     tribes and a unique Federal responsibility to Indian people;
       (3) the Constitution of the United States invests the 
     Congress with plenary power over the field of Indian affairs, 
     and through treaties, statutes, and historical relations with 
     Indian tribes, the United States has undertaken a trust 
     responsibility to protect Indian tribes;
       (4) the Congress, through treaties, statutes, and the 
     general course of dealing with Indian tribes, has assumed the 
     responsibility for the protection and preservation of Indian 
     tribes and for working with tribes and their members to 
     improve their socio-economic status so that they are able to 
     take greater responsibility for their own economic condition;
       (5) providing affordable and healthy homes is an essential 
     element in the special role of the United States in helping 
     tribes and their members to achieve a socio-economic status 
     comparable to their non-Indian neighbors;
       (6) the need for affordable and healthy homes on Indian 
     reservations, in Indian communities, and in Native Alaskan 
     villages is acute and the Federal Government should work not 
     only to provide housing assistance, but also, to the extent 
     practicable, to assist in the development of private housing 
     finance mechanisms on Indian lands to achieve the goals of 
     economic self-sufficiency and self-determination for tribes 
     and their members; and
       (7) Federal assistance to meet these responsibilities 
     should be provided in a manner that recognizes the right of 
     tribal self-governance by making such assistance available 
     directly to the tribes or tribally designated entities.

     SEC. 603. ADMINISTRATION THROUGH OFFICE OF NATIVE AMERICAN 
                   PROGRAMS.

       The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall carry 
     out this title through the

[[Page H4713]]

     Office of Native American Programs of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development.

     SEC. 604. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this title, the following definitions shall 
     apply:
       (1) Affordable housing.--The term ``affordable housing'' 
     means housing that complies with the requirements for 
     affordable housing under subtitle B. The term includes 
     permanent housing for homeless persons who are persons with 
     disabilities, transitional housing, and single room occupancy 
     housing.
       (2) Families and persons.--
       (A) Single persons.--The term ``families'' includes 
     families consisting of a single person in the case of (i) an 
     elderly person, (ii) a disabled person, (iii) a displaced 
     person, (iv) the remaining members of a tenant family, and 
     (v) any other single persons.
       (B) Families.--The term ``families'' includes families with 
     children and, in the cases of elderly families, near-elderly 
     families, and disabled families, means families whose heads 
     (or their spouses), or whose sole members, are elderly, near-
     elderly, or persons with disabilities, respectively. The term 
     includes, in the cases of elderly families, near-elderly 
     families, and disabled families, 2 or more elderly persons, 
     near-elderly persons, or persons with disabilities living 
     together, and 1 or more such persons living with 1 or more 
     persons determined under the regulations of the Secretary to 
     be essential to their care or well-being.
       (C) Absence of children.--The temporary absence of a child 
     from the home due to placement in foster care shall not be 
     considered in determining family composition and family size 
     for purposes of this title.
       (D) Elderly person.--The term ``elderly person'' means a 
     person who is at least 62 years of age.
       (E) Person with disabilities.--The term ``person with 
     disabilities'' means a person who--
       (i) has a disability as defined in section 223 of the 
     Social Security Act,
       (ii) is determined, pursuant to regulations issued by the 
     Secretary, to have a physical, mental, or emotional 
     impairment which (I) is expected to be of long-continued and 
     indefinite duration, (II) substantially impedes his or her 
     ability to live independently, and (III) is of such a nature 
     that such ability could be improved by more suitable housing 
     conditions, or
       (iii) has a developmental disability as defined in section 
     102 of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of 
     Rights Act.

     Such term shall not exclude persons who have the disease of 
     acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or any conditions arising 
     from the etiologic agent for acquired immunodeficiency 
     syndrome.
       (F) Displaced person.--The term ``displaced person'' means 
     a person displaced by governmental action, or a person whose 
     dwelling has been extensively damaged or destroyed as a 
     result of a disaster declared or otherwise formally 
     recognized pursuant to Federal disaster relief laws.
       (G) Near-elderly person.--The term ``near-elderly person'' 
     means a person who is at least 50 years of age but below the 
     age of 62.
       (3) Grant beneficiary.--The term ``grant beneficiary'' 
     means the Indian tribe or tribes on behalf of which a grant 
     is made under this title to a recipient.
       (4) Indian.--The term ``Indian'' means any person who is a 
     member of an Indian tribe.
       (5) Indian area.--The term ``Indian area'' means the area 
     within which a tribally designated housing entity is 
     authorized to provide assistance under this title for 
     affordable housing.
       (6) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' means--
       (A) any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized 
     group or community of Indians, including any Alaska Native 
     village or regional or village corporation as defined in or 
     established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement 
     Act, which is recognized as eligible for the special programs 
     and services provided by the United States to Indians because 
     of their status as Indians pursuant to the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975; and
       (B) any tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community 
     that--
       (i) has been recognized as an Indian tribe by any State; 
     and
       (ii) for which an Indian housing authority is eligible, on 
     the date of the enactment of this title, to enter into a 
     contract with the Secretary pursuant to the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937.
       (7) Local housing plan.--The term ``local housing plan'' 
     means a plan under section 612.
       (8) Low-income family.--The term ``low-income family'' 
     means a family whose income does not exceed 80 percent of the 
     median income for the area, except that the Secretary may, 
     for purposes of this paragraph, establish income ceilings 
     higher or lower than 80 percent of the median for the area on 
     the basis of the authority's findings that such variations 
     are necessary because of unusually high or low family 
     incomes.
       (9) Median income.--The term ``median income'' means, with 
     respect to an area that is an Indian area, the greater of--
       (A) the median income for the Indian area, which the 
     Secretary shall determine; or
       (B) the median income for the United States.
       (10) Recipient.--The term ``recipient'' means the entity 
     for an Indian tribe that is authorized to receive grant 
     amounts under this title on behalf of the tribe, which may 
     only be the tribe or the tribally designated housing entity 
     for the tribe.
       (11) Tribally designated housing entity.--The terms 
     ``tribally designated housing entity'' and ``housing entity'' 
     have the following meaning:
       (A) Existing iha's.--For any Indian tribe that has not 
     taken action under subparagraph (B) and for which an Indian 
     housing authority--
       (i) was established for purposes of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 before the date of the enactment of this 
     title that meets the requirements under the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937,
       (ii) is acting upon such date of enactment as the Indian 
     housing authority for the tribe, and
       (iii) is not an Indian tribe for purposes of this title,

     the terms mean such Indian housing authority.
       (B) Other entities.--For any Indian tribe that, pursuant to 
     this Act, authorizes an entity other than the tribal 
     government to receive grant amounts and provide assistance 
     under this title for affordable housing for Indians, which 
     entity is established--
       (i) by exercise of the power of self-government of an 
     Indian tribe independent of State law, or
       (ii) by operation of State law providing specifically for 
     housing authorities or housing entities for Indians, 
     including regional housing authorities in the State of 
     Alaska,

     the terms mean such entity.

     A tribally designated housing entity may be authorized or 
     established by one or more Indian tribes to act on behalf of 
     each such tribe authorizing or establishing the housing 
     entity. Nothing in this title may be construed to affect the 
     existence, or the ability to operate, of any Indian housing 
     authority established before the date of the enactment of 
     this title by a State-recognized tribe, band, nation, pueblo, 
     village, or community of Indian or Alaska Natives that is not 
     an Indian tribe for purposes of this title.
       (12) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Housing and Urban Development, except as otherwise 
     specified in this title.
            Subtitle A--Block Grants and Grant Requirements

     SEC. 611. BLOCK GRANTS.

       (a) Authority.--For each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
     (to the extent amounts are made available to carry out this 
     title) make grants under this section on behalf of Indian 
     tribes to carry out affordable housing activities. Under such 
     a grant on behalf of an Indian tribe, the Secretary shall 
     provide the grant amounts for the tribe directly to the 
     recipient for the tribe.
       (b) Condition of Grant.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may make a grant under this 
     title on behalf of an Indian tribe for a fiscal year only 
     if--
       (A) the Indian tribe has submitted to the Secretary a local 
     housing plan for such fiscal year under section 612; and
       (B) the plan has been determined under section 613 to 
     comply with the requirements of section 612.
       (2) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive the applicability of 
     the requirements under paragraph (1), in whole or in part, if 
     the Secretary finds that an Indian tribe has not complied or 
     can not complied with such requirements because of 
     circumstances beyond the control of the tribe.
       (c) Amount.--Except as otherwise provided under subtitle B, 
     the amount of a grant under this section to a recipient for a 
     fiscal year shall be--
       (1) in the case of a recipient whose grant beneficiary is a 
     single Indian tribe, the amount of the allocation under 
     section 641 for the Indian tribe; and
       (2) in the case of a recipient whose grant beneficiary is 
     more than 1 Indian tribe, the sum of the amounts of the 
     allocations under section 641 for each such Indian tribe.
       (d) Use for Affordable Housing Activities.--Except as 
     provided in subsection (f), amounts provided under a grant 
     under this section may be used only for affordable housing 
     activities under subtitle B.
       (e) Effectuation of LHP.--Except as provided in subsection 
     (f), amounts provided under a grant under this section may be 
     used only for affordable housing activities that are 
     consistent with the approved local housing plan under section 
     613 for the grant beneficiary on whose behalf the grant is 
     made.
       (f) Administrative Expenses.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall, by regulation, 
     authorize each recipient to use a percentage of any grant 
     amounts received under this title for any administrative and 
     planning expenses of the recipient relating to carrying out 
     this title and activities assisted with such amounts, which 
     may include costs for salaries of individuals engaged in 
     administering and managing affordable housing activities 
     assisted with grant amounts provided under this title and 
     expenses of preparing a local housing plan under section 612.
       (2) Contents of regulations.--The regulations referred to 
     in paragraph (1) shall provide that--
       (A) the Secretary shall, for each recipient, establish a 
     percentage referred to in paragraph (1) based on the specific 
     circumstances of the recipient and the tribes served by the 
     recipient; and
       (B) the Secretary may review the percentage for a recipient 
     upon the written request

[[Page H4714]]

     of the recipient specifying the need for such review or the 
     initiative of the Secretary and, pursuant to such review, may 
     revise the percentage established for the recipient.
       (g) Public-Private Partnerships.--Each recipient shall make 
     all reasonable efforts, consistent with the purposes of this 
     title, to maximize participation by the private sector, 
     including nonprofit organizations and for-profit entities, in 
     implementing the approved local housing plan for the tribe 
     that is the grant beneficiary.

     SEC. 612. LOCAL HOUSING PLANS.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Submission.--The Secretary shall provide for an Indian 
     tribe to submit to the Secretary, for each fiscal year, a 
     local housing plan under this section for the tribe (or for 
     the tribally designated housing entity for a tribe to submit 
     the plan under subsection (e) for the tribe) and for the 
     review of such plans.
       (2) Locally driven national objectives.--A local housing 
     plan shall describe--
       (A) the mission of the tribe with respect to affordable 
     housing or, in the case of a recipient that is a tribally 
     designated housing entity, the mission of the housing entity;
       (B) the goals, objectives, and policies of the recipient to 
     meet the housing needs of low-income families in the 
     jurisdiction of the housing entity, which shall be designed 
     to achieve the national objectives under section 621(a); and
       (C) how the locally established mission and policies of the 
     recipient are designed to achieve, and are consistent with, 
     the national objectives under section 621(a).
       (b) 5-Year Plan.--Each local housing plan under this 
     section for an Indian tribe shall contain, with respect to 
     the 5-year period beginning with the fiscal year for which 
     the plan is submitted, the following information:
       (1) Locally driven national objectives.--The information 
     described in subsection (a)(2).
       (2) Capital improvement overview.--If the recipient will 
     provide capital improvements for housing described in 
     subsection (c)(3) during such period, an overview of such 
     improvements, the rationale for such improvements, and an 
     analysis of how such improvements will enable the recipient 
     to meet its goals, objectives, and mission.
       (c) 1-year plan.--A local housing plan under this section 
     for an Indian tribe shall contain the following information 
     relating to the upcoming fiscal year for which the assistance 
     under this title is to be made available:
       (1) Financial resources.--An operating budget for the 
     recipient for the tribe that includes--
       (A) identification and a description of the financial 
     resources reasonably available to the recipient to carry out 
     the purposes of this title, including an explanation of how 
     amounts made available will leverage such additional 
     resources; and
       (B) the uses to which such resources will be committed, 
     including eligible and required affordable housing activities 
     under subtitle B to be assisted and administrative expenses.
       (2) Affordable housing.--For the jurisdiction within which 
     the recipient is authorized to use assistance under this 
     title--
       (A) a description of the estimated housing needs and the 
     need for assistance for very low-income and moderate-income 
     families;
       (B) a description of the significant characteristics of the 
     housing market, indicating how such characteristics will 
     influence the use of amounts made available under this title 
     for rental assistance, production of new units, 
     rehabilitation of old units, or acquisition of existing 
     units;
       (C) an description of the structure, means of cooperation, 
     and coordination between the recipient and any units of 
     general local government in the development, submission, and 
     implementation of their housing plans, including a 
     description of the involvement of any private industries, 
     nonprofit organizations, and public institutions;
       (D) a description of how the plan will address the housing 
     needs identified pursuant to subparagraph (A), describing the 
     reasons for allocation priorities, and identify any obstacles 
     to addressing underserved needs;
       (E) a description of any homeownership programs of the 
     recipient to be carried out with respect to affordable 
     housing assisted under this title and the requirements and 
     assistance available under such programs;
       (F) a certification that the recipient will maintain 
     written records of the standards and procedures under which 
     the recipient will monitor activities assisted under this 
     title and ensure long-term compliance with the provisions of 
     this title;
       (G) a certification that the recipient will comply with 
     title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 in carrying out this 
     title, to the extent that such title is applicable;
       (H) a statement of the number of families for whom the 
     recipient will provide affordable housing using grant amounts 
     provided under this title;
       (I) a statement of how the goals, programs, and policies 
     for producing and preserving affordable housing will be 
     coordinated with other programs and services for which the 
     recipient is responsible and the extent to which they will 
     reduce (or assist in reducing) the number of households with 
     incomes below the poverty line; and
       (J) a certification that the recipient has obtain insurance 
     coverage for any housing units that are owned or operated by 
     the tribe or the tribally designated housing entity for the 
     tribe and assisted with amounts provided under this Act, in 
     compliance with such requirements as the Secretary may 
     establish.
       (3) Indian housing developed under united states housing 
     act of 1937.--A plan describing how the recipient for the 
     tribe will comply with the requirements under section 623 
     relating to low-income housing owned or operated by the 
     housing entity that was developed pursuant to a contract 
     between the Secretary and an Indian housing authority 
     pursuant to the United States Housing Act of 1937, which 
     shall include--
       (A) a certification that the recipient will maintain a 
     written record of the policies of the recipient governing 
     eligibility, admissions, and occupancy of families with 
     respect to dwelling units in such housing;
       (B) a certification that the recipient will maintain a 
     written record of policies of the recipient governing rents 
     charged for dwelling units in such housing, including--
       (i) the methods by which such rents are determined; and
       (ii) an analysis of how such methods affect--

       (I) the ability of the recipient to provide affordable 
     housing for low-income families having a broad range of 
     incomes;
       (II) the affordability of housing for families having 
     incomes that do not exceed 30 percent of the median family 
     income for the area; and
       (III) the availability of other financial resources to the 
     recipient for use for such housing;

       (C) a certification that the recipient will maintain a 
     written record of the standards and policies of the recipient 
     governing maintenance and management of such housing, and 
     management of the recipient with respect to administration of 
     such housing, including--
       (i) housing quality standards;
       (ii) routine and preventative maintenance policies;
       (iii) emergency and disaster plans;
       (iv) rent collection and security policies;
       (v) priorities and improvements for management of the 
     housing; and
       (vi) priorities and improvements for management of the 
     recipient, including improvement of electronic information 
     systems to facilitate managerial capacity and efficiency;
       (D) a plan describing--
       (i) the capital improvements necessary to ensure long-term 
     physical and social viability of such housing; and
       (ii) the priorities of the recipient for capital 
     improvements of such housing based on analysis of available 
     financial resources, consultation with residents, and health 
     and safety considerations;
       (E) a description of any such housing to be demolished or 
     disposed of, a timetable for such demolition or disposition, 
     and any information required under law with respect to such 
     demolition or disposition;
       (F) a description of how the recipient will coordinate with 
     tribal and State welfare agencies to ensure that residents of 
     such housing will be provided with access to resources to 
     assist in obtaining employment and achieving self-
     sufficiency; and
       (G) a description of the requirements established by the 
     recipient that promote the safety of residents of such 
     housing, facilitate the housing entity undertaking crime 
     prevention measures (such as community policing, where 
     appropriate), allow resident input and involvement, and allow 
     for creative methods to increase resident safety by 
     coordinating crime prevention efforts between the recipient 
     and tribal or local law enforcement officials.
       (4) Indian housing loan guarantees and other housing 
     assistance.--A description of how loan guarantees under 
     section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1992, and other housing assistance provided by the Federal 
     Government for Indian tribes (including grants, loans, and 
     mortgage insurance) will be used to help in meeting the needs 
     for affordable housing in the jurisdiction of the recipient.
       (5) Distribution of assistance.--A certification that the 
     recipient for the tribe will maintain a written record of--
       (A) the geographical distribution (within the jurisdiction 
     of the recipient) of the use of grant amounts and how such 
     geographical distribution is consistent with the geographical 
     distribution of housing need (within such jurisdiction); and
       (B) the distribution of the use of such assistance for 
     various categories of housing and how use for such various 
     categories is consistent with the priorities of housing need 
     (within the jurisdiction of the recipient).
       (d) Participation of Tribally Designated Housing Entity.--A 
     plan under this section for an Indian tribe may be prepared 
     and submitted on behalf of the tribe by the tribally 
     designated housing entity for the tribe, but only if such 
     plan contains a certification by the recognized tribal 
     government of the grant beneficiary that such tribe has had 
     an opportunity to review the plan and has authorized the 
     submission of the plan by the housing entity.
       (e) Coordination of Plans.--A plan under this section may 
     cover more than 1 Indian tribe, but only if the certification 
     requirements under subsection (d) are complied with by each 
     such grant beneficiary covered.
       (f) Plans for Small Tribes.--
       (1) Separate requirements.--The Secretary shall establish 
     requirements for submission of plans under this section and 
     the information to be included in such plans applicable to 
     small Indian tribes and small

[[Page H4715]]

     tribally designated housing entities. Such requirements shall 
     waive any requirements under this section that the Secretary 
     determines are burdensome or unnecessary for such tribes and 
     housing entities.
       (2) Small tribes.--The Secretary shall define small Indian 
     tribes and small tribally designated housing entities based 
     on the number of dwelling units assisted under this subtitle 
     by the tribe or housing entity or owned or operated pursuant 
     to a contract under the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     between the Secretary and the Indian housing authority for 
     the tribe.
       (g) Regulations.--The requirements relating to the contents 
     of plans under this section shall be established by 
     regulation, pursuant to section 616.

     SEC. 613. REVIEW OF PLANS.

       (a) Review and Notice.--
       (1) Review.--The Secretary shall conduct a limited review 
     of each local housing plan submitted to the Secretary to 
     ensure that the plan complies with the requirements of 
     section 612. The Secretary shall have the discretion to 
     review a plan only to the extent that the Secretary considers 
     review is necessary.
       (2) Notice.--The Secretary shall notify each Indian tribe 
     for which a plan is submitted and any tribally designated 
     housing entity for the tribe whether the plan complies with 
     such requirements not later than 45 days after receiving the 
     plan. If the Secretary does not notify the Indian tribe, as 
     required under this subsection and subsection (b), the plan 
     shall be considered, for purposes of this title, to have been 
     determined to comply with the requirements under section 612 
     and the tribe shall be considered to have been notified of 
     compliance upon the expiration of such 45-day period.
       (b) Notice of Reasons for Determination of Noncompliance.--
     If the Secretary determines that a plan, as submitted, does 
     not comply with the requirements under section 612, the 
     Secretary shall specify in the notice under subsection (a) 
     the reasons for the noncompliance and any modifications 
     necessary for the plan to meet the requirements under section 
     612.
       (c) Standards for Determination of Noncompliance.--The 
     Secretary may determine that a plan does not comply with the 
     requirements under section 612 only if--
       (1) the plan is not consistent with the national objectives 
     under section 621(a);
       (2) the plan is incomplete in significant matters required 
     under such section;
       (3) there is evidence available to the Secretary that 
     challenges, in a substantial manner, any information provided 
     in the plan;
       (4) the Secretary determines that the plan violates the 
     purposes of this title because it fails to provide affordable 
     housing that will be viable on a long-term basis at a 
     reasonable cost; or
       (5) the plan fails to adequately identify the capital 
     improvement needs for low-income housing owned or operated by 
     the Indian tribe that was developed pursuant to a contract 
     between the Secretary and an Indian housing authority 
     pursuant to the United States Housing Act of 1937.
       (d) Treatment of Existing Plans.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this title, a plan shall be considered to have 
     been submitted for an Indian tribe if the appropriate Indian 
     housing authority has submitted to the Secretary a 
     comprehensive plan under section 14(e) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (as in effect immediately before the 
     enactment of this title) or under the comprehensive 
     improvement assistance program under such section 14, and the 
     Secretary has approved such plan, before January 1, 1997. The 
     Secretary shall provide specific procedures and requirements 
     for such tribes to amend such plans by submitting only such 
     additional information as is necessary to comply with the 
     requirements of section 612.
       (e) Updates to Plan.--After a plan under section 612 has 
     been submitted for an Indian tribe for any fiscal year, the 
     tribe may comply with the provisions of such section for any 
     succeeding fiscal year (with respect to information included 
     for the 5-year period under section 612(b) or the 1-year 
     period under section 612(c)) by submitting only such 
     information regarding such changes as may be necessary to 
     update the plan previously submitted.

     SEC. 614. TREATMENT OF PROGRAM INCOME AND LABOR STANDARDS.

       (a) Program Income.--
       (1) Authority to retain.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, a recipient may retain any program income 
     that is realized from any grant amounts under this title if--
       (A) such income was realized after the initial disbursement 
     of the grant amounts received by the recipient; and
       (B) the recipient has agreed that it will utilize the 
     program income for affordable housing activities in 
     accordance with the provisions of this title.
       (2) Prohibition of reduction of grant.--The Secretary may 
     not reduce the grant amount for any Indian tribe based solely 
     on (1) whether the recipient for the tribe retains program 
     income under paragraph (1), or (2) the amount of any such 
     program income retained.
       (3) Exclusion of amounts.--The Secretary may, by 
     regulation, exclude from consideration as program income any 
     amounts determined to be so small that compliance with the 
     requirements of this subsection would create an unreasonable 
     administrative burden on the recipient.
       (b) Treatment of Labor Standards.--The use of amounts 
     provided under this title to finance (in whole or in part) a 
     contract for construction or rehabilitation work shall not 
     cause such contract to be subject to the requirements of the 
     Act of March 3, 1931 (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-5; commonly known 
     as the Davis-Bacon Act) or to any other provision of law 
     requiring payment of wages in accordance with such Act.

     SEC. 615. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.

       (a) In General.--In order to ensure that the policies of 
     the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and other 
     provisions of law which further the purposes of such Act (as 
     specified in regulations issued by the Secretary) are most 
     effectively implemented in connection with the expenditure of 
     grant amounts provided under this title, and to ensure to the 
     public undiminished protection of the environment, the 
     Secretary, in lieu of the environmental protection procedures 
     otherwise applicable, may under regulations provide for the 
     release of amounts for particular projects to recipients of 
     assistance under this title who assume all of the 
     responsibilities for environmental review, decisionmaking, 
     and action pursuant to such Act, and such other provisions of 
     law as the regulations of the Secretary specify, that would 
     apply to the Secretary were the Secretary to undertake such 
     projects as Federal projects. The Secretary shall issue 
     regulations to carry out this section only after consultation 
     with the Council on Environmental Quality. The regulations 
     shall provide--
       (1) for the monitoring of the environmental reviews 
     performed under this section;
       (2) in the discretion of the Secretary, to facilitate 
     training for the performance of such reviews; and
       (3) for the suspension or termination of the assumption of 
     responsibilities under this section.

     The Secretary's duty under the preceding sentence shall not 
     be construed to limit or reduce any responsibility assumed by 
     a recipient of grant amounts with respect to any particular 
     release of funds.
       (b) Procedure.--The Secretary shall approve the release of 
     funds subject to the procedures authorized by this section 
     only if, at least 15 days prior to such approval and prior to 
     any commitment of funds to such projects the recipient of 
     grant amounts has submitted to the Secretary a request for 
     such release accompanied by a certification which meets the 
     requirements of subsection (c). The Secretary's approval of 
     any such certification shall be deemed to satisfy the 
     Secretary's responsibilities under the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969 and such other provisions of law as the 
     regulations of the Secretary specify insofar as those 
     responsibilities relate to the releases of funds for projects 
     to be carried out pursuant thereto which are covered by such 
     certification.
       (c) Certification.--A certification under the procedures 
     authorized by this section shall--
       (1) be in a form acceptable to the Secretary,
       (2) be executed by the chief executive officer or other 
     officer of the recipient of assistance under this title 
     qualified under regulations of the Secretary,
       (3) specify that the recipient has fully carried out its 
     responsibilities as described under subsection (a), and
       (4) specify that the certifying officer (A) consents to 
     assume the status of a responsible Federal official under the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and each provision 
     of law specified in regulations issued by the Secretary 
     insofar as the provisions of such Act or such other 
     provisions of law apply pursuant to subsection (a), and (B) 
     is authorized and consents on behalf of the recipient of 
     assistance and such officer to accept the jurisdiction of the 
     Federal courts for the purpose of enforcement of the 
     certifying officer's responsibilities as such an official.

     SEC. 616. REGULATIONS.

       (a) Interim Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this title, the Secretary shall, by 
     notice issued in the Federal Register, establish any 
     requirements necessary to carry out this title in the manner 
     provided in section 617(b), which shall be effective only for 
     fiscal year 1997. The notice shall invite public comments 
     regarding such interim requirements and final regulations to 
     carry out this title and shall include general notice of 
     proposed rulemaking (for purposes of section 564(a) of title 
     5, United States Code) of the final regulations under 
     paragraph (2).
       (b) Final Regulations.--
       (1) Timing.--The Secretary shall issue final regulations 
     necessary to carry out this title not later than September 1, 
     1997, and such regulations shall take effect not later than 
     the effective date under section 617(a).
       (2) Negotiated rulemaking.--Notwithstanding sections 563(a) 
     and 565(a) of title 5, United States Code, the final 
     regulations required under paragraph (1) shall be issued 
     according to a negotiated rulemaking procedure under 
     subchapter III of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code. 
     The Secretary shall establish a negotiated rulemaking 
     committee for development of any such proposed regulations, 
     which shall include representatives of Indian tribes.

     SEC. 617. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b) and 
     as otherwise specifically

[[Page H4716]]

     provided in this title, this title shall take effect on 
     October 1, 1997.
       (b) Interim Applicability.--For fiscal year 1997, this 
     title shall apply to any Indian tribe that requests the 
     Secretary to apply this title to such tribe, subject to the 
     provisions of this subsection, but only if the Secretary 
     determines that the tribe has the capacity to carry out the 
     responsibilities under this title during such fiscal year. 
     For fiscal year 1997, this title shall apply to any such 
     tribe subject to the following limitations:
       (1) Use of assistance amounts as block grant.--Amounts 
     shall not be made available pursuant to this title for grants 
     under this title for such fiscal year, but any amounts made 
     available for the tribe under the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, title II or subtitle D of title IV of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, title IV of the 
     Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, or section 2 of 
     the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 shall be considered grant 
     amounts under this title and shall be used subject to the 
     provisions of this title relating to such grant amounts.
       (2) Local housing plan.--Notwithstanding section 613 of 
     this title, a local housing plan shall be considered to have 
     been submitted for the tribe for fiscal year 1997 for 
     purposes of this title only if--
       (A) the appropriate Indian housing authority has submitted 
     to the Secretary a comprehensive plan under section 14(e) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 or under the 
     comprehensive improvement assistance program under such 
     section 14;
       (B) the Secretary has approved such plan before January 1, 
     1996; and
       (C) the tribe complies with specific procedures and 
     requirements for amending such plan as the Secretary may 
     establish to carry out this subsection.
       (c) Assistance Under Existing Program During Fiscal Year 
     1997.--Notwithstanding the repeal of any provision of law 
     under section 501(a) and with respect only to Indian tribes 
     not provided assistance pursuant to subsection (b), during 
     fiscal year 1997--
       (1) the Secretary shall carry out programs to provide low-
     income housing assistance on Indian reservations and other 
     Indian areas in accordance with the provisions of title II of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 and related provisions 
     of law, as in effect immediately before the enactment of this 
     Act;
       (2) except to the extent otherwise provided in the 
     provisions of such title II (as so in effect), the provisions 
     of title I of such Act (as so in effect) and such related 
     provisions of law shall apply to low-income housing developed 
     or operated pursuant to a contract between the Secretary and 
     an Indian housing authority; and
       (3) none of the provisions of title I, II, III, or IV, or 
     of any other law specifically modifying the public housing 
     program that is enacted after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, shall apply to public housing operated pursuant to 
     a contract between the Secretary and an Indian housing 
     authority, unless the provision explicitly provides for such 
     applicability.

     SEC. 618. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated for grants under 
     subtitle A $650,000,000, for each of fiscal years 1998, 1999, 
     2000, and 2001.
               Subtitle B--Affordable Housing Activities

     SEC. 621. NATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND ELIGIBLE FAMILIES.

       (a) Primary Objective.--The national objectives of this 
     title are--
       (1) to assist and promote affordable housing activities to 
     develop, maintain, and operate safe, clean, and healthy 
     affordable housing on Indian reservations and in other Indian 
     areas for occupancy by low-income Indian families;
       (2) to ensure better access to private mortgage markets for 
     Indian tribes and their members and to promote self-
     sufficiency of Indian tribes and their members;
       (3) to coordinate activities to provide housing for Indian 
     tribes and their members with Federal, State, and local 
     activities to further economic and community development for 
     Indian tribes and their members;
       (4) to plan for and integrate infrastructure resources for 
     Indian tribes with housing development for tribes; and
       (5) to promote the development of private capital markets 
     in Indian country and to allow such markets to operate and 
     grow, thereby benefiting Indian communities.
       (b) Eligible Families.--
       (1) In General.--Except as provided under paragraph (2), 
     assistance under eligible housing activities under this title 
     shall be limited to low-income Indian families on Indian 
     reservations and other Indian areas.
       (2) Exception to Low-Income Requirement.--A recipient may 
     provide assistance for model activities under section 
     622(a)(6) to families who are not low-income families, if the 
     Secretary approves the activities pursuant to such subsection 
     because there is a need for housing for such families that 
     cannot reasonably be met without such assistance. The 
     Secretary shall establish limits on the amount of assistance 
     that may be provided under this title for activities for 
     families who are not low-income families.
       (3) Non-indian families.--A recipient may provide housing 
     or housing assistance provided through affordable housing 
     activities assisted with grant amounts under this title for a 
     non-Indian family on an Indian reservation or other Indian 
     area if the recipient determines that the presence of the 
     family on the Indian reservation or other Indian area is 
     essential to the well-being of Indian families and the need 
     for housing for the family cannot reasonably be met without 
     such assistance.
       (4) Preference for indian families.--The local housing plan 
     for an Indian tribe may require preference, for housing or 
     housing assistance provided through affordable housing 
     activities assisted with grant amounts provided under this 
     title on behalf of such tribe, to be given (to the extent 
     practicable) to Indian families who are members of such 
     tribe, or to other Indian families. In any case in which the 
     applicable local housing plan for an Indian tribe provides 
     for preference under this subsection, the recipient for the 
     tribe shall ensure that housing activities that are assisted 
     with grant amounts under this title for such tribe are 
     subject to such preference.
       (5) Exemption.--Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 
     and title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 shall not 
     apply to actions by Indian tribes under this subsection.

     SEC. 622. ELIGIBLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES.

       Affordable housing activities under this subtitle are 
     activities, in accordance with the requirements of this 
     subtitle, to develop or to support affordable housing for 
     rental or homeownership, or to provide housing services with 
     respect to affordable housing, through the following 
     activities:
       (1) Indian housing assistance.--The provision of 
     modernization or operating assistance for housing previously 
     developed or operated pursuant to a contract between the 
     Secretary and an Indian housing authority.
       (2) Development.--The acquisition, new construction, 
     reconstruction, or moderate or substantial rehabilitation of 
     affordable housing, which may include real property 
     acquisition, site improvement, development of utilities and 
     utility services, conversion, demolition, financing, 
     administration and planning, and other related activities.
       (3) Housing services.--The provision of housing-related 
     services for affordable housing, such as housing counseling 
     in connection with rental or homeownership assistance, energy 
     auditing, and other services related to assisting owners, 
     tenants, contractors, and other entities, participating or 
     seeking to participate in other housing activities assisted 
     pursuant to this section.
       (4) Housing management services.--The provision of 
     management services for affordable housing, including 
     preparation of work specifications, loan processing, 
     inspections, tenant selection, management of tenant-based 
     rental assistance, and management of affordable housing 
     projects.
       (5) Crime prevention and safety activities.--The provision 
     of safety, security, and law enforcement measures and 
     activities appropriate to protect residents of affordable 
     housing from crime.
       (6) Model activities.--Housing activities under model 
     programs that are designed to carry out the purposes of this 
     title and are specifically approved by the Secretary as 
     appropriate for such purpose.

     SEC. 623. REQUIRED AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Maintenance of Operating Assistance for Indian 
     Housing.--Any recipient who owns or operates (or is 
     responsible for funding any entity that owns or operates) 
     housing developed or operated pursuant to a contract between 
     the Secretary and an Indian housing authority pursuant to the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 shall, using amounts of any 
     grants received under this title, reserve and use for 
     operating assistance under section 622(1) such amounts as may 
     be necessary to provide for the continued maintenance and 
     efficient operation of such housing.
       (b) Demolition and Disposition.--This title may not be 
     construed to prevent any recipient (or entity funded by a 
     recipient) from demolishing or disposing of Indian housing 
     referred to in such subsection. Notwithstanding section 114, 
     section 261 shall apply to the demolition or disposition of 
     Indian housing referred to in subsection (a).

     SEC. 624. TYPES OF INVESTMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Subject to section 623 and the local 
     housing plan for an Indian tribe, the recipient for such 
     tribe shall have--
       (1) the discretion to use grant amounts for affordable 
     housing activities through equity investments, interest-
     bearing loans or advances, noninterest-bearing loans or 
     advances, interest subsidies, leveraging of private 
     investments under subsection (b), or any other form of 
     assistance that the Secretary has determined to be consistent 
     with the purposes of this title; and
       (2) the right to establish the terms of assistance.
       (b) Leveraging Private Investment.--A recipient may 
     leverage private investments in affordable housing activities 
     by pledging existing or future grant amounts to assure the 
     repayment of notes and other obligations of the recipient 
     issued for purposes of carrying out affordable housing 
     activities.

     SEC. 625. LOW-INCOME REQUIREMENT AND INCOME TARGETING.

       Housing shall qualify as affordable housing for purposes of 
     this title only if--
       (1) each dwelling unit in the housing--
       (A) in the case of rental housing, is made available for 
     occupancy only by a family that is a low-income family at the 
     time of their initial occupancy of such unit; and
       (B) in the case of housing for homeownership, is made 
     available for purchase only by a family that is a low-income 
     family at the time of purchase; and
       (2) except for housing assisted under section 202 of the 
     United States Housing Act of

[[Page H4717]]

     1937 (as in effect before the enactment of this Act), each 
     dwelling unit in the housing will remain affordable, 
     according to binding commitments satisfactory to the 
     Secretary, for the remaining useful life of the property (as 
     determined by the Secretary) without regard to the term of 
     the mortgage or to transfer of ownership, or for such other 
     period that the Secretary determines is the longest feasible 
     period of time consistent with sound economics and the 
     purposes of this title, except upon a foreclosure by a lender 
     (or upon other transfer in lieu of foreclosure) if such 
     action (A) recognizes any contractual or legal rights of 
     public agencies, nonprofit sponsors, or others to take 
     actions that would avoid termination of low-income 
     affordability in the case of foreclosure or transfer in lieu 
     of foreclosure, and (B) is not for the purpose of avoiding 
     low-income affordability restrictions, as determined by the 
     Secretary.

     SEC. 626. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH SUBSIDY LAYERING 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       With respect to housing assisted with grant amounts 
     provided under this title, the requirements of section 102(d) 
     of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act 
     of 1989 shall be considered to be satisfied upon 
     certification by the recipient of the assistance to the 
     Secretary that the combination of Federal assistance provided 
     to any housing project is not any more than is necessary to 
     provide affordable housing.

     SEC. 627. LEASE REQUIREMENTS AND TENANT SELECTION.

       (a) Leases.--Except to the extent otherwise provided by or 
     inconsistent with tribal law, in renting dwelling units in 
     affordable housing assisted with grant amounts provided under 
     this title, the owner or manager of the housing shall utilize 
     leases that--
       (1) do not contain unreasonable terms and conditions;
       (2) require the owner or manager to maintain the housing in 
     compliance with applicable housing codes and quality 
     standards;
       (3) require the owner or manager to give adequate written 
     notice of termination of the lease, which shall not be less 
     than--
       (A) the period provided under the applicable law of the 
     jurisdiction or 14 days, whichever is less, in the case of 
     nonpayment of rent;
       (B) a reasonable period of time, but not to exceed 14 days, 
     when the health or safety of other residents or employees of 
     the owner or manager is threatened; and
       (C) the period of time provided under the applicable law of 
     the jurisdiction, in any other case;
       (4) require that the owner or manager may not terminate the 
     tenancy except for violation of the terms or conditions of 
     the lease, violation of applicable Federal, tribal, State, or 
     local law, or for other good cause; and
       (5) provide that the owner or manager may terminate the 
     tenancy of a resident for any activity, engaged in by the 
     resident, any member of the resident's household, or any 
     guest or other person under the resident's control, that--
       (A) threatens the health or safety of, or right to peaceful 
     enjoyment of the premises by, other residents or employees of 
     the owner or manager of the housing;
       (B) threatens the health or safety of, or right to peaceful 
     enjoyment of their premises by, persons residing in the 
     immediate vicinity of the premises; or
       (C) is criminal activity (including drug-related criminal 
     activity).
       (b) Tenant Selection.--The owner or manager of affordable 
     rental housing assisted under with grant amounts provided 
     under this title shall adopt and utilize written tenant 
     selection policies and criteria that--
       (1) are consistent with the purpose of providing housing 
     for low-income families;
       (2) are reasonably related to program eligibility and the 
     applicant's ability to perform the obligations of the lease; 
     and
       (3) provide for (A) the selection of tenants from a written 
     waiting list in accordance with the policies and goals set 
     forth in the local housing plan for the tribe that is the 
     grant beneficiary of such grant amounts, and (B) the prompt 
     notification in writing of any rejected applicant of the 
     grounds for any rejection.

     SEC. 628. REPAYMENT.

       If a recipient uses grant amounts to provide affordable 
     housing under activities under this subtitle and, at any time 
     during the useful life of the housing the housing does not 
     comply with the requirement under section 625(a)(2), the 
     Secretary shall reduce future grant payments on behalf of the 
     grant beneficiary by an amount equal to the grant amounts 
     used for such housing (under the authority under section 
     651(a)(2)) or require repayment to the Secretary of an amount 
     equal to such grant amounts.

     SEC. 629. CONTINUED USE OF AMOUNTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

       Any funds for programs for low-income housing under the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 that, on the date of the 
     applicability of this title to an Indian tribe, are owned by, 
     or in the possession or under the control of, the Indian 
     housing authority for the tribe, including all reserves not 
     otherwise obligated, shall be considered assistance under 
     this title and subject to the provisions of this title 
     relating to use of such assistance.
                Subtitle C--Allocation of Grant Amounts

     SEC. 641. ANNUAL ALLOCATION.

       For each fiscal year, the Secretary shall allocate any 
     amounts made available for assistance under this title for 
     the fiscal year, in accordance with the formula established 
     pursuant to section 642, among Indian tribes that comply with 
     the requirements under this title for a grant under this 
     title.

     SEC. 642. ALLOCATION FORMULA.

       The Secretary shall, by regulations issued in the manner 
     provided under section 616, establish a formula to provide 
     for allocating amounts available for a fiscal year for block 
     grants under this title among Indian tribes. The formula 
     shall be based on factors that reflect the need of the Indian 
     tribes and the Indian areas of the tribes for assistance for 
     affordable housing activities, including the following 
     factors:
       (1) The number of low-income housing dwelling units owned 
     or operated at the time pursuant to a contract between an 
     Indian housing authority for the tribe and the Secretary.
       (2) The extent of poverty and economic distress within 
     Indian areas of the tribe.
       (3) Other objectively measurable conditions as the 
     Secretary may specify.
       The regulations establishing the formula shall be issued 
     not later than the expiration of the 12-month period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this title.
              Subtitle D--Compliance, Audits, and Reports

     SEC. 651. REMEDIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.

       (a) Actions by Secretary Affecting Grant Amounts.--Except 
     as provided in subsection (b), if the Secretary finds after 
     reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing that a 
     recipient of assistance under this title has failed to comply 
     substantially with any provision of this title, the Secretary 
     shall--
       (1) terminate payments under this title to the recipient;
       (2) reduce payments under this title to the recipient by an 
     amount equal to the amount of such payments which were not 
     expended in accordance with this title;
       (3) limit the availability of payments under this title to 
     programs, projects, or activities not affected by such 
     failure to comply; or
       (4) in the case of noncompliance described in section 
     652(b), provide a replacement tribally designated housing 
     entity for the recipient, under section 652.

     If the Secretary takes an action under paragraph (1), (2), or 
     (3), the Secretary shall continue such action until the 
     Secretary determines that the failure to comply has ceased.
       (b) Noncompliance Because of Technical Incapacity.--If the 
     Secretary makes a finding under subsection (a), but 
     determines that the failure to comply substantially with the 
     provisions of this title--
       (1) is not a pattern or practice of activities constituting 
     willful noncompliance, and
       (2) is a result of the limited capability or capacity of 
     the recipient,

     the Secretary may provide technical assistance for the 
     recipient (directly or indirectly) that is designed to 
     increase the capability and capacity of the recipient to 
     administer assistance provided under this title in compliance 
     with the requirements under this title.
       (c) Referral for Civil Action.--
       (1) Authority.--In lieu of, or in addition to, any action 
     authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary may, if the 
     Secretary has reason to believe that a recipient has failed 
     to comply substantially with any provision of this title, 
     refer the matter to the Attorney General of the United States 
     with a recommendation that an appropriate civil action be 
     instituted.
       (2) Civil action.--Upon such a referral, the Attorney 
     General may bring a civil action in any United States 
     district court having venue thereof for such relief as may be 
     appropriate, including an action to recover the amount of the 
     assistance furnished under this title which was not expended 
     in accordance with it, or for mandatory or injunctive relief.
       (d) Review.--
       (1) In general.--Any recipient who receives notice under 
     subsection (a) of the termination, reduction, or limitation 
     of payments under this title may, within 60 days after 
     receiving such notice, file with the United States Court of 
     Appeals for the circuit in which such State is located, or in 
     the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 
     Columbia, a petition for review of the Secretary's action. 
     The petitioner shall forthwith transmit copies of the 
     petition to the Secretary and the Attorney General of the 
     United States, who shall represent the Secretary in the 
     litigation.
       (2) Procedure.--The Secretary shall file in the court 
     record of the proceeding on which the Secretary based the 
     action, as provided in section 2112 of title 28, United 
     States Code. No objection to the action of the Secretary 
     shall be considered by the court unless such objection has 
     been urged before the Secretary.
       (3) Disposition.--The court shall have jurisdiction to 
     affirm or modify the action of the Secretary or to set it 
     aside in whole or in part. The findings of fact by the 
     Secretary, if supported by substantial evidence on the record 
     considered as a whole, shall be conclusive. The court may 
     order additional evidence to be taken by the Secretary, and 
     to be made part of the record. The Secretary may modify the 
     Secretary's findings of fact, or make new findings, by reason 
     of the new evidence so taken and filed with the court, and 
     the Secretary shall also file such modified or new findings, 
     which findings with respect to questions of fact shall be 
     conclusive if supported by substantial evidence on the record 
     considered as a whole, and shall also file the Secretary's 
     recommendation, if any, for the modification or setting aside 
     of the Secretary's original action.

[[Page H4718]]

       (4) Finality.--Upon the filing of the record with the 
     court, the jurisdiction of the court shall be exclusive and 
     its judgment shall be final, except that such judgment shall 
     be subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United 
     States upon writ of certiorari or certification as provided 
     in section 1254 of title 28, United State Code.

     SEC. 652. REPLACEMENT OF RECIPIENT.

       (a) Authority.--As a condition of the Secretary making a 
     grant under this title on behalf of an Indian tribe, the 
     tribe shall agree that, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, the Secretary may, only in the circumstances set 
     forth in subsection (b), require that a replacement tribally 
     designated housing entity serve as the recipient for the 
     tribe, in accordance with subsection (c).
       (b) Conditions of Removal.--The Secretary may require such 
     replacement tribally designated housing entity for a tribe 
     only upon a determination by the Secretary on the record 
     after opportunity for a hearing that the recipient for the 
     tribe has engaged in a pattern or practice of activities that 
     constitutes substantial or willful noncompliance with the 
     requirements under this title.
       (c) Choice and Term of Replacement.--If the Secretary 
     requires that a replacement tribally designated housing 
     entity serve as the recipient for a tribe (or tribes)--
       (1) the replacement entity shall be an entity mutually 
     agreed upon by the Secretary and the tribe (or tribes) for 
     which the recipient was authorized to act, except that if no 
     such entity is agreed upon before the expiration of the 60-
     day period beginning upon the date that the Secretary makes 
     the determination under subsection (b), the Secretary shall 
     act as the replacement entity until agreement is reached upon 
     a replacement entity; and
       (2) the replacement entity (or the Secretary, as provided 
     in paragraph (1)) shall act as the tribally designated 
     housing entity for the tribe (or tribes) for a period that 
     expires upon--
       (A) a date certain, which shall be specified by the 
     Secretary upon making the determination under subsection (b); 
     or
       (B) the occurrence of specific conditions, which conditions 
     shall be specified in written notice provided by the 
     Secretary to the tribe upon making the determination under 
     subsection (b).

     SEC. 653. MONITORING OF COMPLIANCE.

       (a) Enforceable Agreements.--Each recipient, through 
     binding contractual agreements with owners and otherwise, 
     shall ensure long-term compliance with the provisions of this 
     title. Such measures shall provide for (1) enforcement of the 
     provisions of this title by the grant beneficiary or by 
     recipients and other intended beneficiaries, and (2) remedies 
     for the breach of such provisions.
       (b) Periodic Monitoring.--Not less frequently than 
     annually, each recipient shall review the activities 
     conducted and housing assisted under this title to assess 
     compliance with the requirements of this title. Such review 
     shall include on-site inspection of housing to determine 
     compliance with applicable requirements. The results of each 
     review shall be included in the performance report of the 
     recipient submitted to the Secretary under section 654 and 
     made available to the public.

     SEC. 654. PERFORMANCE REPORTS.

       (a) Requirement.--For each fiscal year, each recipient 
     shall--
       (1) review the progress it has made during such fiscal year 
     in carrying out the local housing plan (or plans) for the 
     Indian tribes for which it administers grant amounts; and
       (2) submit a report to the Secretary (in a form acceptable 
     to the Secretary) describing the conclusions of the review.
       (b) Content.--Each report under this section for a fiscal 
     year shall--
       (1) describe the use of grant amounts provided to the 
     recipient for such fiscal year;
       (2) assess the relationship of such use to the goals 
     identified in the local housing plan of the grant 
     beneficiary;
       (3) indicate the recipient's programmatic accomplishments; 
     and
       (4) describe how the recipient would change its programs as 
     a result of its experiences.
       (c) Submission.--The Secretary shall establish dates for 
     submission of reports under this section, and review such 
     reports and make such recommendations as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to carry out the purposes of this 
     title.
       (d) Public Availability.--A recipient preparing a report 
     under this section shall make the report publicly available 
     to the citizens in the recipient's jurisdiction in sufficient 
     time to permit such citizens to comment on such report prior 
     to its submission to the Secretary, and in such manner and at 
     such times as the recipient may determine. The report shall 
     include a summary of any comments received by the grant 
     beneficiary or recipient from citizens in its jurisdiction 
     regarding its program.

     SEC. 655. REVIEW AND AUDIT BY SECRETARY.

       (a) Annual Review.--The Secretary shall, at least on an 
     annual basis, make such reviews and audits as may be 
     necessary or appropriate to determine--
       (1) whether the recipient has carried out its eligible 
     activities in a timely manner, has carried out its eligible 
     activities and certifications in accordance with the 
     requirements and the primary objectives of this title and 
     with other applicable laws, and has a continuing capacity to 
     carry out those activities in a timely manner;
       (2) whether the recipient has complied with the local 
     housing plan of the grant beneficiary; and
       (3) whether the performance reports under section 654 of 
     the recipient are accurate.

     Reviews under this section shall include, insofar as 
     practicable, on-site visits by employees of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development.
       (b) Report by Secretary.--The Secretary shall submit a 
     written report to the Congress regarding each review under 
     subsection (a). The Secretary shall give a recipient not less 
     than 30 days to review and comment on a report under this 
     subsection. After taking into consideration the comments of 
     the recipient, the Secretary may revise the report and shall 
     make the recipient's comments and the report, with any 
     revisions, readily available to the public not later than 30 
     days after receipt of the recipient's comments.
       (c) Effect of Reviews.--The Secretary may make appropriate 
     adjustments in the amount of the annual grants under this 
     title in accordance with the Secretary's findings pursuant to 
     reviews and audits under this section. The Secretary may 
     adjust, reduce, or withdraw grant amounts, or take other 
     action as appropriate in accordance with the Secretary's 
     reviews and audits under this section, except that grant 
     amounts already expended on affordable housing activities may 
     not be recaptured or deducted from future assistance provided 
     on behalf of an Indian tribe.

     SEC. 656. GAO AUDITS.

       To the extent that the financial transactions of Indian 
     tribes and recipients of grant amounts under this title 
     relate to amounts provided under this title, such 
     transactions may be audited by the Comptroller General of the 
     United States under such rules and regulations as may be 
     prescribed by the Comptroller General. The representatives of 
     the General Accounting Office shall have access to all books, 
     accounts, records, reports, files, and other papers, things, 
     or property belonging to or in use by such tribes and 
     recipients pertaining to such financial transactions and 
     necessary to facilitate the audit.

     SEC. 657. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     conclusion of each fiscal year in which assistance under this 
     title is made available, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Congress a report that contains--
       (1) a description of the progress made in accomplishing the 
     objectives of this title; and
       (2) a summary of the use of such funds during the preceding 
     fiscal year.
       (b) Related Reports.--The Secretary may require recipients 
     of grant amounts under this title to submit to the Secretary 
     such reports and other information as may be necessary in 
     order for the Secretary to make the report required by 
     subsection (a).
     Subtitle E--Termination of Assistance for Indian Tribes under 
                         Incorporated Programs

     SEC. 661. TERMINATION OF INDIAN PUBLIC HOUSING ASSISTANCE 
                   UNDER UNITED STATES HOUSING ACT OF 1937.

       (a) In General.--After September 30, 1997, financial 
     assistance may not be provided under the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 or pursuant to any commitment entered 
     into under such Act, for Indian housing developed or operated 
     pursuant to a contract between the Secretary and an Indian 
     housing authority, unless such assistance is provided from 
     amounts made available for fiscal year 1997 and pursuant to a 
     commitment entered into before September 30, 1997.
       (b) Termination of Restrictions on Use of Indian Housing.--
     Except as provided in section 623(b) of this title, any 
     housing developed or operated pursuant to a contract between 
     the Secretary and an Indian housing authority pursuant to the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 shall not be subject to any 
     provision of such Act or any annual contributions contract or 
     other agreement pursuant to such Act, but shall be considered 
     and maintained as affordable housing for purposes of this 
     title.

     SEC. 662. TERMINATION OF NEW COMMITMENTS FOR RENTAL 
                   ASSISTANCE.

       After September 30, 1997, financial assistance for rental 
     housing assistance under the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 may not be provided to any Indian housing authority or 
     tribally designated housing entity, unless such assistance is 
     provided pursuant to a contract for such assistance entered 
     into by the Secretary and the Indian housing authority before 
     such date.

     SEC. 663. TERMINATION OF YOUTHBUILD PROGRAM ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of title IV of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12899 et 
     seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 460 as section 461; and
       (2) by inserting after section 459 the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 460. INELIGIBILITY OF INDIAN TRIBES.

       ``Indian tribes, Indian housing authorities, and other 
     agencies primarily serving Indians or Indian areas shall not 
     be eligible applicants for amounts made available for 
     assistance under this subtitle for fiscal year 1997 and 
     fiscal years thereafter.''.
       (b) Effective Date and Applicability.--The amendments under 
     subsection (a) shall be made on October 1, 1997, and shall 
     apply with respect to amounts made available for assistance 
     under subtitle D of title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act for fiscal year 1998 and 
     fiscal years thereafter.

[[Page H4719]]

     SEC. 664. TERMINATION OF HOME PROGRAM ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12721 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 217(a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``reserving amounts under 
     paragraph (2) for Indian tribes and after''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (2) in section 288--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``, Indian tribes,'';
       (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``, Indian tribe,''; and
       (C) in subsection (c)(4), by striking ``, Indian tribe,''.
       (b) Effective Date and Applicability.--The amendments under 
     subsection (a) shall be made on October 1, 1997, and shall 
     apply with respect to amounts made available for assistance 
     under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act for fiscal year 1998 and fiscal years thereafter.

     SEC. 665. TERMINATION OF HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR THE HOMELESS.

       (a) McKinney Act Programs.--Title IV of the Stewart B. 
     McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11361 et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (1) in section 411, by striking paragraph (10);
       (2) in section 412, by striking ``, and for Indian 
     tribes,'';
       (3) in section 413--
       (A) in subsection (a)--
       (i) by striking ``, and to Indian tribes,''; and
       (ii) by striking ``, or for Indian tribes'' each place it 
     appears;
       (B) in subsection (c), by striking ``or Indian tribe''; and
       (C) in subsection (d)(3)--
       (i) by striking ``, or Indian tribe'' each place it 
     appears; and
       (ii) by striking ``, or other Indian tribes,'';
       (4) in section 414(a)--
       (A) by striking `or Indian tribe'' each place it appears; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``, local government,'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``or local government'';
       (5) in section 415(c)(4), by striking ``Indian tribes,'';
       (6) in section 416(b), by striking ``Indian tribe,'';
       (7) in section 422--
       (A) in by striking ``Indian tribe,''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (3);
       (8) in section 441--
       (A) by striking subsection (g);
       (B) in subsection (h), by striking ``or Indian housing 
     authority''; and
       (C) in subsection (j)(1), by striking ``, Indian housing 
     authority'';
       (9) in section 462--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``, Indian tribe,''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (4); and
       (10) in section 491(e), by striking ``, Indian tribes (as 
     such term is defined in section 102(a) of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1974),''.
       (b) Innovative Homeless Demonstration.--Section 2(b) of the 
     HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 11301 note) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking `` `unit of general local 
     government', and `Indian tribe' '' and inserting ``and `unit 
     of general local government' ''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking ``unit of general local 
     government (including units in rural areas), or Indian 
     tribe'' and inserting ``or unit of general local 
     government''.
       (c) Effective Date and Applicability.--The amendments under 
     subsections (a) and (b) shall be made on October 1, 1997, and 
     shall apply with respect to amounts made available for 
     assistance under title IV of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Act and section 2 of the HUD Demonstration Act of 
     1993, respectively, for fiscal year 1998 and fiscal years 
     thereafter.

     SEC. 666. SAVINGS PROVISION.

       Except as provided in sections 661 and 662, this title may 
     not be construed to affect the validity of any right, duty, 
     or obligation of the United States or other person arising 
     under or pursuant to any commitment or agreement lawfully 
     entered into before October 1, 1997, under the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, subtitle D of title IV of the Cranston-
     Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, title II of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, title IV 
     of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, or 
     section 2 of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993.

     SEC. 667. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Sections 661, 662, and 666 shall take effect on the date of 
     the enactment of this title.
     Subtitle F--Loan Guarantees for Affordable Housing Activities

     SEC. 671. AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Authority.--To such extent or in such amounts as 
     provided in appropriation Acts, the Secretary may, subject to 
     the limitations of this subtitle and upon such terms and 
     conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, guarantee and make 
     commitments to guarantee, the notes or other obligations 
     issued by Indian tribes or tribally designated housing 
     entities, for the purposes of financing affordable housing 
     activities described in section 622.
       (b) Lack of Financing Elsewhere.--A guarantee under this 
     subtitle may be used to assist an Indian tribe or housing 
     entity in obtaining financing only if the Indian tribe or 
     housing entity has made efforts to obtain such financing 
     without the use of such guarantee and cannot complete such 
     financing consistent with the timely execution of the program 
     plans without such guarantee.
       (c) Terms of Loans.--Notes or other obligations guaranteed 
     pursuant to this subtitle shall be in such form and 
     denominations, have such maturities, and be subject to such 
     conditions as may be prescribed by regulations issued by the 
     Secretary. The Secretary may not deny a guarantee under this 
     subtitle on the basis of the proposed repayment period for 
     the note or other obligation, unless the period is more than 
     20 years or the Secretary determines that the period causes 
     the guarantee to constitute an unacceptable financial risk.
       (d) Limitation on Outstanding Guarantees.--No guarantee or 
     commitment to guarantee shall be made with respect to any 
     note or other obligation if the issuer's total outstanding 
     notes or obligations guaranteed under this subtitle 
     (excluding any amount defeased under the contract entered 
     into under section 672(a)(1)) would thereby exceed an amount 
     equal to 5 times the amount of the grant approval for the 
     issuer pursuant to title III.
       (e) Prohibition of Purchase by FFB.--Notes or other 
     obligations guaranteed under this subtitle may not be 
     purchased by the Federal Financing Bank.
       (f) Prohibition of Guarantee Fees.--No fee or charge may be 
     imposed by the Secretary or any other Federal agency on or 
     with respect to a guarantee made by the Secretary under this 
     subtitle.

     SEC. 672. SECURITY AND REPAYMENT.

       (a) Requirements on Issuer.--To assure the repayment of 
     notes or other obligations and charges incurred under this 
     subtitle and as a condition for receiving such guarantees, 
     the Secretary shall require the Indian tribe or housing 
     entity issuing such notes or obligations to--
       (1) enter into a contract, in a form acceptable to the 
     Secretary, for repayment of notes or other obligations 
     guaranteed under this subtitle;
       (2) pledge any grant for which the issuer may become 
     eligible under this title;
       (3) demonstrate that the extent of such issuance and 
     guarantee under this title is within the financial capacity 
     of the tribe and is not likely to impairment the ability to 
     use of grant amounts under subtitle A, taking into 
     consideration the requirements under section 623(a); and
       (4) furnish, at the discretion of the Secretary, such other 
     security as may be deemed appropriate by the Secretary in 
     making such guarantees, including increments in local tax 
     receipts generated by the activities assisted under this 
     title or dispositions proceeds from the sale of land or 
     rehabilitated property.
       (b) Repayment From Grant Amounts.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of this title--
       (1) the Secretary may apply grants pledged pursuant to 
     subsection (a)(2) to any repayments due the United States as 
     a result of such guarantees; and
       (2) grants allocated under this title for an Indian tribe 
     or housing entity (including program income derived 
     therefrom) may be used to pay principal and interest due 
     (including such servicing, underwriting, and other costs as 
     may be specified in regulations issued by the Secretary) on 
     notes or other obligations guaranteed pursuant to this 
     subtitle.
       (c) Full Faith and Credit.--The full faith and credit of 
     the United States is pledged to the payment of all guarantees 
     made under this subtitle. Any such guarantee made by the 
     Secretary shall be conclusive evidence of the eligibility of 
     the obligations for such guarantee with respect to principal 
     and interest, and the validity of any such guarantee so made 
     shall be incontestable in the hands of a holder of the 
     guaranteed obligations.

     SEC. 673. PAYMENT OF INTEREST.

       The Secretary may make, and contract to make, grants, in 
     such amounts as may be approved in appropriations Acts, to or 
     on behalf of an Indian tribe or housing entity issuing notes 
     or other obligations guaranteed under this subtitle, to cover 
     not to exceed 30 percent of the net interest cost (including 
     such servicing, underwriting, or other costs as may be 
     specified in regulations of the Secretary) to the borrowing 
     entity or agency of such obligations. The Secretary may also, 
     to the extent approved in appropriation Acts, assist the 
     issuer of a note or other obligation guaranteed under this 
     subtitle in the payment of all or a portion of the principal 
     and interest amount due under the note or other obligation, 
     if the Secretary determines that the issuer is unable to pay 
     the amount because of circumstances of extreme hardship 
     beyond the control of the issuer.

     SEC. 674. TREASURY BORROWING.

       The Secretary may issue obligations to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury in an amount outstanding at any one time sufficient 
     to enable the Secretary to carry out the obligations of the 
     Secretary under guarantees authorized by this subtitle. The 
     obligations issued under this section shall have such 
     maturities and bear such rate or rates of interest as shall 
     be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Secretary 
     of the Treasury is authorized and directed to purchase any 
     obligations of the Secretary issued under this section, and 
     for such purposes may use as a public debt transaction the 
     proceeds from the sale of any securities issued under chapter 
     31

[[Page H4720]]

     of title 31, United States Code, and the purposes for which 
     such securities may be issued under such chapter are extended 
     to include the purchases of the Secretary's obligations 
     hereunder.

     SEC. 675. TRAINING AND INFORMATION.

       The Secretary, in cooperation with eligible public 
     entities, shall carry out training and information activities 
     with respect to the guarantee program under this subtitle.

     SEC. 676. LIMITATIONS ON AMOUNT OF GUARANTEES.

       (a) Aggregate Fiscal Year Limitation.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law and subject only to the absence of 
     qualified applicants or proposed activities and to the 
     authority provided in this subtitle, to the extent approved 
     or provided in appropriation Acts, the Secretary shall enter 
     into commitments to guarantee notes and obligations under 
     this subtitle with an aggregate principal amount of 
     $400,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 
     and 2001.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations for Credit Subsidy.--
     There is authorized to be appropriated to cover the costs (as 
     such term is defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974) of guarantees under this subtitle, 
     $40,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 
     and 2001.
       (c) Aggregate Outstanding Limitation.--The total amount of 
     outstanding obligations guaranteed on a cumulative basis by 
     the Secretary pursuant to this subtitle shall not at any time 
     exceed $2,000,000,000 or such higher amount as may be 
     authorized to be appropriated for this subtitle for any 
     fiscal year.
       (d) Fiscal Year Limitations on Tribes.--The Secretary shall 
     monitor the use of guarantees under this subtitle by Indian 
     tribes. If the Secretary finds that 50 percent of the 
     aggregate guarantee authority under subsection (c) has been 
     committed, the Secretary may--
       (1) impose limitations on the amount of guarantees any one 
     Indian tribe may receive in any fiscal year of $50,000,000; 
     or
       (2) request the enactment of legislation increasing the 
     aggregate limitation on guarantees under this subtitle.

     SEC. 677. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This subtitle shall take effect upon the enactment of this 
     title.
       Subtitle G--Other Housing Assistance for Native Americans

     SEC. 681. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR INDIAN HOUSING.

       (a) Definition of Eligible Borrowers to Include Indian 
     Tribes.--Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development 
     Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1515z-13a) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``and Indian housing authorities'' and 
     inserting ``, Indian housing authorities, and Indian 
     tribes,''; and
       (B) by striking ``or Indian housing authority'' and 
     inserting ``, Indian housing authority, or Indian tribe''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``or Indian housing 
     authorities'' and inserting ``, Indian housing authorities, 
     or Indian tribes''.
       (b) Need for Loan Guarantee.--Section 184(a) of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1992 is amended by striking 
     ``trust land'' and inserting ``lands or as a result of a lack 
     of access to private financial markets''.
       (c) LHP Requirement.--Section 184(b)(2) of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992 is amended by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``that is under 
     the jurisdiction of an Indian tribe for which a local housing 
     plan has been submitted and approved pursuant to sections 612 
     and 613 of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
     Determination Act of 1996 that provides for the use of loan 
     guarantees under this section to provide affordable 
     homeownership housing in such areas''.
       (d) Lender Option to Obtain Payment Upon Default Without 
     Foreclosure.--Section 184(h) of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1992 is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(A)--
       (A) in the first sentence of clause (i), by striking ``in a 
     court of competent jurisdiction''; and
       (B) by striking clause (ii) and inserting the following new 
     clause:
       ``(ii) No foreclosure.--Without seeking foreclosure (or in 
     any case in which a foreclosure proceeding initiated under 
     clause (i) continues for a period in excess of 1 year), the 
     holder of the guarantee may submit to the Secretary a request 
     to assign the obligation and security interest to the 
     Secretary in return for payment of the claim under the 
     guarantee. The Secretary may accept assignment of the loan if 
     the Secretary determines that the assignment is in the best 
     interests of the United States. Upon assignment, the 
     Secretary shall pay to the holder of the guarantee the pro 
     rata portion of the amount guaranteed (as determined under 
     subsection (e)). The Secretary shall be subrogated to the 
     rights of the holder of the guarantee and the holder shall 
     assign the obligation and security to the Secretary.'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
       (e) Limitation of Mortgagee Authority.--Section 184(h)(2) 
     of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, as so 
     redesignated by subsection (e)(3) of this section, is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``tribal allotted or 
     trust land,'' and inserting ``restricted Indian land, the 
     mortgagee or''; and
       (B) in the second sentence, by striking ``Secretary'' each 
     place it appears, and inserting ``mortgagee or the 
     Secretary''.
       (f) Limitation on Outstanding Aggregate Principal Amount.--
     Section 184(i)(5)(C) of the Housing and Community Development 
     Act of 1992 is amended by striking ``1993'' and all that 
     follows through ``such year'' and inserting ``1997, 1998, 
     1999, 2000, and 2001 with an aggregate outstanding principal 
     amount note exceeding $400,000,000 for each such fiscal 
     year''.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations for Guarantee Fund.--
     Section 184(i)(7) of the Housing and Community Development 
     Act of 1992 is amended by striking ``such sums'' and all that 
     follows through ``1994'' and inserting ``$30,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001''.
       (h) Definitions.--Section 184(k) of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992 is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4), by inserting after ``authority'' the 
     following: ``or Indian tribe'';
       (2) in paragraph (5)--
       (A) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(A) is authorized to engage in or assist in the 
     development or operation of--
       ``(i) low-income housing for Indians; or
       ``(ii) housing subject to the provisions of this section; 
     and''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:

     ``The term includes tribally designated housing entities 
     under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
     Determination Act of 1996.''; and
       (3) by striking paragraph (8) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(8) The term `tribe' or `Indian tribe' means any Indian 
     tribe, band, notation, or other organized group or community 
     of Indians, including any Alaska Native village or regional 
     or village corporation as defined in or established pursuant 
     to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, which is 
     recognized as eligible for the special programs and services 
     provided by the United States to Indians because of their 
     status as Indians pursuant to the Indian Self-Determination 
     and Education Assistance Act of 1975.

     SEC. 682. 50-YEAR LEASEHOLD INTEREST IN TRUST OR RESTRICTED 
                   LANDS FOR HOUSING PURPOSES.

       (a) Authority to Lease.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, any restricted Indian lands, whether 
     tribally or individually owned, may be leased by the Indian 
     owners, with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, 
     for residential purposes.
       (b) Term.--Each lease pursuant to subsection (a) shall be 
     for a term not exceeding 50 years.
       (c) Other Conditions.--Each lease pursuant to subsection 
     (a) and each renewal of such a lease shall be made under such 
     terms and regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (d) Rule of Construction.--This section may not be 
     construed to repeal, limit, or affect any authority to lease 
     any restricted Indian lands that--
       (1) is conferred by or pursuant to any other provision of 
     law; or
       (2) provides for leases for any period exceeding 50 years.

     SEC. 683. TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

       There is authorized to be appropriated for assistance for 
     the a national organization representing Native American 
     housing interests for providing training and technical 
     assistance to Indian housing authorities and tribally 
     designated housing entities $2,000,000, for each of fiscal 
     years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.

     SEC. 684. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This subtitle and the amendments made by this subtitle 
     shall take effect upon the enactment of this title.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the committee of Wednesday, 
May 8, 1996, the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth] will be 
recognized for 10 minutes, and a Member opposed will be recognized for 
10 minutes.


                         parliamentary inquiry

  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I have a perfecting amendment to 
the amendment of the gentleman from Arizona. When would be the 
appropriate time to offer that amendment?
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would like to recognize the gentleman from 
Arizona for his amendment, and at that point, under the unanimous-
consent agreement of yesterday, the gentleman from Arizona has 10 
minutes in support of his amendment that will be allocated in support 
and 10 minutes will be allocated in opposition.
  At any time while the amendment of the gentleman from Arizona is 
pending, the gentleman from Alaska may offer a perfecting amendment.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I claim that time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] will be 
recognized for 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth].

[[Page H4721]]

  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes and 45 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to H.R. 2406 which 
will provide the tools for native American tribes to meet their unique 
housing needs.
  My amendment consists of the text of H.R. 3219, the Native American 
Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. This legislation 
was introduced by my colleague from New York, the chairman of the 
Housing Subcommittee. I cosponsor it along with Mr. Bereuter of 
Nebraska, and Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Months of consultation with 
tribes from across the country produced the legislation before us 
today.
  The need for better housing on Indian reservations is clear. As 
Albert Hale, president of the Navajo Nation, testified before the 
Housing Subcommittee, over 56 percent of the Navajo people live in 
poverty. It is not uncommon to have Navajo families of as many as 12 
people living in a two-room house. The Navajo tribal government has 
estimated that over 13,000 new homes are needed to alleviate severe 
overcrowding. But tribes, such as the Navajo Nation, need not just the 
resources, but the flexibility, to address the housing problems they 
face.
  A more effective system of Indian housing should be based on several 
important principles. First, public housing programs modeled for urban 
America often do not work in Indian country. Second the Federal role in 
providing housing to native Americans should recognize the special 
trust relationship between the Federal Government and tribal 
governments. Finally, tribes and Indian housing authorities should have 
the flexibility and responsibility to address the housing needs in 
their communities.

  The amendment I am offering reflects these principles. H.R. 3219 
separates Indian housing from public housing, a move which tribes have 
been advocating for years. It creates a block grant which will go 
directly to tribes, not through the States. I believe this is an 
important part of recognizing the government-to-government relationship 
between tribes and the Federal Government. This block grant will also 
increase local control and allow much greater flexibility for each 
tribe to address its own housing needs, including building new homes, 
renovating existing homes, or increasing community development. 
Finally, H.R. 3219 takes steps to promote and facilitate homeownership 
and lending on reservations.
  The National Congress of America Indians, which has 206 member 
tribes, supports these principles as articulate in H.R. 3219. The 
National American Indian Housing Council, which represents 187 Indian 
housing authorities, also supports the principles in this bill.
  I know that there are still issues that various parties want to see 
addressed in this legislation, and I hope that the process will 
continue to be as open and inclusive a process as Chairman Lazio has 
promoted so far. For instance, one of the tribes in my congressional 
district, the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian community, is a self-
governance tribe. Although they believe that this bill provides an 
important opportunity to move toward self-sufficiency in housing, they 
would like to see an option for self-governance tribes to deliver 
housing services through a self-governance contract. I know that, as we 
move forward to conference, Chairman Lazio will continue to make every 
effort to accommodate the needs and concerns of tribes. Likewise, we 
have reached a compromise on the Davis-Bacon issue, which will be 
addressed in an amendment offered momentarily by my colleagues from 
Alaska and Minnesota.
  If this amendment is approved and H.R. 3219 is attached to H.R. 2406, 
none of the provisions of H.R. 2406 will apply to tribes and Indian 
housing will be established as separate from public housing, as I have 
said. However, it is extremely important to move the two bills 
concurrently. As my colleagues know, H.R. 2406 repeals the 1937 Housing 
Act. Without passage of H.R. 3219, native Americans could be left 
without a Federal housing program which would be devastating to tribes 
across the country.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, which will improve 
housing conditions for native Americans across the country.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment in its present 
form. Mr. Chairman, I have concerns about certainly the rush to act on 
this amendment. It makes sweeping changes to the native American 
housing policy. There has only been one hearing on this and five 
witnesses. In fact, the administration, who favors this amendment, did 
not testify on it, nor have they submitted testimony.
  Mr. Chairman, I, myself, have long been an advocate of assisted 
housing in Indian country and have worked with many Members. Very 
often, Mr. Chairman, it is a very far limited market. It requires 
infrastructure changes. The pattern of ownership is complicated, as my 
colleagues on the Committee on Resources with whom I work are 
knowledgeable of the problem and challenge.
  We did not have a markup on this bill. It does not have some of the 
needed policy changes that I think are necessary, such as the issue of 
State Housing Finance Agency role in terms of native American housing. 
Well crafted proposals and recommendations exist in that vein. Also 
this measure could include urban Indian housing as one of the outcomes, 
which is not in this amendment. Most native Americans in fact live in 
urban settings today.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I am concerned about these shortcomings about some 
of the labor provisions within this amendment. I also am concerned that 
there are other amendments that may be offered without any warning to 
most the membership on this issue.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. 
Young], who is planning on offering an amendment at this time.


amendment offered by mr. young of alaska to amendment no. 9 offered by 
                              mr. hayworth

  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the 
amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Young of Alaska to Amendment No. 9 
     offered by Mr. Hayworth: Page 29 of the amendment, strike 
     line 22, and all that follows through page 30, line 4, and 
     insert the following new subsection:
       (b)(1) In general.--Any contract for the construction of 
     affordable housing with 12 or more units assisted with grant 
     amounts made available under this Act shall contain a 
     provision requiring that no less than the wages prevailing in 
     the locality, as predetermined by the Secretary of Labor 
     pursuant to the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-5), 
     shall be paid to all laborers and mechanics employed in the 
     development of affordable housing involved, and recipients 
     shall require certification as to the compliance with the 
     provisions of this section prior to making any payment under 
     such contract.
       (2) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if the 
     individual receives no compensation or is paid expenses, 
     reasonable benefits, or a nominal fee to perform the services 
     for which the individual volunteered and such persons are not 
     otherwise employed at any time in the construction work.
       (3) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive the provisions of this 
     subsection.

  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask 
unanimous consent that the amendment to the amendment be considered as 
read and printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Alaska?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, first let me say I do support the 
amendment of the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth]. The Indian 
housing problems in this Nation are severe. This is a good amendment 
and I will be supporting it.
  Mr. Chairman, I'm offering an amendment to the amendment by Mr. 
Hayworth, to correct a problem relating to the application of the 
Davis-Bacon Act to construction of Indian housing.
  As written, the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona 
contains language that would effectively prohibit application of the 
Davis-Bacon Act to construction of Indian housing. I think this is 
wrong. My amendment changes the language to ensure that the Davis-Bacon 
Act applies to the construction of 12 or more units of Indian housing.
  My amendment will make the gentleman's amendment more consistent with 
current law, in which the Davis-Bacon Act applies to certain federally

[[Page H4722]]

subsidized construction contracts. I realize there is a larger debate 
concerning Davis-Bacon at issue. However, this is not the place to 
debate our views on Davis-Bacon, which I happen to support strongly.
  Consideration of Davis-Bacon reform or repeal should be considered 
separately and on its own merits. It should not be modified or repealed 
in a piecemeal fashion through legislation like this.
  I strongly support our effort to give more control and flexibility in 
operating affordable housing projects to Indians. However, this is not 
the place to address Davis-Bacon.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this amendment, and I stress again, 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona, if my amendment is 
adopted, is a good piece of legislation and I urge its passage.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Alaska offering this 
amendment. This is a major concern that I have had with this amendment 
in its present form. But with the amendment of the gentleman from 
Alaska on prevailing wage, it is one of the major outstanding questions 
concerning the Hayworth legislation as it exists. I appreciate the 
gentleman from Alaska offering this amendment, and I urge Members to 
support it.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VENTO. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman from Alaska if 
this will continue to apply to publicly financed housing and not apply 
to private?
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield, only 
to publicly financed housing.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I urge the passage of this legislation.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, as I said, I support the amendment that the gentleman 
from Alaska [Mr. Young] is offering, which basically exempts funds 
provided under 12 units. The current Hayworth amendment did not do 
that. I think it may have been a technical problem, but its consequence 
is a major concern.
  As I said, the Young amendment would provide prevailing wage, would 
not apply for 12 units or less, and would provide the opportunity for 
the Secretary to waive the provisions as provided by the Secretary 
under similar authority existing in the CDBG program policy allocated 
to Indian tribes.
  Mr. Chairman, I have worked with those concerned with the request of 
the gentleman from Alaska, and I appreciate his initiative in bringing 
this amendment to the floor this afternoon.
  It is my understanding that the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth] 
is going to accept this amendment, and some of my concerns are 
addressed with it. So, I urge my colleagues' support for the Young 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, inquiry. Do we address this amendment at 
this juncture?
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would point out that we can address the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Alaska at this point in the 
process, and we can reserve the balance of debate time on both sides 
once this amendment has been resolved. Or, we can wait until all the 
time has been utilized.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alaska 
[Mr. Young] to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. 
Hayworth].
  The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question now before the House is the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth], as amended.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter].
  (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time. I rise in strong support of the Hayworth amendment. It actually 
does incorporate the provisions of H.R. 3219. Secretary Cisneros was 
reported to have been told by the Navajo, the best thing he could do 
for housing was to support the Republican bill, H.R. 3219. Actually, it 
is a bipartisan bill and has been from the beginning.


   amendment offered by mr. bereuter to the amendment offered by mr. 
                          hayworth, as amended

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Bereuter to the amendment offered 
     by Mr. Hayworth, as amended: Page 77 of the amendment, after 
     line 19, insert the following new subsections:
       (i) Principal Obligation Amounts.--Section 184(b)(5)(C) of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 is amended 
     by striking clause (i) and inserting the following new 
     clause:
       ``(i) 97.75 percent of the appraised value of the property 
     as of the date the loan is accepted for guarantee (or 98.75 
     percent if the value of the property is $50,000 or less); 
     and''.
       (j) Availability of Amounts.--
       (1) Requirement of appropriations.--Section 184(i)(5) of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 is amended 
     by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(A) Requirement of appropriations.--The authority of the 
     Secretary to enter into commitments to guarantee loans under 
     this section shall be effective for any fiscal year to the 
     extent or in such amounts as are or have been provided in 
     appropriations Acts, without regard to the fiscal year for 
     which such amounts were appropriated.''.
       (2) Costs.--Section 184(i)(5)(B) of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new sentence: ``Any amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to this subparagraph shall remain available until 
     expended.''.
       (k) GNMA Authority.--The first sentence of section 
     306(g)(1) of the Federal National Mortgage Association 
     Charter Act (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)(1)) is amended by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``; or guaranteed 
     under section 184 of the Housing and Community Development 
     Act of 1992''.

  Mr. BEREUTER (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment to the amendment, as amended, be considered 
as read and printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Nebraska?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment has three rather simple 
but important provisions which make improvements in the section 184 
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program, first enacted in 1992. The 
amendment authorizes funds appropriate to remain available until the 
next fiscal year or until expended, raises the maximum loan level to 
the same as FHA single-family loans, and provided that Ginnie Mae may 
purchase loans under the program.
  Mr. Chairman, I move for its adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, this Member's amendment, which has been drafted in 
cooperation with the administration, makes three very simple but 
important improvements to the Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee 
Program, first authorized through the Housing and Community Development 
Act of 1992. This loan program, administered by the Department of 
Housing and Urban Developments Office of Native American Programs, has 
proven to be a highly popular and effective way to bring private market 
participation to meet the housing needs in Indian country.
  The current loan guarantee program allows Indians and Indian Housing 
Authorities [IHAs] access to private financing that otherwise would not 
be available to them because of the unique legal status of Indian trust 
land. The Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund is used to guarantee loans 
made to Indian families and IHAs for the construction, acquisition, 
and rehabilitation of 1-4 family dwellings. This must be standard 
housing and must be located on trust land or land located in an Indian 
or Alaskan native area.

  HUD works with tribes, lenders, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs to 
administer the loan program. HUD issues prequalification commitments 
based on information received from the lender. The lender completes 
property underwriting, and then submits the loan to HUD for firm 
commitment. After the commitment is issued, the loan is closed and 
serviced by the lender.
  This Member's amendment makes three simple changes to the current 
program. And this Member should note at this point that these changes 
were suggested and are supported by HUD. First, the maximum loan amount 
is raised to bring it in line with the widely-used FHA single-family 
loan program. Specifically, for loans with appraised values of $50,000 
or less, the maximum loan amount will be 98.75 percent of the appraised 
value. For loan on properties valued above $50,000,

[[Page H4723]]

 the loan may be 97.75 percent of the appraised value.
  The second change made by this amendment is simple yet very 
important. Because the construction process often does not conform to 
the congressional budget cycle, this amendment authorizes funds 
appropriated to remain available until expended.
  The final change made by this Member's amendment is an expansion of 
the authority of the Government National Mortgage Association, also 
known as Ginnie Mae, to purchase loans guaranteed under this program. 
Without this expansion, Ginnie Mae is not authorized to participate in 
Indian country. I would like to note that the Nations largest housing 
secondary market, Fannie Mae, has been instrumental in the programs 
early successes. However, now is not the time to limit the sources of 
capital for participating lenders. Rather, by adding Ginnie Mae as an 
additional source of funds, this amendment would expand the capital 
available in Indian country.
  Mr. Chairman, this Member urges his colleagues to vote for this 
amendment, and for H.R. 2406.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the amendment of the gentleman from 
Nebraska. It is a good amendment in terms of providing the Ginnie Mae 
authority and the increased loans authority and availability. I think 
this is exactly the type of help in terms of real financing improvement 
and innovation that is necessary. I commend the gentleman from Nebraska 
[Mr. Bereuter], an advocate throughout his career in Congress regarding 
Indian housing, and native American policy, and I support this measure.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter] to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth], as amended.
  The amendment to the amendment, as amended, was agreed to.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, under this procedure it is rather awkward that one must 
be in opposition. Obviously, I did not mean to surprise my colleague 
from Arizona, but it was necessary in fact to use the time, and in the 
present form, when the amendment was initially offered, I did not 
support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I appropriately recognize the amendments and changes 
made have improved this amendment. I suggest to my colleagues who are 
interested in Native American housing the severe problems we have in 
this area. I hope this block grant approach accomplishes the noble 
objectives that are expressed. I have my doubts considering the 
infrastructure and other threshold issues that we face, but look 
forward to working to see the positive goals become a reality.
  We have a significant Native American population in the State that I 
represent. I would like nothing better than to see them get better 
housing. Some of the worst housing we have in this Nation is occupied 
by Native Americans, and the commensurate problems that occur with it 
greatly concern me as it relates to our direct and joint 
responsibilities, the Secretary of HUD, the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
and, of course, this Congress.
  With that said, Mr. Chairman, I will now support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter].
  (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Bereuter 
amendment to the Hayworth amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, this Member rises in strong support of the Hayworth 
amendment. This amendment incorporates the text of H.R. 3219, the 
Native American Housing Assistance Self-Determination Act of 1996. This 
Member, along with his colleagues from Arizona, Mr. Hayworth, the 
chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Lazio, and his colleague from the 
other side of the aisle, Mr. Johnson of South Dakota, introduced H.R. 
3219. I say, perhaps immediately, but eventually, I believe that this 
bill and Mr. Hayworth's amendment is the most important and beneficial 
Indian housing initiative ever offered.
  The concepts contained in this amendment are widely supported by 
Indian groups, including the National American Indian Housing Council. 
This revolutionary measure for the first time decouples predominantly 
rural Indian housing from the laws which were designed to govern urban 
public housing.
  Additionally, the Hayworth amendment creates flexible block grants to 
tribes or their tribally designated housing entity, recognizes and 
supports the unique government-to-government relationship between 
Indian tribes and the U.S. Government and restates the value of having 
local control by giving the tribes greater flexibility in providing 
housing, creates a consolidated native American housing grant--HUD's 
Office of Native American Programs will be dedicated to helping Indian 
communities meet their housing needs, with a common goal of achieving 
economic self-sufficiency. HUD will enforce strict accountability 
standards, and involves private capital markets and private lenders in 
improving economic conditions by removing the legal barriers which have 
kept private investors from participating in Indian country. 
Specifically, the amendment replaces the 20-year leaseholds under 
current law with a 40-year lease.

  Unfortunately, this Member understands this important amendment has 
been placed in jeopardy by the dubious opposition of big labor. The 
measure strives to keep the costs, including labor costs, of providing 
housing at its lowest possible level in order to provide maximum impact 
for very limited funds. In a lobbying effort as late as last night, big 
labor has equated a vote for housing Americas most underserved citizens 
as a vote against big labor. Not concerned with what is good for 
America, big labor has threatened to kill a measure which prohibits 
inflated contract costs associated with the prevailing wages required 
by the Davis-Bacon Act. With homelessness in Indian country at 
embarrassingly high rates, we can ill-afford to waste a penny on such 
questionable mandates as Davis-Bacon.
  Although this Member strongly believes the prohibition against 
applying Davis-Bacon to Indian housing should stay in the amendment, 
this Member will not block a move to strike the language because the 
urgent need to provide safe and adequate housing to Indians outweighs 
this Member's opposition to Davis-Bacon.
  Mr. Chairman, this Member again strongly urges his colleagues to 
support Native Americans and vote in favor of the Hayworth amendment.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Coburn].
  (Mr. COBURN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. Chairman, as a representative of 14 tribes from the 
Second District of Oklahoma, I rise in support of the Hayworth 
amendment.
  I would first like to thank Chairman Lazio and Congressman Hayworth 
for their tremendous effort and dedication in putting together the 
Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. 
I rise in support of this legislation in large part because the second 
largest Native American tribe in the United States, the Cherokee, 
reside in my district respectively. The 14 tribes which I represent in 
Congress strongly support this landmark Indian housing reform bill.
  The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma has a tribal membership which 
currently numbers 170,000. Despite the large tribal size, the number of 
Indian housing units is ridiculously low. The Housing authority of the 
Cherokee Nation manages some 4,300 housing units under the Low Rent, 
Section 8 and Mutual Help Homeownership Opportunity Program 
administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Development. But the 
tribe's need for housing is much, much greater.
  The Cherokee Nations Housing Authority budget has grown from $8 
million to $30 million and its work force has increased from 65 to 250 
employees. This growth is due, in part, to the Housing Authority's 
ability to leverage Federal dollars, to the extent HUD's program 
constraints allow. Still, most Cherokee tribal members live in crowded 
Indian housing units in conditions considerably more severe than those 
of the non-Indian populations.

  Mr. Chairman, Tribes and Indian Housing Authorities like those of the 
Cherokee Nation are prime examples of what is achievable in Indian 
management working with scarce resources. They have successfully 
leveraged Federal programs available for housing and other assistance 
to Native Americans with whatever other outside financing they can 
identify.
  Mr. Hayworth's amendment will advance this progress substantially by 
separating from public housing programs the Indian housing programs and 
moving toward deregulation of those Indian housing programs. Tribes and 
their housing authorities will be better able to leverage Federal 
dollars with private financing to construct new housing and renovate 
existing units in Indian country.
  The most important feature of this bill is the procedure of block 
granting the federal funds

[[Page H4724]]

for Indian housing programs. The block grant approach is fully 
consistent with the concept of Indian self-determination and self-
governance.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting Mr. 
Hayworth's amendment, and adopting it as part of H.R. 2406.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma [Mr. Watts], a gentleman I would have loved to block for on 
the gridiron.
  (Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge my colleagues to 
vote for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. 
Hayworth] to add a new title called the Native American Housing 
Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. The amendment helps to 
leverage private sector capital to the Indian housing market where it 
is much needed. The amendment provides loan guarantees for affordable 
housing activities, thus providing for greater involvement of the 
financial community.
  Substantially similar to the popular section 108 loan guarantee 
program for community development block grants, this bill allows Indian 
housing authorities to borrow or issue debt equal to up to 5 years 
worth of allocation under the housing grants formula to be paid back 
over not more than 20 years with the full faith and credit of the 
United States. The Hayworth amendment helps the tribes move to a place 
where they are able to better self-govern.
  Block grants to tribal governments and tribal housing authorities is 
a step in the right direction. It allows tribes to determine what their 
local tribal housing needs are and how they should be met.
  In closing, I would like to commend and thank the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Lazio], the chairman, and the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. 
Hayworth], and their fine staff for the hard work on the Native 
American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. I urge 
my colleagues to join me in voting to adopt this innovative proposal.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
New York [Mr. Lazio], distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on 
Housing and Community Development.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, this is an important, it is not 
just important substantively but it is important in terms of process. 
For the first time, native Americans had input, had the ability to 
influence the process to reflect the values and the concerns that they 
had back in Indian country.
  When we had a hearing, and we have had several different meetings 
with leaders, including housing specialists from the Indian country, we 
invited people from Indian country and we invited native Americans in 
to hear their story, to understand what the concerns are, to understand 
how further progress was being blocked by a structure that was now 
clearly obsolete and out of date. This is an effort to move us forward.
  Mr. Chairman, it gives native Americans many of the same tools that 
have been so dramatic in terms of helping our Nation's communities. 
Most importantly the loan guarantee program that will allow, in some of 
the most rural areas of our Nation, where some of the worst housing 
conditions in our entire Nation are, the ability to leverage money and 
to have larger developments that are cost-effective and bring more hope 
and more opportunity to native Americans. I am very proud of this 
effort, and I ask for its support.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds, simply to say 
that I echo the comments of the chairman of the subcommittee. I thank 
him for his efforts.
  I thank my colleague from Minnesota for pointing out some legitimate 
policy differences. But make no mistake, this is historic legislation 
which empowers the first Americans with what should be the right of 
first Americans. That is the right to find the dwelling of their choice 
and to empower them to be meaningful members not only of their own 
communities but of this Nation at large.
  I urge adoption of this amendment as it has been amended.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth], as amended.
  The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there other amendments to the bill?


                 amendment no. 22 offered by mr. roemer

  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 22 offered by Mr. Roemer:

                               H.R. 2406

       At the end of the bill, insert the following new title:
    TITLE VI--NATIONAL MANUFACTURED HOUSING CONSTRUCTION AND SAFETY 
                     STANDARDS CONSENSUS COMMITTEE

     SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCE.

       (a) Short Title.--This title may be cited as the ``National 
     Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 
     1996''.
       (b) Reference.--Whenever in this title an amendment is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to that section or other provision of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1974.

     SEC. 602. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

       Section 602 (42 U.S.C. 5401) is amended by striking the 
     first sentence and inserting the following: ``The Congress 
     declares that the purposes of this title are to reduce the 
     number of personal injuries and deaths and property damage 
     resulting from manufactured home accidents and to establish a 
     balanced consensus process for the development, revision, and 
     interpretation of Federal construction and safety standards 
     for manufactured homes.''.

     SEC. 603. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 603 (42 U.S.C. 5402) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``dealer'' and inserting 
     ``retailer'';
       (2) in paragraph (12), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (3) in paragraph (13), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(14) `consensus committee' means the committee 
     established under section 604(a)(7); and
       ``(15) `consensus standards development process' means the 
     process by which additions and revisions to the Federal 
     manufactured home construction and safety standards shall be 
     developed and recommended to the Secretary by the consensus 
     committee.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Occurrences of ``dealer''.--The Act (42 U.S.C. 5401 et 
     seq.) is amended by striking ``dealer'' and inserting 
     ``retailer'' in each of the following provisions:
       (A) In section 613, each place such term appears.
       (B) In section 614(f), each place such term appears.
       (C) In section 615(b)(1).
       (D) In section 616.
       (2) Other amendments.--The Act (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (A) in section 615(b)(3), by striking ``dealer or dealers'' 
     and inserting ``retailer or retailers''; and
       (B) by striking ``dealers'' and inserting ``retailers'' 
     each place such term appears--
       (i) in section 615(d);
       (ii) in section 615(f); and
       (iii) in section 623(c)(9).

     SEC. 604. FEDERAL MANUFACTURED HOME CONSTRUCTION AND SAFETY 
                   STANDARDS.

       Section 604 (42 U.S.C. 5403) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsections (a) and (b) and inserting the 
     following new subsections:
       ``(a) Establishment.--
       ``(1) Authority.--The Secretary shall establish, by order, 
     appropriate Federal manufactured home construction and safety 
     standards. Each such Federal manufactured home standard shall 
     be reasonable and shall meet the highest standards of 
     protection, taking into account existing State and local laws 
     relating to manufactured home safety and construction. The 
     Secretary shall issue all such orders pursuant to the 
     consensus standards development process under this 
     subsection. The Secretary may issue orders which are not part 
     of the consensus standards development process only in 
     accordance with subsection (b).
       ``(2) Consensus standards development process.--Not later 
     than 180 days after the date of enactment of the National 
     Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 
     1996, the Secretary shall enter into a cooperative agreement 
     or establish a relationship with a qualified technical or 
     building code organization to administer the consensus 
     standards development process and establish a consensus 
     committee under paragraph (7). Periodically, the Secretary 
     shall review such organization's performance and may replace 
     the organization upon a finding of need.
       ``(3) Revisions.--The consensus committee established under 
     paragraph (7) shall consider revisions to the Federal 
     manufactured home construction and safety standards and shall 
     submit revised standards to the Secretary at least once 
     during every 2-year period, the first such 2-year period 
     beginning

[[Page H4725]]

     upon the appointment of the consensus committee under 
     paragraph (7). Before submitting proposed revised standards 
     to the Secretary, the consensus committee shall cause the 
     proposed revised standards to be published in the Federal 
     Register, together with a description of the consensus 
     committee's considerations and decisions under subsection 
     (e), and shall provide an opportunity for public comment. 
     Public views and objections shall be presented to the 
     consensus committee in accordance with American National 
     Standards Institute procedures. After such notice and 
     opportunity public comment, the consensus committee shall 
     cause the recommended revisions to the standards and notice 
     of its submission to the Secretary to be published in the 
     Federal Register. Such notice shall describe the 
     circumstances under which the proposed revised standards 
     could become effective.
       ``(4) Review by secretary.--The Secretary shall either 
     adopt, modify, or reject the standards submitted by the 
     consensus committee. A final order adopting the standards 
     shall be issued by the Secretary not later than 12 months 
     after the date the standards are submitted to the Secretary 
     by the consensus committee, and shall be published in the 
     Federal Register and become effective pursuant to subsection 
     (c). If the Secretary--
       ``(A) adopts the standards recommended by the consensus 
     committee, the Secretary may issue a final order directly 
     without further rulemaking;
       ``(B) determines that any portion of the standards should 
     be rejected because it would jeopardize health or safety or 
     is inconsistent with the purposes of this title, a notice to 
     that effect, together with this reason for rejecting the 
     proposed standard, shall be published in the Federal Register 
     no later than 12 months after the date the standards are 
     submitted to the Secretary by the consensus committee;
       ``(C) determines that any portion of the standard should be 
     modified because it would jeopardize health or safety or is 
     inconsistent with the purposes of this title--
       ``(i) such determination shall be made no later that 12 
     months after the date the standards are submitted to the 
     Secretary by the consensus committee;
       ``(ii) within such 12-month period, the Secretary shall 
     cause the proposed modified standard to be published in the 
     Federal Register, together with an explanation of the reason 
     for the Secretary's determination that the consensus 
     committee recommendation needs to be modified, and shall 
     provide an opportunity for public comment in accordance with 
     the provisions of section 553 of title 5, United States Code; 
     and
       ``(iii) the final standard shall become effective pursuant 
     to subsection (c).
       ``(5) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to take final 
     action under paragraph (4) and publish notice of the action 
     in the Federal Register within the 12-month period under such 
     paragraph, the recommendations of the consensus committee 
     shall be considered to have been adopted by the Secretary and 
     shall take effect upon the expiration of the 180-day period 
     that begins upon the conclusion of the 12-month period. 
     Within 10 days after the expiration of the 12-month period, 
     the Secretary shall cause to be published in the Federal 
     Register notice of the Secretary's failure to act, the 
     revised standards, and the effective date of the revised 
     standards. Such notice shall be deemed an order of the 
     Secretary approving the revised standards proposed by the 
     consensus committee.
       ``(6) Interpretive bulletins.--The Secretary may issue 
     interpretive bulletins to clarify the meaning of any Federal 
     manufactured home construction and safety standards, subject 
     to the following requirements:
       ``(A) Review by consensus committee.--Before issuing an 
     interpretive bulletin, the Secretary shall submit the 
     proposed bulletin to the consensus committee and the 
     consensus committee shall have 90 days to provide written 
     comments thereon to the Secretary. If the consensus committee 
     fails to act or if the Secretary rejects any significant 
     views recommended by the consensus committee, the Secretary 
     shall explain in writing to the consensus committee, before 
     the bulletin becomes effective, the reasons for such 
     rejection.
       ``(B) Proposals.--The consensus committee may, from time to 
     time, submit to the Secretary proposals for interpretive 
     bulletins under this subsection. If the Secretary fails to 
     issue or rejects a proposed bulletin within 90 days of its 
     receipt, the Secretary shall be considered to have approved 
     the proposed bulletin and shall immediately issue the 
     bulletin.
       ``(C) Effect.--Interpretative bulletins issued under this 
     paragraph shall become binding without rulemaking.
       ``(7) Consensus committee.--
       ``(A) Purpose.--The consensus committee referred to in 
     paragraph (2) shall have as its purpose providing periodic 
     recommendations to the Secretary to revise and interpret the 
     Federal manufactured home construction and safety standards 
     and carrying out such other functions assigned to the 
     committee under this title. The committee shall be organized 
     and carry out its business in a manner that guarantees a fair 
     opportunity for the expression and consideration of various 
     positions.
       ``(B) Membership.--The consensus committee shall be 
     composed of 25 members who shall be appointed as follows:
       ``(i) Appointment by process administrator.--Members shall 
     be appointed by the qualified technical or building code 
     organization that administers the consensus standards 
     development process pursuant to paragraph (2), subject to the 
     approval of the Secretary.
       ``(ii) Balanced membership.--Members shall be appointed in 
     a manner designed to include all interested parties without 
     domination by any single interest category.
       ``(iii) Selection procedures and requirements.--Members 
     shall be appointed in accordance with selection procedures 
     for consensus committees promulgated by the American National 
     Standards Institute, except that the American National 
     Standards Institute interest categories shall be modified to 
     ensure representation on the committee by individuals 
     representing the following fields, in equal numbers under 
     each of the following subclauses:

       ``(I) Manufacturers.
       ``(II) Retailers, insurers, suppliers, lenders, community 
     owners and private inspection agencies which have a financial 
     interest in the industry.
       ``(III) Homeowners and consumer representatives.
       ``(IV) Public officials, such as those from State or local 
     building code enforcement and inspection agencies.
       ``(V) General interest, including academicians, 
     researchers, architects, engineers, private inspection 
     agencies, and others.

     Members of the consensus committee shall be qualified by 
     background and experience to participate in the work of the 
     committee, but members by reason of subclauses (III), (IV), 
     and (V), except the private inspection agencies, may not have 
     a financial interest in the manufactured home industry, 
     unless such bar to participation is waived by the Secretary. 
     The number of members by reason of subclause (V) who 
     represent private inspection agencies may not constitute more 
     than 20 percent of the total number of members by reason of 
     subclause (V). Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     paragraph, the Secretary shall appoint a member of the 
     consensus committee, who shall not have voting privileges.
       ``(C) Meetings.--The consensus committee shall cause 
     advance notice of all meetings to be published in the Federal 
     Register and all meetings of the committee shall be open to 
     the public.
       ``(D) Authority.--Sections 203, 205, 207, and 208 of title 
     18, United States Code, shall not apply to the members of the 
     consensus committee. Members shall not be considered to be 
     special government employees for purposes of part 2634 of 
     title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. The consensus committee 
     shall not be considered an advisory committee for purposes of 
     the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
       ``(E) Administration.--The consensus committee and the 
     administering organization shall operate in conformance with 
     American National Standards Institute procedures for the 
     development and coordination of American National Standards 
     and shall apply to such Institute to obtain accreditation.
       ``(F) Staff.--The consensus committee shall be provided 
     reasonable staff resources by the administering organization. 
     Upon a showing of need and subject to the approval of the 
     Secretary, the administering organization shall furnish 
     technical support to any of the various interest categories 
     on the consensus committee.
       ``(b) Other Orders.--The Secretary may issue orders that 
     are not developed under the procedures set forth in 
     subsection (a) in order to respond to an emergency health or 
     safety issue, or to address issues on which the Secretary 
     determines the consensus committee will not make timely 
     recommendations, but only if the proposed order is first 
     submitted by the Secretary to the consensus committee for 
     review and the committee is afforded 90 days to provide its 
     views on the proposed order to the Secretary. If the 
     consensus committee fails to act within such period or if the 
     Secretary rejects any significant change recommended by the 
     consensus committee, the public notice of the order shall 
     include an explanation of the reasons for the Secretary's 
     action. The Secretary may issue such orders only in 
     accordance with the provisions of section 553 of title 5, 
     United States Code.'';
       (2) by striking subsection (e);
       (3) in subsection (f), by striking the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(e) Considerations in Establishing and Interpreting 
     Standards.--The consensus committee, in recommending 
     standards and interpretations, and the Secretary, in 
     establishing standards or issuing interpretations under this 
     section, shall--'';
       (4) by striking subsection (g);
       (5) in the first sentence of subsection (j), by striking 
     ``subsection (f)'' and inserting ``subsection (e)''; and
       (6) by redesignating subsections (h), (i), and (j) as 
     subsections (f), (g), and (h), respectively.

     SEC. 605. ABOLISHMENT OF NATIONAL MANUFACTURED HOME ADVISORY 
                   COUNCIL.

       Section 605 (42 U.S.C. 5404) is hereby repealed.

     SEC. 606. PUBLIC INFORMATION.

       Section 607 (42 U.S.C. 5406) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by inserting ``to the Secretary'' after ``submit''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``Such 
     cost and other information shall be submitted to the 
     consensus committee by the Secretary for its evaluation.'';

[[Page H4726]]

       (2) in subsection (d), by inserting ``, the consensus 
     committee,'' after ``public,''; and
       (3) by striking subsection (c) and redesignating 
     subsections (d) and (e) as subsections (c) and (d), 
     respectively.

     SEC. 607. INSPECTION FEES.

       Section 620 (42 U.S.C. 5419) is amended to read as follows:
       ``Sec. 620. (a) Authority To Establish Fees.--In carrying 
     out the inspections required under this title and in 
     developing standards pursuant to section 604, the Secretary 
     may establish and impose on manufactured home manufacturers, 
     distributors, and retailers such reasonable fees as may be 
     necessary to offset the expenses incurred by the Secretary in 
     conducting such inspections and administering the consensus 
     standards development process and for developing standards 
     pursuant to section 604(b), and the Secretary may use any 
     fees so collected to pay expenses incurred in connection 
     therewith. Such fees shall only be modified pursuant to 
     rulemaking in accordance with the provisions of section 553 
     of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(b) Deposit of Fees.--Fees collected pursuant to this 
     title shall be deposited in a fund, which is hereby 
     established in the Treasury for deposit of such fees. Amounts 
     in the fund are hereby available for use by the Secretary 
     pursuant to subsection (a). The use of these fees by the 
     Secretary shall not be subject to general or specific 
     limitations on appropriated funds unless use of these fees is 
     specifically addressed in any future appropriations 
     legislation. The Secretary shall provide an annual report to 
     Congress indicating expenditures under this section. The 
     Secretary shall also make available to the public, in 
     accordance with all applicable disclosure laws, regulations, 
     orders, and directives, information pertaining to such funds, 
     including information pertaining to amounts collected, 
     amounts disbursed, and the fund balance.''.

     SEC. 608. ELIMINATION OF ANNUAL REPORT REQUIREMENT.

       Section 626 (42 U.S.C. 5425) is hereby repealed.

     SEC. 609. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by this title shall take effect on the 
     date of enactment of this Act, except that the amendments 
     shall have no effect on any order or interpretative bulletin 
     that is published as a proposed rule pursuant to the 
     provisions of section 553 of title 5, United States Code, on 
     or before that date.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the agreement of May 8, the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Roemer] will be recognized for 10 minutes in support of 
his amendment, and a Member in opposition will be recognized for 10 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I offer this bipartisan amendment on behalf of myself, the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Royce], the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Gonzalez], 
the gentleman from California [Mr. Calvert], the gentleman from 
Minnesota [Mr. Vento], and the gentleman from Florida [Mr. McCollum].
   Mr. Chairman, nothing is more important to our American society, to 
our citizens, our consumers and our businesses than addressing the 
excessive cost of regulation. Nowhere is it more true and more accurate 
than its impact and its negative impact on the manufactured housing 
industry. Along those lines, 4\1/2\ months ago we sat down with 
Secretary Cisneros, with consumer groups, with Democrats and 
Republicans, and we started working out a way by which we can cut back 
on the cost to the manufactured housing industry of promulgating even 
simple new changes to regulatory laws and standards.
  We came up with a very delicate balance here, this bipartisan bill. 
This bill will make it much easier to promulgate these regulations and 
standards because the consumers are at the table, the businesses are at 
the table, and it is not just Federal mandates coming out of HUD.
  This is commonsense legislation whereby some people have always said 
regulations are the answer. Now, more and more in the last year we have 
heard no regulations should be out there. We are saying, let us come up 
with a third alternative, a new idea and bring Democrats and 
Republicans together.
  Here is what AARP is saying, because so many senior citizens live in 
this affordable, quality housing and manufactured homes: I am writing 
to express the strong support of the American Association of Retired 
Persons for the Royce-Roemer amendment, which would establish a 
balanced consensus process for the development, revision, and 
interpretation of Federal construction and safety standards for 
manufactured homes.
  We have reached this balance with Secretary Cisneros and HUD and 
Democrats and Republicans, consumer groups, AARP, we have this delicate 
balance now. We would hope that this amendment would be passed, that we 
could get this onto this bill. We have indications that this will be 
supported in the Senate and by the President.
  If, however, amendments are attached to this bill where we have not 
had hearings, where there is currently litigation and there are 
currently different issues before the courts, where there has been no 
input, no input into the very delicate and technical dialog that we 
have had with these groups over the last 4\1/2\ months, then we 
probably get nothing. We probably do not get this consensus committee. 
We probably do not get the ability to save the consumer and the 
businesses the money. We probably do not get this new idea.
  I would urge my colleagues to vote for the Roemer amendment, the 
Royce amendment, the Calvert amendment, the Gonzalez and Vento 
amendment and in the bipartisan fashion that we should be working 
together around here and to strongly reject any kinds of attempts to 
write legislation at the last minute on the floor without hearings and 
to support this in the sense of this is not going to cost the taxpayer 
one nickel. All of the money that puts forward this consensus committee 
comes from the industry.
  I am very happy to propose this amendment on behalf of the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Royce] and myself.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member seek to control the time in opposition 
to the amendment?
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I do.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] is recognized 
for 10 minutes.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Indiana [Mr. McIntosh], and I ask 
unanimous consent that he be permitted to control the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  (Mr. McINTOSH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Chairman, this body recognized many years ago that 
manufactured homes fulfill a vital need in the American housing market. 
Manufactured homes always have been unique. They offer Americans an 
option to buy affordable housing. Manufactured homes make homeowners of 
hundreds of thousands of Americans who might otherwise be forced to 
rely on public assistance and forgo one of the basic elements of the 
American dream, a home of their own.
  Now, in order to ensure both the safety and affordability of 
manufactured homes, Congress, in 1974, adopted the National 
Manufactured Home Construction Safety Standards Act. HUD has issued 
many standards but delivered very little in terms of consumer benefit 
under this act. It has imposed costs that in many ways have made 
manufactured housing unaffordable for those who could most benefit from 
this industry.
  So today I rise in opposition to my colleague from Indiana's 
amendment.


  Amendment Offered by Mr. McIntosh as a Substitute for the Amendment 
                         Offered by Mr. Roemer

  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment as a substitute for 
the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. McIntosh as a substitute for the 
     amendment offered by Mr. Roemer:
       At the end of the bill, insert the following new title:
   TITLE VI--MANUFACTURED HOUSING CONSTRUCTION AND SAFETY STANDARDS 
                          CONSENSUS COMMITTEE

     SEC. 601. REFERENCE.

       Whenever in this title an amendment is expressed in terms 
     of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other 
     provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to 
     that section or other provision of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1974.

     SEC. 602. DEFINITIONS.

       Section 603 (42 U.S.C. 5402) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (7) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:

[[Page H4727]]

       ``(7) `Federal manufactured home construction and safety 
     standard' means a reasonable performance standard for the 
     construction, design, and transportation of a manufactured 
     home which meets the needs of the public including the need 
     for affordability, quality, durability, and safety;'';
       (2) in paragraph (12), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (3) in paragraph (13), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon; and
       (4) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(14) `consensus committee' means the body established to 
     provide periodic recommendations to the Secretary pursuant to 
     the provisions of section 604;
       ``(15) `consensus process' means the process by which the 
     consensus committee, established pursuant to section 604, 
     recommends to the Secretary any additions, revocations, and/
     or amendments to the Federal manufactured home construction 
     and safety standards and any related interpretations;
       ``(16) `transportation' means the movement of a 
     manufactured home or manufactured home components from the 
     manufacturing facility to a retailer's place of business or a 
     location selected by the purchaser, and the movement of a 
     manufactured home or manufactured home components from the 
     retailers's place of business to a site selected by the home 
     purchaser, where applicable; and
       ``(17) `Secretariat' means the qualified technical or 
     building code maintenance organization selected by the 
     Secretary to administer the consensus process, and to appoint 
     the members of the consensus committee established under 
     section 604.''.

     SEC. 603. FEDERAL MANUFACTURED HOME CONSTRUCTION AND SAFETY 
                   STANDARDS.

       (a) In General.--Section 604 (42 U.S.C. 5403) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(a) Establishment.--
       ``(1) Authority of secretary.--The Secretary shall 
     establish, by order, appropriate Federal manufactured home 
     design, construction, transportation, and safety performance 
     standards that shall be reasonable, practicable, objectively 
     stated, and reflective of current developments in building 
     standards and technology. The Secretary shall issue such 
     orders pursuant to the consensus process described in this 
     section.
       ``(2) Establishment of consensus committee and 
     procedures.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of the United States Housing Act of 1996, the 
     Secretary, in accordance with all relevant statutes, 
     regulations, orders, and directives pertaining to 
     competitively bid procurement, shall enter into a contract 
     with a qualified technical or building code organization to 
     administer a consensus process as its secretariat and to 
     establish a manufactured housing consensus committee and 
     appoint the members of that committee. The performance of 
     such secretariat shall be reviewed by the Secretary on a 
     periodic basis. The consensus committee shall be exempt from 
     the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. All 
     meetings shall be open to the public, and advance notice of 
     such meetings shall be provided in the Federal Register. Any 
     final action by the consensus committee shall be taken only 
     after notice to the public and opportunity for public comment 
     in accordance with the provisions of section 553 and 
     subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(3) Selection and qualifications.--The consensus 
     committee shall function, and its members shall be selected, 
     in accordance with the procedures for consensus committees 
     promulgated by the American National Standards Institute. 
     Members of the consensus committee shall be qualified to 
     participate in the work of the committee. The consensus 
     committee and the secretariat organization shall be certified 
     by the American National Standards Institute and shall be 
     provided reasonable staff resources by the administering 
     organization.
       ``(4) Responsibilities.--The consensus committee 
     established under this subsection shall be responsible for 
     the maintenance and revision of the Federal manufactured home 
     construction and safety standards, including the 
     interpretation of such standards.
       ``(5) Revisions to standards.--The consensus committee 
     shall consider additions, deletion, and amendments to the 
     Federal manufactured home construction and safety standards, 
     as needed, over a 2-year cycle. The consensus committee, 
     after notice and an opportunity for public comment, shall 
     publish any proposed standards or revisions and notice of 
     their submission to the Secretary, in the Federal Register. 
     This notice shall describe the circumstances under which the 
     proposed standards could become effective.
       ``(6) Secretary's response.--The Secretary may either adopt 
     or reject the standards submitted by the consensus committee. 
     A final order adopting such a standard, or rejecting such a 
     standard, shall be issued by the Secretary no later than 180 
     days after the date the proposed standard or regulation is 
     submitted to the Secretary by the consensus committee, and 
     shall be published in the Federal Register. In the event that 
     the Secretary rejects, in whole or in part, such a standard, 
     such publication shall be preceded by publication of the 
     proposed standard and the Secretary's proposed final order 
     for public comment in accordance with section 553 and 
     subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(7) Failure to take action.--If the Secretary fails to 
     take final action under paragraph (6) and publish notice of 
     the action in the Federal Register within the required 180-
     day period, the recommendations of the consensus committee 
     shall take effect 60 days after the 180-day period. Within 10 
     days after the expiration of the 180-day period, the 
     consensus committee shall publish in the Federal Register 
     notice of the Secretary's failure to act, the revised 
     standards, and the effective date of the revised standards.
       ``(8) Interim emergency standards.--The Secretary shall 
     have the authority at any time to request that the consensus 
     committee develop interim emergency performance standards or 
     amendments to the standards, when necessary to respond to a 
     health or safety emergency, as determined by the Secretary in 
     writing. The consensus committee shall have 60 days to submit 
     such proposed interim standards or amendments following a 
     request by the Secretary.
       ``(9) Written interpretations.--Upon request from an 
     interested party and after a finding that such an 
     interpretation is reasonably necessary, the consensus 
     committee shall submit to the Secretary written 
     interpretations of the Federal manufactured home construction 
     and safety standards. These interpretations shall become 
     binding upon the completion of notice and comment rulemaking 
     procedures by the Secretary in accordance with section 553 
     and subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States 
     Code, which shall be instituted within 180 days of the 
     Secretary's receipt of such an interpretation. The Secretary 
     may reject, in whole or in part, an interpretation only upon 
     a written finding that the interpretation is inconsistent 
     with the purposes of this title.'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking ``All'' and inserting ``Except as expressly 
     provided herein, all''; and
       (B) by inserting ``and subchapter II of chapter 5'' after 
     ``section 553'';
       (3) in subsection (c), by striking ``Each'' and all that 
     follows through ``effect,'' and inserting the following: 
     ``Each order establishing, amending, deleting, or 
     interpreting a Federal manufactured home construction and 
     safety standard shall specify the date such standard, 
     amendment, or interpretation is to take effect,'';
       (4) by striking subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g) and 
     inserting the following new subsections:
       ``(d) Preemption.--Except as may otherwise be expressly 
     authorized by the provisions of this title, a State or local 
     unit of government shall not establish, continue in effect, 
     or enforce any standard pertaining to the design, 
     construction, transportation, or safety of manufactured homes 
     after the effective date of the United States Housing Act of 
     1996. The standards mandated by this title are deemed 
     complete and exhaustive and shall supersede and preempt State 
     and local law and regulations.
       ``(e) Considerations.--The consensus committee, in 
     recommending performance standards and issuing 
     interpretations, and the Secretary, in establishing such 
     standards and standards interpretations under this title, 
     shall--
       ``(1) consider relevant, reliable manufactured home 
     construction and safety data, including the results of the 
     research, development, testing, and evaluation activities 
     conducted pursuant to this title, and those activities 
     conducted by private organizations and other governmental 
     agencies to determine how best to promote the purposes of 
     this title;
       ``(2) consult with such State or interstate agencies 
     (including legislative committees) as they deem appropriate;
       ``(3) consider whether any such proposed performance 
     standard or standard interpretation is reasonable for the 
     particular type of manufactured home or for the geographic 
     region for which it is adopted;
       ``(4) consider the probable effect of such standard or 
     standard interpretation on the cost of the manufactured homes 
     to purchasers and potential purchasers; and
       ``(5) consider the extent to which any such standard or 
     standard interpretation will contribute to carrying out the 
     purposes of this title.'';
       (5) by redesignating subsections (h), (i), and (j) as 
     subsections (f), (h), and (i), respectively;
       (6) by inserting after subsection (f) (as so redesignated 
     by paragraph (5) of this subsection) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(g) Evaluation Methodologies.--Based on a finding of 
     need, as determined in writing by the Secretary, the 
     consensus committee may, in accordance with the provisions of 
     this section, establish reasonable, cost-effective, uniform 
     evaluation methodologies in order to determine compliance 
     with existing standards, or may evaluate proposed 
     methodologies.''; and
       (7) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(j) Required Use of Consensus Process.--After the date of 
     the enactment of the United States Housing Act of 1996, the 
     Secretary shall not adopt or amend any standards or standards 
     interpretations other than through the consensus process set 
     forth in this section.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 610 (42 U.S.C. 
     5409(a)(6)) is amended by striking ``subsection (h)'' and 
     inserting ``subsection (f)''.

     SEC. 604. INSPECTION FEES.

       Section 620 (42 U.S.C. 5419) is amended to read as follows:

[[Page H4728]]

          ``inspection and collection and utilization of fees

       ``Sec. 620. (a) Establishment.--The Secretary may establish 
     and impose, on manufactured home manufacturers, distributors, 
     and dealers, a reasonable fee to offset the necessary 
     expenses incurred in conducting the inspections required by 
     this title and the expenses incurred by the consensus 
     committee in performing its duties under this title. Such 
     fees shall be established and/or modified pursuant to notice 
     and comment rulemaking in accordance with section 553 and 
     subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code.
       ``(b) Use.--Fees collected pursuant to this title shall be 
     deposited in a dedicated fund and shall be expended only for 
     the functions specified in subsection (a), and shall be 
     subject for expenditure only to the extent approved in an 
     appropriations Act. The Secretary shall provide an annual 
     report to the Congress specifying expenditures of these 
     funds. The Secretary shall also make available to the public, 
     in accordance with all applicable disclosure statutes, 
     regulations, orders, or directives, information pertaining to 
     such funds, including but not limited to, information 
     pertaining to amounts collected, amounts disbursed, and the 
     fund balance.''.

  Mr. McINTOSH (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment offered as a substitute for the amendment be 
considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Indiana?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Chairman, I think it is important that the 
substitute amendment be added to this bill for three reasons.
  First, HUD has simply failed to write commonsense building standards 
and my colleague's amendment, as well intended as it is, does not do 
anything to remove the discretion from HUD in setting forth those 
standards. HUD has consistently failed to consider the technological 
changes in the industry and building materials, often specifies very 
bureaucratic specific standards rather than a more common sense 
performance-based approach that would allow the engineers in the 
industry to develop the most affordable ways of providing for safe and 
effective housing.
  I would like to share with my colleagues two examples of this. I was 
conducting a field hearing in Florida and heard testimony about wind 
regulations there that were developed in such a way that they increased 
the cost of affordable housing of a $30,000 home by $3,000. That is a 
10-percent increase. Many people are no longer able to afford those 
houses because of those regulations that were not necessary because 
they go beyond the local requirements for site built housing.
  Another example was HUD regulations on insulation. When the 
insulation industry came to them and asked them to increase the 
standards beyond what was necessary for energy efficiency, the average 
cost of a $28,000 rose to $2,100, again nearly a 10-percent increase 
passed on to the consumer who could no longer afford to buy the houses.
  The second reason is that my amendment would give us a very real 
consensus committee. The consumer groups, the environmental groups, the 
industry groups would all be included in the new consensus committee. 
Unfortunately, my colleague's amendment does not require HUD to use the 
advice of this consensus committee in developing regulations where my 
substitute would require that the agency do that.
  The third reason and the final point is that my substitute would 
require that all of HUD's spending in this area go through the regular 
appropriations process. Currently, HUD is able to accumulate funds from 
the industry and disburse them in ways that are not supervised by this 
Congress. My amendment would take care of that by requiring that these 
funds go through an appropriations bill.
  The amendment is fair. It is a genuine effort to get to commonsense 
regulations. It is supported by the Manufacturing Housing Institute in 
Louisiana, Alabama, and Texas. It is supported by many of the 
manufacturers in our home State. I would urge my colleagues today to 
vote for my substitute so that we can have a real consensus committee 
at work and have an opportunity to get to commonsense regulations.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McINTOSH. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. ROEMER. The gentleman mentioned that he is trying to be inclusive 
of these consumer groups. Has he worked with any of those consumer 
groups, and why are they opposed to his legislation?
  Mr. McINTOSH. I am not exactly sure why they are opposed to these 
groups. The provisions that we would have in our substitute would 
require HUD to include them in making the regulatory recommendations. 
The difference is that the consumer groups would not be able to do an 
end run around the consensus committee and ask the Secretary to ignore 
its recommendation.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield further, I 
would just say to the gentleman that, in relation to wind standards, 
that he very articulately discussed on his time that the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Calvert] and I were in Congress before the gentleman 
from Indiana, and we worked very closely with the industry and very 
closely with HUD to address that problem, and I think my colleague 
would find that the manufactured housing industry was very pleased, 
after going through very rough treatment from HUD, what we were able to 
accomplish in terms of getting commonsense solutions to that wind 
standard that they initially promulgated.
  This consensus committee that we have developed in our bipartisan 
legislation with HUD will prevent that kind of fiasco from happening 
again.
   Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Calvert], an original cosponsor of the legislation.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the McIntosh 
amendment and certainly in favor of the Roemer-Royce amendment to the 
United States Housing Act. The McIntosh amendment is a poison pill 
meant to kill this commonsense reform that we are working on.
  The McIntosh amendment is certainly opposed by HUD. But more 
importantly, the great majority, the great majority of the industry, 
the manufactured industry here in the United States, is also in 
opposition, along with many, many consumer groups. It is an unworkable 
proposal that flies in the face of this Congress's efforts to return 
authority to State and local governments.
  It is of particular concern to California as the McIntosh language 
would more than likely prevent local governments from allowing fire 
sprinklers in manufactured housing, a great concern in my area, and as 
the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer] mentioned, the problem we have 
had with wind and sheer in the Florida area, we could have had that 
resolved if this committee was in effect earlier.
  On the other hand, the Roemer-Royce amendment has broad bipartisan 
support and the backing, as I mentioned earlier, of industry, HUD and 
consumers. It creates a committee consisting of manufacturers, 
consumers, public officials and other interest groups. This committee 
will develop standards for manufactured housing in partnership with the 
HUD secretary.
  Let us not lose an opportunity to enact commonense reform. Reject the 
poison-pill McIntosh amendment and support the bipartisan Roemer-Royce-
Calvert proposal.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida [Mr. McCollum].
  (Mr. McCOLLUM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the 
McIntosh amendment, but in strong support of the Roemer underlying 
proposal. I think what we have here is an opportunity today to be able 
to do something for manufactured housing that has been needed for a 
long time.
  It is absolutely necessary that we have a consensus committee. It has 
to be established. I do not think any of us disagree with that fact. 
HUD, the consumer groups, everybody understands that.
  The manufactured housing, affordable housing for everybody, is very, 
very important in the State of Florida as it is in California and in 
much of the country today. Many low- and middle-income Americans are 
very dependent on it, and it is time that we have the

[[Page H4729]]

benefit and the knowledge and the input of the building codes and 
standards for the most knowledgeable people possible in the industry. 
This amendment, the underlying amendment, would guarantee a balance 
among the various interests that are involved.
  We must reform the current process that HUD uses to develop the 
construction and safety standards for manufactured homes because, 
simply put, it does not work right now. The consensus committee that 
the Royce-Roemer amendment establishes will streamline the regulatory 
process and accept input from members of the industry, consumer groups, 
and HUD, but it will not go as far as the McIntosh amendment does.

  I question whether the McIntosh amendment is constitutional. 
Specifically, his proposal would require the Secretary to either adopt 
without modification or reject the consensus committee's proposal, and 
that action must be further to notice and comment rulemaking even 
though a full administrative record has already been produced.
  It also precludes the Secretary from acting on his own, even when the 
consensus committee fails to act in a timely manner. It creates 
roadblocks to timely implementation of code interpretations needed to 
resolve uncertainties that arise in planned inspections, and the 
Secretary, under the McIntosh amendment, would have no ability to 
insure that membership of the private consensus committee to whom the 
Federal authority is being delegated represents all the interests.
  It is defective in a number of ways is what I am saying, and as much 
as I respect the gentleman from Indiana who has offered it, Mr. 
McIntosh, I respect this gentleman's amendment as the one that the 
industry groups support. The AARP supports it. I support it. I think 
that most of our colleagues should reject Mr. McIntosh's stronger, 
tougher, if he wants to call it, version in light on the fact we have 
something with the Roemer proposal that really will work.
  Mr. Chairman, we need to get on with it, and as the gentleman from 
California said, unfortunately probably the McIntosh amendment is a 
killer amendment to what we are trying to do.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from the great State of Florida [Mr. Stearns], 
where so many New Yorkers reside.
  Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a tough call, and I want to say frankly I am 
one of the original cosponsors of the Roemer amendment, and I support 
what he was doing until I had a better understanding what the gentleman 
from Indiana [Mr. McIntosh] is doing.
  So I say to my colleagues, let me just say how I view it: That the 
gentleman from Indiana [Mr. McIntosh] has done something here which to 
the manufacturing home industry in itself is perhaps something they 
want more than the Roemer amendment, but the Roemer amendment has a 
chance in the sense there is a lot of consensus, a lot of people that 
favor it up here in Washington. In the beltway a lot of people think 
this is the best thing to do.
  But if my colleagues go back to my home congressional district, in 
fact if they go back to Nobility Home and they talk to Terry Trexler, 
who is the president of this company who has struggled in the trenches 
with this regulation and has dealt with this for years, he says he 
would rather have the McIntosh amendment than the Roemer amendment.
  So what we have here basically is we have an amendment which will 
affect the people who are working in the industry better than the Romer 
amendment, so I say to my colleagues reluctantly I would like them to 
support the McIntosh amendment. I think it is a better thing to do, and 
I think overall that this will bring a little bit more sense to the 
industry, and in fact this is something on the Senate side, as I 
understand, and I might have a colloquy with the gentleman from Indiana 
[Mr. McIntosh] if I could get his attention.

  I would ask the gentleman from Indiana, if I can take a moment, can 
he tell me on the Senate side what kind of bill they have? Does it 
closely parallel the gentleman's or the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. 
Roemer's?
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, it is my 
understanding that the lead sponsors of this bill in the Senate have 
one that is much closer to my legislation, actually a little bit 
stronger in its terms, and therefore the likelihood of this in 
conference coming out closer to the terms of my amendment is much 
greater, and it is my opinion that HUD would not recommend a veto of 
this legislation simply because of this provision. So that politically 
ours has the greatest chance of surviving and, in fact, does much more 
for the employees and the manufactured housing industry.
  Mr. STEARNS. Let me conclude, Mr. Chairman, by just reading a final 
sentence from this letter that Nobility Homes sent to me. It says, 
``The employees of our subsidiary, in addition, endorse this bill as 
much better for the industry and for the consumer.''
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California [Mr. Lewis], a member of the Committee on 
Appropriations.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman 
yielding me the time.
  I want to especially express my appreciation to my friend, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Calvert], who brought this amendment to 
my attention in the first place. In our region in southern California, 
manufactured housing is a very important employer and a great supplier. 
A very, very significant percentage of the industry is from our region.
  There is no question that the industry is going to thrive and survive 
better if there is a consensus agreement. There is no doubt it is a 
major employer in our region that provides first-time home opportunity 
for many, many a family in southern California.
  There is absolutely no doubt in my mind's eye that the Mcintosh 
amendment in its current form could be a killer amendment. On the other 
hand, the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. McIntosh] has indicated that the 
Senate has a bill that is closer to him. So it is logical to have the 
Calvert-Roemer amendment go forward so we have a reasonable discussion 
in conference.
  I urge the Members to vote against the McIntosh amendment and for the 
Roemer amendment.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Minnesota [Mr. Vento], a very distinguished member of the committee and 
a very, very hard-working Member of Congress.
  Mr. VENTO. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me, and I 
rise in opposition to the McIntosh amendment and in favor of the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].
  The fact is that I think Mr. Roemer's amendment strikes policy of 
consensus. The issue with McIntosh is that it cuts off the authority at 
the local level to control manufactured housing and it cuts off the 
ability of HUD to control manufactured housing at the other end, and so 
obviously some manufacturing housing advocates or manufacturers think 
that is the way to go. No big surprise. But that means it is not 
controlled from the Federal side, it is not controlled locally, but who 
does control it? We do have some responsibility.
  I mean this is the dilemma we have had. We have got to leave some 
balance in this policy, and I think that the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer] strikes that balance. There is no 
question about it, but there has been discrimination against this 
manufactured housing based on regulatory and zoning policies. The way 
to right that is to follow and pass the Roemer-Calvert amendment. 
That's the best and positive proposal that has been hammered out and 
deserves the support of the House.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I would conclude by saying that people across America 
are asking us here in Congress to not say that regulations and 9-story 
buildings with bureacrats are the answers to our problems. We do not do 
that with this amendment. It is a consensus committee of consumers, 
supported by the Secretary of HUD. It is supported by the manufactured 
housing institute that

[[Page H4730]]

comprises about 70, 75 percent of the industry. It is strongly 
supported by the consumer groups and the American Association of 
Retired People.
  Now, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. McCollum] and the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Lewis] and others, very distinguished members of the 
Republican Party, have said that the McIntosh amendment will kill any 
ability for this Roemer-Royce bipartisan bill to be signed into law.
  We need to accomplish commonsense reform for our industry, for our 
consumers, and for the sake of this country to compete in a global 
environment. I urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan Roemer-
Royce-Calvert-Vento amendment and defeat Mr. McIntosh's amendment.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining 3 minutes 
of my time to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana [Mr. McIntosh].
  Mr. McINTOSH. Mr. Chairman, first let me commend my colleague from 
New York for bringing this entire bill forward and the incredibly good 
work that he and his committee have done, and let me assure him that 
when my amendment is added to this bill, it will in no means make it 
less likely that it is to be signed by the President.
  The last time I checked, the consumer groups were not the ones 
controlling the Senate or the conference and that in fact this 
amendment is most likely to come through the Senate and the House 
conference intact and survive in order to provide real relief for the 
owners and purchasers of these manufactured housing.
  Bottom line is, my amendment would put real teeth into regulatory 
relief, would require common sense to be used by HUD in developing 
standards for safe manufactured housing, would avoid the disastrous 
regulations in the past that have increased the cost of this housing by 
10, 20 percent at a leap, and would finally do something for working 
men and women in this country who want a chance to have the American 
dream, to afford their own home, many of them for the first time.

                              {time}  1645

  We need to pass this amendment for their sake. Mr. Chairman, I 
include for the Record a letter from Mr. Jim Shea, who lives in the 
district of the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer]. He indicated that 
it is his belief that the proposed consensus committee in my 
colleague's amendment would not improve the process, and might in fact 
seriously set back the effort to have reasonable regulation.
  I also include for the Record the letter referred to by the gentleman 
from Florida [Mr. Stearns] from Nobility Homes in Ocala, Florida.
  The letters referred to are as follows:

                                         Fairmont Homes, Inc.,

                                        Nappanee, IN, May 3, 1996.
     Hon. Timothy Roemer,
     U.S. House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Roemer, I appreciated the time that your 
     legislative staff person, Ms. Katherine Graham, spent on the 
     phone with me this week regarding the proposed legislative 
     changes to the National Manufactured Home Construction and 
     Safety Standards Act that you may sponsor. I thought that 
     because of the length of our discussion, I should provide a 
     written summarization of the grave concerns that we, as well 
     as numerous other manufacturers, have with the proposed 
     legislative language.


                          consensus committee

       As we recently discussed, the Industry has sought for some 
     time to gain the benefits of a good consensus committee 
     process to update the regulations on a reasonable basis. 
     Unfortunately, it is my belief that the proposed consensus 
     committee structure will result in no improvement in the 
     process, and may result in a serious setback to reasonable 
     regulation.
       (1) I understand that consensus committee proposals would 
     be subject to rejection or modification if the Secretary 
     deems them to be ``inconsistent with the purposes of Title 
     VI.'' Ms. Graham stated that if the Secretary wanted to 
     modify a committee approved regulation, the modification 
     would have to go through rulemaking. While this is true as 
     far as it goes, upon further consideration of the proposed 
     legislation it is apparent that the Secretary, under section 
     604(6), could selectively reject portions of a proposed 
     regulation without ever engaging in notice and comment 
     rulemaking. Through such selective rejection of only portions 
     of a proposed standard, the Secretary could unilaterally 
     change the substance of an entire standard. In addition, 
     under section 604(8)(b), the Secretary is authorized to 
     circumvent the consensus process altogether, and issue his 
     own standards upon a finding of an emergency, or a finding 
     that ``the consensus committee will not make timely 
     recommendations.'' It is important to note that this 
     exception to consensus standards-development is phrased in 
     the disjunctive. Thus, the secretary could totally bypass the 
     consensus committee, even in the absence of an emergency, and 
     could preempt committee deliberations and debate over the 
     most controversial issues by the simple expedient of 
     declaring the committee incapable of rending a ``timely'' 
     recommendation and forcing through a standard of his own 
     design.
       (2) The new legislative language appears to totally remove 
     the current notice and comment requirements for 
     interpretative Bulletins. Ms. Graham said that the committee 
     would have full review of the Interpretative Bulletins before 
     issuance, but she was unsure if the Secretary would have to 
     go through rulemaking on the interpretative Bulletins. If the 
     Secretary chose to modify Interpretative Bulletin language as 
     it came out of the committee. I noted that the overreaching 
     use by HUD of Interpretative Bulletins in the past had 
     created great consternation in the industry and any system 
     that made it easier to make de facto changes in the 
     regulations through Interpetative Bulletins would be 
     totally unacceptable. In fact any change that is 
     undertaken should effectively eliminate the confusion and 
     extra costs caused by Interpretative Bulletins.
       I have other general concerns over language relating to 
     consensus committee formation. One of the most important is 
     my understanding that the Secretary is not required to enter 
     into a contract with the administrative organization and 
     would therefore not be subject to administrative rules 
     regarding full and fair competition and that the Secretary 
     could replace the consensus committee administrative 
     organization upon a mere finding ``of need.'' Our research on 
     the contractor selection process revealed apparent unfairness 
     of monitoring contractor selection by HUD over the years. 
     Considering the problems we have seen in monitoring 
     contractor selection where HUD is supposedly constrained by 
     administrative rules regarding full and fair competition, it 
     is obvious there would be no fair process of administrator 
     selection and evaluation with the inadequate provisions of 
     the proposed legislation.


                             accountability

       As I mentioned to Ms. Graham, any change in the Act must 
     increase the accountability of HUD for expenditures of fees, 
     and ensure that the formation of the consensus committee is 
     not used as a means for HUD to unreasonably raise fees or use 
     them for expanded purposes. A lack of accounting by HUD for 
     industry fee use has been a problem since the program's 
     inception. As you know, HUD has a historically poor record of 
     providing the annual reports to Congress on expenditures and 
     other aspects of the Federal program that are currently 
     required by the Act.
       I asked Ms. Graham why the new language did not require the 
     application of the appropriation process to section 620 to 
     require HUD to properly account for expenditures both in the 
     consensus committee areas and in all areas. She said that 
     subjecting HUD to the appropriation process would result in 
     negatives for the industry, especially during budgetary 
     battles such as those experienced this past year. My sense is 
     that many other crucial areas of the government were impacted 
     by the budgetary impasse, yet continued to function 
     adequately. I don't see how it would be different for our 
     program.
       Ms. Graham stated that it was her understanding that any 
     changes in fees would be subject to rulemaking, but I did not 
     find any language in the proposal that supports this 
     requirement.


                               preemption

       As you know, HUD has, over recent years, reduced the 
     strength of its application of the preemptive language in the 
     Act. The preemptive language is very important for two 
     reasons:
       (1) The language enables the cost effectiveness of 
     manufactured housing by permitting manufacturing 
     standardization. The efficiency of standardization is the 
     basis for our industry as the sole provider of affordable, 
     non-subsidized housing.
       (2) Without preemption, the status of the Third District as 
     one of the top loci for the manufactured housing industry 
     would likely to come to an end, causing a severe impact on 
     employment in the district.
       Ms. Graham responded that while she recognized the 
     importance of the preemption issue, there would likely be 
     great political difficulties with strengthening the 
     preemptive language in the Act this year. However, it is our 
     position that strengthening the language would only result in 
     a return to the level of federal preemption originally 
     envisioned by the sponsors of the 1974 Act.
       Summarizing, we listened to your advice that we reduce the 
     scope of any reform to the Act this year due to the limited 
     legislative agenda this year. Hence, our expectations were 
     scaled back. However, we cannot endorse proposed legislation 
     that would effectively give HUD veto power over the 
     membership of the consensus committee; allow HUD to replace 
     the administering organization at will; allow HUD to 
     selectively veto discrete portions of proposed standards 
     without rulemaking; and, ultimately bypass the consensus 
     process itself. We believe any changes to the Act that do not 
     result in 1) a more effective regulatory process through a 
     properly structured consensus committee, 2) more 
     accountability by HUD for expenditures of fees in the 
     program, and 3) strengthening of preemptive language to 
     ensure the

[[Page H4731]]

     protection of jobs in the Third District are not worthy of 
     your efforts.
           Sincerely,
                                                    James F. Shea,
     Executive Committee Chairman.
                                                                    ____



                                          Nobility Homes, Inc,

                                           Ocala, FL, May 9, 1996.
       Dear Representatives Stearns: It is my understanding that 
     Representative McIntosh of Indiana will be introducing a 
     substitute amendment to the ``Roemer-Ryce'' Amendment on 
     manufactured housing.
       All the employees of Nobility Homes, Inc. urge you to 
     support this amendment. Also, all the employees of our 
     subsidiary, Prestige Home Centers, Inc., the largest retailer 
     of manufactured home in Florida, with a sales center in your 
     district, urge you to support this amendment. It is much 
     better for the industry and the consumer.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Terry Trexler,
                                                        President.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is good for all concerned. It brings 
consumers and environmentalists to the table, it helps protect 
consumers for the cost of unnecessary regulation. It allows us to go 
forward in a commonsense way in developing safety regulations for 
manufactured housing, America's best hope for affordable housing in 
this country.
  Mrs. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
Roemer-Royce amendment to the U.S. Housing Act of 1996 (H.R. 2406). 
This amendment establishes a consensus committee which will be 
responsible for the revision and interpretation of Federal manufactured 
housing construction and safety performance standards. This committee 
will be made up of all interested parties including industry, 
consumers, and government. This is an excellent opportunity to bring 
common sense back to the regulatory process.
  Manufactured housing is an important industry and a large employer in 
my district in places like Woodland and Chehalis. This industry 
fulfills a vital need for people who want to live the American dream of 
home ownership. Unfortunately, onerous regulatory requirements have 
precluded some from achieving this dream. I support the amendment 
because it takes a significant step toward providing regulatory relief 
for the Federal manufactured housing program. Moreover, by removing 
these regulatory burdens we will increase the availability of 
affordable housing.
  I urge my colleagues to support manufactured housing and to support 
the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired. The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. McIntosh] as a substitute 
for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].
  The amendment offered as a substitute for the amendment was rejected.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other amendments to the bill?


          Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, proceedings will now resume on 
those amendments on which further proceedings were postponed in the 
following order: Amendments offered by the gentlewoman from New York 
[Ms. Velazquez], and an amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Durbin].


                  Amendments Offered by Ms. VELAZQUEZ

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendments offered by the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. 
Velazquez] on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendments.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendments.


                             recorded vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair points out pursuant to House Resolution 426 
the next vote in this series will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 126, 
noes 297, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 157]

                               AYES--126

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Berman
     Bishop
     Bonior
     Boucher
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Cardin
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Coyne
     Cummings
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Durbin
     Engel
     Evans
     Fattah
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Furse
     Gibbons
     Gonzalez
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     LaFalce
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Mink
     Moakley
     Nadler
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Stark
     Stokes
     Studds
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Torres
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Volkmer
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Williams
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                               NOES--297

     Allard
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Borski
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clement
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     Deal
     DeLay
     Dickey
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Greene (UT)
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jacobs
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Longley
     Lucas
     Luther
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myers
     Myrick
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Reed
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Roth
     Roukema
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Traficant
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bevill
     English
     Houghton
     Laughlin
     Molinari
     Paxon
     Schroeder
     Smith (TX)
     Torricelli
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1707

  Mr. KASICH and Ms. ESHOO changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. MARKEY and Mr. MATSUI changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''

[[Page H4732]]

  So the amendments were rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                    amendment offered by mr. durbin

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             recorded vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 106, 
noes 318, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 158]

                               AYES--106

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baldacci
     Barrett (WI)
     Beilenson
     Berman
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Cardin
     Coleman
     Conyers
     Coyne
     Cummings
     Davis
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gibbons
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Harman
     Hinchey
     Horn
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martini
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Moakley
     Moran
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal
     Neumann
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Porter
     Quinn
     Reed
     Regula
     Rivers
     Rose
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Shays
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Stark
     Stokes
     Studds
     Torres
     Towns
     Ward
     Waxman
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Zimmer

                               NOES--318

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fazio
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Green (TX)
     Greene (UT)
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     Lazio
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Longley
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     Mascara
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Meek
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Murtha
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Traficant
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Bevill
     Houghton
     Laughlin
     Molinari
     Paxon
     Schroeder
     Smith (TX)
     Torricelli
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1718

  Messrs. RANGEL, UPTON, HASTINGS of Florida, Ms. VELAZQUEZ, and Mrs. 
COLLINS of Illinois changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. BALDACCI changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today because I have 
some real concerns about how the Republican majority of this body treat 
those of our citizens who are most vulnerable.
  H.R. 2406 the United States Housing Act of 1995 in its final form 
will repeal the Brooke amendment which established a flat rent of 30 
percent of income for residents of all public housing and assisted 
housing. This provision protected the most vulnerable residents of 
public housing and later those with Section 8 assistance from paying 
too high a percentage of their income in rent.
  This bill will establish minimum rents of $25 to $50 a month without 
any consideration of a family's income. In my State of Texas, the 
impact would be felt by 33,949 poor families who will have to pay more 
for a place to call home.
  H.R. 2406 will also give housing authorities the power to demolish 
apartments without any consideration for the residents or their rights. 
In my district, the residents of the Allen Parkway Village have been 
completely removed from the decision making process by local public 
housing authority which may have been too emersed in its day-to-day 
operation to remember that their policy affects real people.
  I have consistently argued that the residents of public housing must 
be involved in any plan to rehabilitate or demolish their homes. 
Residents must also be given the opportunity to contest the actions of 
a housing authority through due process with an adequate appeals 
procedure.
  Having a place to call home, no matter how modest, is a cornerstone 
of the American Dream, it is the goal of every family.
  Do we suspend the right to life, liberty and property because an 
individual earns the minimum wage or less? The Federal Government 
created and supports an affordable public housing program because there 
is a need. The current supply of housing is clearly deficient when we 
consider the thousands of homeless families that inhabit shelters in 
our Nation.
  Today, we should be codifying the American Dream, making it a right 
for all of our country's families to have access to an affordable place 
to call home. It would be the right thing to do and it is what the 
American people deserve.

  Does this body consider an individual's opinion of no value or their 
voice silent if they are poor and reside in public housing. A home is 
not just a place to live it is also a place where people should and 
must have a voice. For residents of Allen Parkway Village in Houston, 
TX, what we do here today is very relevant and very real to their 
democratic rights as residents of public housing.
  Citizens of this country no matter what their economic standing must 
have a right to be heard and to have due process. It is a shame that 
the Republican majority brought this piece of legislation before the 
House for consideration without insuring that these rights were 
guaranteed to the residents of public housing.
  Do we not want to maintain a reliable supply of affordable housing 
for our Nation's poor? I believe we do, the Houston Housing Authority 
has several fine examples of providing good housing for Houstonians. 
More can be done including the providing of affordable housing for low-
income citizens; however total abdication of Federal responsibility in 
public housing is clearly unwise.
  The Congress should not in its shortsightedness or insensitivity 
toward the poor, in public

[[Page H4733]]

housing policy making, create one additional homeless family.
  When you are the poor of the poor, then you have a perspective that 
few of us in this chamber have ever known or will know. That should 
not, however, stop us from having common sense or compassion about what 
is fair or what is right.
  I would caution us before this vote with a metaphor using words from 
Langston's Hughe's poem, ``As I Grew Older''.

       It was a long time ago. I have almost forgotten my dream. 
     But it was there then, In front of me, Bright like a sun--My 
     dream. And then the wall rose, Rose slowly, Slowly, Between 
     me and my dream. Rose slowly, slowly, Dimming, Hiding, The 
     light of my dream. Rose until it touched the sky--

  The wall is the legislation we pass that affect the poor and the 
dream is affordable housing.
  Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my serious 
reservations about the elimination of the service coordinators 
authorization under H.R. 2406, the U.S. Housing Act.
  The service coordinators program was established in 1992 in response 
to a desperate need in our Nation's public housing. At that time, 
elderly and disabled residents were being placed into public housing 
together. The differences between the needs and lifestyles of these two 
populations were leading to fear and distrust. In a few cases, violence 
even broke out.
  To help ease these tensions and ensure that all residents were 
receiving the medical, psychological, social and other services they 
needed, we developed the service coordinators program. When the grant 
was first announced, competition for these funds was intense. Cities 
all across the Nation recognized that this program would allow them to 
address resident issues in a coordinated, comprehensive manner.
  This program has accomplished a tremendous amount at a very low cost. 
In my hometown of Milwaukee, there has been a sea change in the 
atmosphere at public housing complexes where service coordinators were 
sent. Our local paper, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, reported that 
originally, ``the only older people living in Milwaukee's public 
housing towers were those who had no other options.'' However, after 
service coordinators were established, ``Within months, the social 
workers and nurses * * * had made major inroads in easing tensions, 
helping residents get to know one another and linking those who were 
sick or abusing alcohol or drugs to the help they needed.''
  I am deeply concerned that the block grant established under H.R. 
2406 will force housing authorities to make difficult funding choices 
that will result in the elimination of service coordinators. Too often, 
social services cannot compete against needs like housing repairs and 
operating costs. It would be truly tragic if the programs we have made 
is erased simply because the funding stream is eliminated. We know what 
the problem has been, and we have designed a solution that works. It 
troubles me deeply that this bill may effectively destroy that 
solution, and all the hard-won advancements in mixed population 
housing.
  Mr. Speaker, if service coordinators are eliminated, I will be 
watching closely to determine whether the sort of backsliding I have 
described occurs in the future. It if does, you may be certain that I 
will propose reinstating this critical program.
  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2406, 
the ``United States Housing Act of 1996.''
  How many times have you heard visitors from foreign counties express 
their astonishment at the wealth gap between individuals in this 
country living within the same communities. They see slums a quarter of 
a mile away from mansions. They see the homeless panhandling in front 
of luxury hotels. They see a husband and wife with their two children 
standing at a freeway entrance holding a sigh that says ``Homeless-will 
work for food,'' as a $50,000 sports car goes by.
  It it one thing to want all the riches of the world, but for many it 
is a struggle just to provide a home for their family. Is that too much 
to ask? What happened to the American dream? Everyone in Congress 
claims to be sympathetic to those in need of housing assistance, still, 
H.R. 2406 makes changes contrary to what I believe to be our public 
housing assistance goals. Low-income individuals should not be forced 
to decide between rent for housing and other primary needs.
  H.R. 2406 establishes a minimum rent requirement eliminating current 
standards which cap tenant rents to 30 percent of adjusted gross 
income. All public housing assistance recipients would be required to 
pay at least $25 per month. The result would be that vulnerable, very 
low-income tenants will be required to contribute a large percentage of 
their incomes to rents.
  Proponents of this bill argue that the minimum rent level is meager, 
however, for someone who makes minimum wage and earns less than $9,000 
per year, $300 is a big chunk of income. It is even more frightening 
for someone dependent on Social Security. What does this new charge 
mean to them? What does it mean to the disabled? What does this mean to 
their children?

  I believe this proposal could send vulnerable low-income tenants into 
the street. I urge that the minimum rent level be removed and that the 
current 30 percent of adjusted income cap for rents be maintained.
  Additionally, this bill eliminates regulations that directs public 
housing assistance to the most vulnerable. H.R. 2406 does not reserve 
any Section 8 assistance for very low-income families. Moreover, it 
only requires 25 percent of public housing units to be reserved for the 
very low-income families as compared to current standards requiring 85 
percent. I believe the very low-income should be a principal concern 
and we should be cautious to allocate scarce resources to those with 
minimal need.
  I sincerely believe that all of us in Congress have compassion for 
those who lack adequate housing. I believe we all care about low-income 
families and the homeless.
  I do not, however, believe dumping responsibility on States in the 
form of Block Grants is the solution; nor is removing regulations that 
direct assistance to very low-income families; nor is requiring very 
low-income tenants to pay minimum rents, forcing many to choose between 
health, food or rent.
  Reform of the Department of Housing and Urban Development is 
necessary, but H.R. 2406 misses the mark, ignoring our obligation to 
the most vulnerable populations while unloading the Federal burden by 
dumping it on the States. This is not the policy that we should be 
pursuing.
  Visitors from other countries are astonished to see the contrast in 
housing conditions between the rich and the poor in the United States. 
Why aren't we? I know the Federal Government doesn't have all the 
answers, but neither do the States. Therefore, the Federal Government 
must continue to play a significant role in insuring that housing needs 
of our country are met. We must work together to make the most 
efficient use of our resources and I sincerely do not believe this bill 
does that.
  Unless drastic changes are made to H.R. 2406, I urge a ``no'' vote on 
this bill.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chairman, every day my constituents remind me of the 
difficulty they have with making ends meet. And while $50 may not be 
much to you, but it is a lot for many of my constituents living in 
public housing.
  It has been estimated that 5.3 million low-income households are 
either spending more than half their incomes on rent or living in 
extremely substandard housing. This figure is expected to dramatically 
increase if the Velazquez amendment is not accepted.
  I understand that the rent increase is intended to encourage personal 
responsibility. But I wish someone would tell me how a 70-year-old 
senior citizen or a 73-year-old Air Force veteran is going to be taught 
personal responsibility. I believe they know what responsibility is and 
many of them have lived and survived in situations that many of us 
could not imagine living through.
  This bill presupposes that the average public housing resident has 
extra money for rent. We are talking about people who have been 
displaced from their jobs, who have been homeless, who are single 
parents with young children and cannot afford child care and therefore 
cannot work a minimum wage job. People who are disabled, perhaps on 
dialysis, or who have suffered a stroke, simply cannot afford to pay 
higher rent. We are talking about truly needy families who do not want 
to be in the situation in which they find themselves in.
  While I understand compassion is something this Congress is often not 
able to express. We want all Americans to pick themselves up by their 
own bootstraps when they don't even have boots. We must not forget that 
welfare, Medicaid and several other programs to help the needy are 
already on the chopping block. We cannot throw people out on the 
streets because they happen to be poor.
  I urge my colleagues to protect the housing for seniors with limited 
incomes, former homeless families with no income and large families 
receiving AFDC benefits. I urge the adoption of the Velazquez 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other amendments to the bill?
  If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
LaHood) having assumed the chair, Mr. Gunderson, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having

[[Page H4734]]

had under consideration the bill, (H.R. 2406), to repeal the United 
States Housing Act of 1937, deregulate the public housing program and 
the program for rental housing assistance for low-income families, and 
increase community control over such programs, and for other purposes, 
pursuant to House Resolution 426, he reported the bill back to the 
House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the 
Whole?
  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a separate vote on the Maloney 
amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is a separate vote demanded on any other 
amendment?
  The Clerk will report the amendment on which a separate vote has been 
demanded.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment: page 37, line 19, strike ``A'' and insert ``(a) 
     In General.--Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), 
     a''.
       Page 37, line 25, strike ``Notwithstanding the preceding 
     sentence, pet'' and insert the following:
       (b) Federally Assisted Rental Housing for the Elderly or 
     Disabled.--Pet
       Page 38, after line 5, insert the following new subsection:
       (c) Elderly Families in Public and Assisted housing.--
     Responsible ownership of common household pets shall not be 
     denied any elderly or disabled family who resides in a 
     dwelling unit in public housing or an assisted dwelling unit 
     (as such term is defined in section 371), subject to the 
     reasonable requirements of the local housing and management 
     authority or the owner of the assisted dwelling unit, as 
     applicable. This subsection shall not apply to units in 
     public housing or assisted dwelling units that are located in 
     federally assisted rental housing for the elderly or 
     handicapped referred to in subsection (b).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 375, 
noes, 48, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 159]

                               AYES--375

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cooley
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Fields (TX)
     Filner
     Flake
     Flanagan
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Funderburk
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Green (TX)
     Greene (UT)
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hobson
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Johnston
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lantos
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Regula
     Richardson
     Riggs
     Rivers
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Schumer
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                                NOES--48

     Archer
     Armey
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Bateman
     Bonilla
     Callahan
     Campbell
     Collins (GA)
     Cox
     DeLay
     Doolittle
     Ehlers
     Gilchrest
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     King
     Largent
     Lazio
     Livingston
     Lucas
     McCrery
     Moran
     Neumann
     Orton
     Pombo
     Rohrabacher
     Roth
     Sanford
     Scarborough
     Shadegg
     Shuster
     Smith (MI)
     Souder
     Stump
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Walker
     Watts (OK)
     White

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bevill
     Dickey
     Hastert
     Laughlin
     Molinari
     Paxon
     Schroeder
     Tanner
     Torricelli
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1740

  Mr. WHITE changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. WAMP and Mr. FUNDERBURK changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the 
committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


       motion to recommit offered by Mr. kennedy of massachusetts

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I am in its present form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts moves to recommit the bill, 
     H.R. 2406, to the Committee on Banking and Financial 
     Services, with instructions to report the same back to the 
     House forthwith with the following amendments:
       In Section 225(a) of the bill (as amended by the manager's 
     amendment), after paragraph (2) insert the following new 
     paragraph:
       (3) Exceptions.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this section, the amount paid for monthly rent for a dwelling 
     unit in public housing may not exceed 30 percent of the 
     family's adjusted monthly income for any family who has an 
     annual income which is principally derived from earned 
     income.

[[Page H4735]]

       In Section 322(a) of the bill (as amended by the manager's 
     amendment), after paragraph (2) insert the following new 
     paragraph:
       (3) Exceptions.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the amount 
     paid by an assisted family for monthly rent for an assisted 
     dwelling unit, may not exceed 30 percent of the family's 
     adjusted monthly income for any family who has an annual 
     income which is principally derived from earned income.

     Any amount payable under paragraph (4) shall be in addition 
     to the amount payable under this paragraph.
       In section 352(a)(2) of the bill (as amended by the 
     manager's amendment), after ``paragraph (2)'' insert ``or 
     (3)''.

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts (during the reading).
   Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to recommit be 
considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Kennedy] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio], my friend for the efforts that he 
has made on this bill. I want to thank the gentleman in particular for 
the extensions that he has made to the Brooke amendment.
  Under the bill the way we are about to vote on it, we will have 
protected our senior citizens and elderly.

                              {time}  1745

   Mr. Speaker, under the way this bill is about to be voted on, with 
the amendments that the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] has 
accepted, we will be protecting our elderly, our senior citizens, that 
live in public housing and that gain access to tenant based vouchers 
with the Brooke amendment. We have extended that to disabled people. We 
have extended that to our Nation's veterans.
  The one group of people that we have not extended the Brooke 
protections to are the very people that the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity suggests that the 
Brooke amendment is going to most hurt. That is the working poor of 
this country. They are the individuals that under the arguments that we 
have heard over the course of the last 24 hours have a disincentive, 
that is to go to work, that is put into place by the Brooke amendment.
  However, because of all of the protections that we have placed into 
the Brooke amendment, the only people that we can now raise rents on 
are, in fact, the working poor. So we have this perverse situation 
where we have created an enormous disincentive, an even larger 
disincentive to work under the notions put forward by the Republicans 
in this bill.
  We have a perverse situation where the very individuals that all of 
us in this Chamber have voiced the greatest concern about in terms of 
their ability to go out and work and the disincentives that we 
sometimes inadvertently put into law that creates these weird 
circumstances where they are no longer incentivized to work but are 
incentivized to stay on the Government dole are in fact created by 
virtue of the exemptions that we have placed in this bill. So what has 
occurred is, in fact, an enormous rent increase.
  It will not be linked to a percentage of income, but I do not know 
anyone that worries about whether or not their rent increase occurs 
because it is a percentage of income or just because the landlord 
jacked up the rent. But nevertheless, what we got here is a rent 
increase of substantial proportions on the very individuals that 
everyone in this House is looking to protect and to create incentives 
to have them go out and work for a living.
  This motion to recommit would extend the Brooke protections to the 
working poor that work for a living, that live in public housing, that 
use tenant based couchers and say that they cannot inadvertently have 
their rents jacked up because of the maneuvers that end up being 
created perversely by this legislation that will inadvertently jack up 
their rents.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank].
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, this very carefully drawn 
recommit says, if a majority of your income comes from work, you will 
get the same cap that welfare recipients get. We will be creating, if 
we reject this, precisely the disincentive my colleagues said they did 
not want.
  Remember, under this recommit there is no floor. If a housing 
authority does not want to go up to 30 percent, it does not have to. So 
the gentleman from New York's argument comes down to this: If you tell 
a housing authority it cannot charge a working person more than 30 
percent of income, they will wind up paying more rent than if you tell 
the housing authority they can charge an unlimited amount of income. 
That is the difference.
  We are saying, if you are working, 30 percent is the maximum. There 
is no minimum. It is whatever the housing authority wants to set.
  The gentleman from New York says, no, we must protect these working 
people. Let us let the housing authority charge them whatever they 
want. What we will get is the people on welfare will be protected by a 
30-percent cap, and people who are working will not be protected.
  Steve Forbes, where are you when we need you to make rational housing 
policy? Why do my colleagues want to say that working people will be 
treated not only in dollar amounts more but qualitatively more? This 
amendment does what the gentleman may have set out to do. And it is 
true, housing authorities will tell you, no, we need the money. If you 
vote no, you are voting to let the local bureaucratic people who run 
the housing authorities get more money out of working people without 
limit. If they get a shortfall, they will have one place to go. They 
will be able to raise the rents not on the disabled people, not on the 
welfare recipients, they will be able to raise the rents on the working 
people. If they do not want to raise the rents, they will not have to. 
Nothing in here forces them.
  The gentleman from New York says trust the local authorities, but 
apparently he does not trust them because he says, if you put a 30 
percent, they are too stupid to know that 30 percent up here does not 
mean you cannot be below 30 percent. If you really think they cannot 
tell the difference, then protect these people.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Torkildsen].
  Mr. TORKILDSEN. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following 
article on the Brooke amendment:

                  [From the Boston Globe, May 8, 1996]

                       Save the Brooke Amendment

                         (By Edward W. Brooke)

   (27 years ago, we passed a law to keep rents affordable in public 
                   housing--we still need it today.)

       As a young man starting out on my own, my father taught me 
     that if I was paying more than 25 percent of my income on 
     rent, I was paying more than I could afford and should find 
     another place to live. It was sound advice then, and it is 
     sound advice today.
       Too much spent on housing leaves a person juggling to pay 
     for other essentials, robbing Peter to pay Paul, with no 
     ability to save for the future.
       Twenty-seven years ago as a Republican US senator from 
     Massachusetts, I introduced the ``Brooke Amendment'' to keep 
     rents affordable for low-income families, elders, veterans 
     and disabled people living in public housing. Then, as now, 
     public housing authorities faced increasing operating 
     expenses and, in order to cover costs, were charging tenants 
     higher and higher rents--in some cases upwards of 50 percent 
     of their meager incomes.
       Congress had two choices: fill the operating-cost gap or 
     turn people out of their homes. We voted to fill the gap and 
     passed legislation, signed into law by President Nixon in 
     1969, to cap rent at 25 percent of income. In 1981, this cap 
     was raised to 30 percent.
       Now, US Rep. Rick Lazio, a Republican from New York and 
     chairman of the housing subcommittee, is expected to bring to 
     the full House a bill that calls for the elimination of the 
     Brooke Amendment. It will put 2.7 million households in 
     danger of losing the rent-cap safeguard in their federally 
     subsidized housing. The rationale for repealing the Brooke 
     Amendment is that, to fill the current revenue gap, housing 
     authorities need to attract working people who can pay higher 
     rents into public housing. The 30-percent cap is seen as a 
     disincentive for residents to obtain work.
       The purpose of public housing is to provide decent, 
     affordable housing for low-income families, and the Brooke 
     Amendment has ensured that for almost 30 years.
       However, a specious argument has caught hold in Congress 
     that people who have jobs and more choices will choose to 
     move into public housing developments where apartments are 
     cramped, safety is often a problem

[[Page H4736]]

     and one is branded with the stigma of living in a poor 
     development. Do members of Congress really believe that 
     people who have the means to live elsewhere will move into 
     public housing projects? The reality is that people live in 
     public housing because they have no other choice; they are 
     poor and have no other place to go.
       If Congress truly wants to remove barriers that discourage 
     public housing residents from obtaining employment, the 
     solution is to give housing authorities the flexibility to 
     set rents below 30 percent in certain instances and allow 
     people to save and get back on their feet. Congress should 
     not withhold operating subsidies from public housing 
     authorities and try to balance the budget by reaching deeper 
     into the pockets of our poorest people. We must keep rents in 
     public housing at a fair and reasonable percentage of income, 
     a percentage that recognizes that people need money to pay 
     for other basic expenses as well.
       Some advocates of the repeal cite the rate of crime in 
     public housing. The fact is that less than 15 percent of 
     public housing tenants are involved in crime. More than 85 
     percent are decent, law-abiding citizens who live in fear of 
     crime. The way to address the crime problem is not repeal of 
     the cap on rents, but through eviction and prosecution of 
     criminal tenants.
       I fear that the real intention in repealing the Brooke 
     Amendment is to abandon federal public housing. This 
     misguided and hard-edged legislative action will destroy the 
     foundation of our federal housing policy.
       Abandoning public housing is unwise for the country. It 
     ignores the investment that this country has already made to 
     build millions of units of housing--housing that, if we had 
     to rebuild today, would be prohibitive in cost.
       The Brooke Amendment is not a budget buster. Last year, the 
     federal government provided $2.9 billion to agencies that run 
     public housing. This figure was dwarfed by the $56.3 billion 
     in mortgage interest deductions that reduce housing costs for 
     middle-and upper-income people. There is clearly no fairness 
     or equity in the allocations between the haves and the have-
     nots.
       There comes a point in making policy decisions when 
     compassion and common sense must dictate. I respectfully urge 
     my Republican successors in Congress to preserve the Brooke 
     Amendment.

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the 
motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking the full chairman of the 
Committee on Banking and Financial Services, the gentleman from Iowa 
[Mr. Leach], for his support and friendship. I want to thank the 
members of my subcommittee, especially the people who have been at my 
side in handling the debate, the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Baker], 
the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter], the vice chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development. I want to thank the 
gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle], the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. 
Hayworth], the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Weller], on and on.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy] for 
his cooperation, the ability to work together on a number of different 
items.
  Mr. Speaker, this moment culminates 2 days of debate about two 
different visions of America. The first vision is the vision at my 
left. It is the state of public housing in America.
  Mr. Speaker, 200,000 Americans live in public housing that is run by 
corrupt, dysfunctional, mismanaged housing authorities. And the other 
side defends this. They think that this is acceptable, that it is OK in 
America to have communities where 200,000 Americans live in this 
despair, without hope or opportunity.
  We do not accept that. These housing authorities, let me just talk 
about some of these housing authorities. Think about if your children 
went to school and they came back with test scores, not for 1 year or 2 
years or 3 years or 5 years but for 17 years out of 100. New Orleans is 
scoring 27. Can you imagine if your children came back with a score of 
27 year after year? Condemning the population, the people that we are 
supposed to serve, to poverty. District of Columbia, 33; Philadelphia, 
35; Detroit, 37; Pittsburgh, 47; Atlanta, 49.
  And let me tell my colleagues something, this is what HUD is bragging 
about. They gave me this piece of paper because they think this is 
good. I think it stinks. I think we should not accept it. I think we 
should say that the people deserve more, that we should fire these 
housing authorities that continue to do a poor job year-after-year 
while billions of taxpayer dollars pour into them.
  This is the future of America. We have two different visions. Claim 
the past, which is this vision, or give the children who live in public 
housing hope. Give them a chance. Give them a chance to live in a place 
where they can have a fireman or a policeman living next door. Give 
them a chance where somebody can come over for a cup of coffee, talk 
about a job that might be available in the place that they work, 
instead of a place like State Street, where you have 10,000 people 
warehoused because of the policies of the last few Congresses, an 
unemployment rate of 99 percent.
  Talk about despair. Talk about disgrace. Talk about lack of 
compassion. That is a lack of compassion. To defend the status quo, to 
say that that is acceptable. It is not acceptable in America. It is 
acceptable nowhere in America.
  Now what they are talking about is maintaining one of the most 
important disincentives to work, the Brooke amendment, which has 
punished people who want to get out of poverty, want to take the 
opportunity to walk down that path toward employment. It says the 
minute you go to work, you pay a 30-percent tax. it says that you 
cannot live under the same rules, if you live in public housing, all of 
us live under.
  Let us consider ourselves here. How would we all like to pay a 30-
percent rent on our income? What kind of an artificial bizarre world 
sets rent based on how much income you make so that the minute you go 
to work, if you are to take overtime or get a better job or help 
yourself up the ladder or it you want your other spouse to go to work, 
the minute that happens, you get penalized, your rent goes up?
  What we are saying is, set flat rents that help incentivize work. Mr. 
Speaker, what we are talking about is fundamental local control, about 
reclaiming our communities and getting Washington bureaucrats and their 
one-size-fits-all-20-page-pet regulatory model out of our community so 
they can do their own job.
  Let me tell you about the people who have hands-on experience, Mr. 
Speaker, the people from the housing authorities themselves and what 
they say.
  The Public Housing Authorities Directors Association says, this 
legislation would permit badly needed flexibility that PHAs need to 
move residents up the ladder of self-sufficiency. We strongly support 
the provisions that would allow for working families flexible ceiling 
rents that would allow working residents to remain in public housing.
  I urge a ``no'' vote for the future of the children in public 
housing.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the motion 
to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             recorded vote

  Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5 of 
rule XV, the Chair announces that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the period of time within which a vote by electronic device, if 
ordered, will be taken on the question of passage of the bill.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 196, 
noes 226, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 160]

                               AYES--196

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Bishop
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Danner
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Flanagan
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Frisa
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Harman

[[Page H4737]]


     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     LaTourette
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lincoln
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moran
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Taylor (MS)
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Walsh
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                               NOES--226

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brewster
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis
     Deal
     DeLay
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Greene (UT)
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moorhead
     Morella
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Petri
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Rose
     Roth
     Roukema
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bevill
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Ewing
     Laughlin
     Molinari
     Paxon
     Schroeder
     Tanner
     Torricelli
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1814

  The Clerk announced the following pair:
  On this vote:

       Mr. Tanner for, with Mr. Paxon against.

  Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania and Mr. BLUTE changed their vote from ``no'' 
to ``aye.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. EWING. Mr. Speaker, on Rollcall No. 160, my card failed to 
register my vote. I intended to be recorded ``No.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the passage 
of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
                             RECORDED VOTE
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 315, 
noes 107, not voting 11, as follows:
                             [Roll No. 161]
                               AYES--315
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clayton
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooley
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Funderburk
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Green (TX)
     Greene (UT)
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Lincoln
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Longley
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Obey
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (FL)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Richardson
     Riggs
     Rivers
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roth
     Roukema
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Schumer
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stump
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thornton
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Vucanovich
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Ward
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer
                               NOES--107
     Abercrombie
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Blute
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brown (FL)
     Bryant (TX)
     Clay
     Clement
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cummings
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Engel
     Evans
     Fattah
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gonzalez
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hastings (FL)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     LaFalce
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     McDermott
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan

[[Page H4738]]


     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Scarborough
     Serrano
     Slaughter
     Stark
     Stokes
     Studds
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Volkmer
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Williams
     Woolsey
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bachus
     Bevill
     Dickey
     Laughlin
     Molinari
     Paxon
     Royce
     Schroeder
     Tanner
     Torricelli
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1823

  Messrs. DEUTSCH, DICKS, and COSTELLO changed their vote from ``aye'' 
to ``no.''
  Mr. CLYBURN changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 2 of House 
Resolution 426, I call up from the Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 
1260) to reform and consolidate the public and assisted housing 
programs of the United States, and to redirect primary responsibility 
for these programs from the Federal Government to States and 
localities, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate 
consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The text of S. 1260 is as follows:

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Public 
     Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 1996''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings and purposes.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Effective date.
Sec. 5. Proposed regulations; technical recommendations.
Sec. 6. Elimination of obsolete documents.
Sec. 7. Annual reports.

                   TITLE I--PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

Sec. 101. Declaration of policy.
Sec. 102. Membership on board of directors.
Sec. 103. Authority of public housing agencies.
Sec. 104. Definitions.
Sec. 105. Contributions for lower income housing projects.
Sec. 106. Public housing agency plan.
Sec. 107. Contract provisions and requirements.
Sec. 108. Expansion of powers.
Sec. 109. Public housing designated for the elderly and the disabled.
Sec. 110. Public housing capital and operating funds.
Sec. 111. Labor standards.
Sec. 112. Repeal of energy conservation; consortia and joint ventures.
Sec. 113. Repeal of modernization fund.
Sec. 114. Eligibility for public and assisted housing.
Sec. 115. Demolition and disposition of public housing.
Sec. 116. Repeal of family investment centers; voucher system for 
              public housing.
Sec. 117. Repeal of family self-sufficiency; homeownership 
              opportunities.
Sec. 118. Revitalizing severely distressed public housing.
Sec. 119. Mixed-income and mixed-ownership projects.
Sec. 120. Conversion of distressed public housing to tenant-based 
              assistance.
Sec. 121. Public housing mortgages and security interests.
Sec. 122. Linking services to public housing residents.
Sec. 123. Applicability to Indian housing.

                 TITLE II--SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Sec. 201. Merger of the certificate and voucher programs.
Sec. 202. Repeal of Federal preferences.
Sec. 203. Portability.
Sec. 204. Leasing to voucher holders.
Sec. 205. Homeownership option.
Sec. 206. Technical and conforming amendments.
Sec. 207. Implementation.
Sec. 208. Definition.
Sec. 209. Effective date.

                  TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Public housing flexibility in the CHAS.
Sec. 302. Repeal of certain provisions.
Sec. 303. Determination of income limits.
Sec. 304. Demolition of public housing.
Sec. 305. Coordination of tax credits and section 8.
Sec. 306. Eligibility for public and assisted housing.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) there exists throughout the Nation a need for decent, 
     safe, and affordable housing;
       (2) the inventory of public housing units owned and 
     operated by public housing agencies, an asset in which the 
     Federal Government has invested approximately 
     $90,000,000,000, has traditionally provided rental housing 
     that is affordable to low-income persons;
       (3) despite serving this critical function, the public 
     housing system is plagued by a series of problems, including 
     the concentration of very poor people in very poor 
     neighborhoods and disincentives for economic self-
     sufficiency;
       (4) the Federal method of overseeing every aspect of public 
     housing by detailed and complex statutes and regulations 
     aggravates the problem and places excessive administrative 
     burdens on public housing agencies;
       (5) the interests of low-income persons, and the public 
     interest, will best be served by a reformed public housing 
     program that--
       (A) consolidates many public housing programs into programs 
     for the operation and capital needs of public housing;
       (B) streamlines program requirements;
       (C) vests in public housing agencies that perform well the 
     maximum feasible authority, discretion, and control with 
     appropriate accountability to both public housing tenants and 
     localities; and
       (D) rewards employment and economic self-sufficiency of 
     public housing tenants;
       (6) voucher and certificate programs under section 8 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 are successful for 
     approximately 80 percent of applicants, and a consolidation 
     of the voucher and certificate programs into a single, 
     market-driven program will assist in making section 8 tenant-
     based assistance more successful in assisting low-income 
     families in obtaining affordable housing and will increase 
     housing choice for low-income families; and
       (7) the needs of Indian families residing on Indian 
     reservations and other Indian areas will best be served by 
     providing programs specifically designed to meet the needs of 
     Indian communities while promoting tribal self-governance and 
     self-determination.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to consolidate the various programs and activities 
     under the public housing programs administered by the 
     Secretary in a manner designed to reduce Federal 
     overregulation;
       (2) to redirect the responsibility for a consolidated 
     program to States, Indian tribes, localities, public housing 
     agencies, and public housing tenants;
       (3) to require Federal action to overcome problems of 
     public housing agencies with severe management deficiencies; 
     and
       (4) to consolidate and streamline tenant-based assistance 
     programs.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act, the following definitions shall 
     apply:
       (1) Public housing agency.--The term ``public housing 
     agency'' has the same meaning as in section 3 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Housing and Urban Development.

     SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Act or 
     the amendments made by this Act, this Act and the amendments 
     made by this Act shall become effective on the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. PROPOSED REGULATIONS; TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS.

       (a) Proposed Regulations.--Not later than 9 months after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
     to the Congress proposed regulations that the Secretary 
     determines are necessary to carry out the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended by this Act.
       (b) Technical Recommendations.--Not later than 9 months 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     submit to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
     Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Banking and 
     Financial Services of the House of Representatives, 
     recommended technical and conforming legislative changes 
     necessary to carry out this Act and the amendments made by 
     this Act.

     SEC. 6. ELIMINATION OF OBSOLETE DOCUMENTS.

       Effective 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     no rule, regulation, or order (including all handbooks, 
     notices, and related requirements) pertaining to public 
     housing or section 8 tenant-based programs issued or 
     promulgated under the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     before the date of enactment of this Act may be enforced by 
     the Secretary.

     SEC. 7. ANNUAL REPORTS.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit a 
     report to the Congress on the impact of the amendments made 
     by this Act on--
       (1) the demographics of public housing tenants and families 
     receiving tenant-based assistance under the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937; and
       (2) the economic viability of public housing agencies.
                   TITLE I--PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING

     SEC. 101. DECLARATION OF POLICY.

       Section 2 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY.

       ``It is the policy of the United States to promote the 
     general welfare of the Nation by

[[Page H4739]]

     employing the funds and credit of the Nation, as provided in 
     this title--
       ``(1) to assist States, Indian tribes, and political 
     subdivisions of States to remedy the unsafe housing 
     conditions and the acute shortage of decent and safe 
     dwellings for low-income families;
       ``(2) to assist States, Indian tribes, and political 
     subdivisions of States to address the shortage of housing 
     affordable to low-income families; and
       ``(3) consistent with the objectives of this title, to vest 
     in public housing agencies that perform well, the maximum 
     amount of responsibility and flexibility in program 
     administration, with appropriate accountability to both 
     public housing tenants and localities.''.

     SEC. 102. MEMBERSHIP ON BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

       Title I of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 27. MEMBERSHIP ON BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

       ``(a) Required Membership.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (b), the membership of the board of directors of 
     each public housing agency shall contain not less than 1 
     member who is a resident of a public housing project operated 
     by the public housing agency.
       ``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any 
     public housing agency in any State that requires the members 
     of the board of directors of a public housing agency to be 
     salaried and to serve on a full-time basis.
       ``(c) Nondiscrimination.--No person shall be prohibited 
     from serving on the board of directors or similar governing 
     body of a public housing agency because of the residence of 
     that person in a public housing project.''.

     SEC. 103. AUTHORITY OF PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCIES.

       (a) Authority of Public Housing Agencies.--
       (1) In general.--Section 3(a)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)(2)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(2) Authority of public housing agencies.--
     Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a public housing agency may 
     adopt ceiling rents that reflect the reasonable market value 
     of the housing, but that are not less than the actual monthly 
     costs--
       ``(i) to operate the housing of the public housing agency; 
     and
       ``(ii) to make a deposit to a replacement reserve (in the 
     sole discretion of the public housing agency).
       ``(B) Minimum rent.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a 
     public housing agency may provide that each family residing 
     in a public housing project or receiving tenant-based or 
     project-based assistance under section 8 shall pay a minimum 
     monthly rent in an amount not to exceed $25 per month.
       ``(C) Police officers.--
       ``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, a public housing agency may, in accordance with the 
     public housing agency plan, allow a police officer who is not 
     otherwise eligible for residence in public housing to reside 
     in a public housing unit. The number and location of units 
     occupied by police officers under this clause, and the terms 
     and conditions of their tenancies, shall be determined by the 
     public housing agency.
       ``(ii) Definition.--As used in this subparagraph, the term 
     `police officer' means any person determined by a public 
     housing agency to be, during the period of residence of that 
     person in public housing, employed on a full-time basis as a 
     duly licensed professional police officer by a Federal, 
     State, tribal, or local government or by any agency thereof 
     (including a public housing agency having an accredited 
     police force).
       ``(D) Encouragement of self-sufficiency.--Each public 
     housing agency shall develop a rental policy that encourages 
     and rewards employment and economic self-sufficiency.''.
       (2) Regulations.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall, by regulation, after 
     notice and an opportunity for public comment, establish such 
     requirements as may be necessary to carry out section 
     3(a)(2)(A) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     amended by paragraph (1).
       (B) Transition rule.--Prior to the issuance of final 
     regulations under paragraph (1), a public housing agency may 
     implement ceiling rents, which shall be--
       (i) determined in accordance with section 3(a)(2)(A) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as that section existed on 
     the day before the date of enactment of this Act;
       (ii) equal to the 95th percentile of the rent paid for a 
     unit of comparable size by tenants in the same public housing 
     project or a group of comparable projects totaling 50 units 
     or more; or
       (iii) equal to the fair market rent for the area in which 
     the unit is located.
       (b) Nontroubled Public Housing Agencies.--Section 3(a) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437(a)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Nontroubled public housing agencies.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding the rent calculation 
     formula in paragraph (1), and subject to subparagraph (B), 
     the Secretary shall permit a public housing agency, other 
     than a public housing agency determined to be troubled 
     pursuant to 6(j), to determine the amount that a family 
     residing in public housing shall pay as rent.
       ``(B) Limitation.--With respect to a family whose income is 
     equal to or less than 50 percent of the median income for the 
     area, as determined by the Secretary with adjustments for 
     smaller and larger families, a public housing agency may not 
     require a family to pay as rent under subparagraph (A) an 
     amount that exceeds the greatest of--
       ``(i) 30 percent of the monthly adjusted income of the 
     family;
       ``(ii) 10 percent of the monthly income of the family;
       ``(iii) if the family is receiving payments for welfare 
     assistance from a public agency and a part of those payments, 
     adjusted in accordance with the actual housing costs of the 
     family, is specifically designated by that public agency to 
     meet the housing costs of the family, the portion of those 
     payments that is so designated; and
       ``(iv) $25.''.

     SEC. 104. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Definitions.--
       (1) Single persons.--Section 3(b)(3) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(3)) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), in the third sentence, by striking 
     ``the Secretary shall'' and all that follows before the 
     period at the end and inserting the following: ``the public 
     housing agency may give preference to single persons who are 
     elderly or disabled persons before single persons who are 
     otherwise eligible''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), in the second sentence, by 
     striking ``regulations of the Secretary'' and inserting 
     ``public housing agency plan''.
       (2) Adjusted income.--Section 3(b)(5) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(5)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(5) Adjusted income.--The term `adjusted income' means 
     the income that remains after excluding--
       ``(A) $480 for each member of the family residing in the 
     household (other than the head of the household or the spouse 
     of the head of the household)--
       ``(i) who is under 18 years of age; or
       ``(ii) who is--

       ``(I) 18 years of age or older; and
       ``(II) a person with disabilities or a full-time student;

       ``(B) $400 for an elderly or disabled family;
       ``(C) the amount by which the aggregate of--
       ``(i) medical expenses for an elderly or disabled family; 
     and
       ``(ii) reasonable attendant care and auxiliary apparatus 
     expenses for each family member who is a person with 
     disabilities, to the extent necessary to enable any member of 
     the family (including a member who is a person with 
     disabilities) to be employed;

     exceeds 3 percent of the annual income of the family;
       ``(D) child care expenses, to the extent necessary to 
     enable another member of the family to be employed or to 
     further his or her education;
       ``(E) with respect to a family assisted by an Indian 
     housing authority only, excessive travel expenses, not to 
     exceed $25 per family per week, for employment- or education-
     related travel; and
       ``(F) any other income that the public housing agency 
     determines to be appropriate, as provided in the public 
     housing agency plan.''.
       (3) Indian housing authority; indian tribe.--
       (A) In general.--Section 3(b) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)) is amended by striking 
     paragraphs (11) and (12) and inserting the following:
       ``(11) Indian housing authority.--The term `Indian housing 
     authority' means any entity that--
       ``(A) is authorized to engage or assist in the development 
     or operation of low-income housing for Indians; and
       ``(B) is established--
       ``(i) by exercise of the power of self-government of an 
     Indian tribe, independent of State law; or
       ``(ii) by operation of State law authorizing or enabling an 
     Indian tribe to create housing authorities for Indians, 
     including regional housing authorities in the State of 
     Alaska.
       ``(12) Indian tribe.--The term `Indian tribe' means the 
     governing body of any Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, 
     nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of 
     the Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian Tribe, 
     pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 
     1994.''.
       (B) Applicability.--The amendment made by subparagraph (A) 
     does not affect the existence, or the ability to operate, of 
     any Indian housing authority established before the date of 
     enactment of this Act by any State recognized tribe, band, 
     pueblo, group, community, or nation of Indians or Alaska 
     Natives that does not qualify as an Indian tribe under 
     section 3(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     amended by this paragraph.
       (b) Disallowance of Earned Income From Public Housing Rent 
     Determinations.--
       (1) In general.--Section 3 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a) is amended--
       (A) by striking the undesignated paragraph at the end of 
     subsection (c)(3) (as added by section 515(b) of Public Law 
     101-625); and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:

[[Page H4740]]

       ``(d) Disallowance of Earned Income From Public Housing 
     Rent Determinations.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the rent payable under subsection (a) by a family--
       ``(A) that--
       ``(i) occupies a unit in a public housing project; or
       ``(ii) receives assistance under section 8; and
       ``(B) whose income increases as a result of employment of a 
     member of the family who was previously unemployed for 1 or 
     more years (including a family whose income increases as a 
     result of the participation of a family member in any family 
     self-sufficiency or other job training program);

     may not be increased as a result of the increased income due 
     to such employment during the 18-month period beginning on 
     the date on which the employment is commenced.
       ``(2) Phase-in of rate increases.--After the expiration of 
     the 18-month period referred to in paragraph (1), rent 
     increases due to the continued employment of the family 
     member described in paragraph (1)(B) shall be phased in over 
     a subsequent 3-year period.
       ``(3) Overall limitation.--Rent payable under subsection 
     (a) shall not exceed the amount determined under subsection 
     (a).''.
       (2) Applicability of amendment.--
       (A) Public housing.--Notwithstanding the amendment made by 
     paragraph (1), any tenant of public housing participating in 
     the program under the authority contained in the undesignated 
     paragraph at the end of section 3(c)(3) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as that paragraph existed on the day 
     before the date of enactment this Act, shall be governed by 
     that authority after that date.
       (B) Section 8.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall 
     apply to tenant-based assistance provided under section 8 of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, with funds 
     appropriated on or after October 1, 1996.
       (c) Definitions of Terms Used in Reference to Public 
     Housing.--
       (1) In general.--Section 3(c) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(c)) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and of the fees and 
     related costs normally involved in obtaining non-Federal 
     financing and tax credits with or without private and 
     nonprofit partners'' after ``carrying charges''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), in the first sentence, by striking 
     ``security personnel),'' and all that follows through the 
     period and inserting the following: ``security personnel), 
     service coordinators, drug elimination activities, or 
     financing in connection with a public housing project, 
     including projects developed with non-Federal financing and 
     tax credits, with or without private and nonprofit 
     partners.''.
       (2) Technical correction.--Section 622(c) of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-550; 
     106 Stat. 3817) is amended by striking `` `project.' '' and 
     inserting ``paragraph (3)''.
       (3) New definitions.--Section 3(c) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(c)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(6) Public housing agency plan.--The term `public housing 
     agency plan' means the plan of the public housing agency 
     prepared in accordance with section 5A.
       ``(7) Disabled housing.--The term `disabled housing' means 
     any public housing project, building, or portion of a project 
     or building, that is designated by a public housing agency 
     for occupancy exclusively by disabled persons or families.
       ``(8) Elderly housing.--The term `elderly housing' means 
     any public housing project, building, or portion of a project 
     or building, that is designated by a public housing agency 
     exclusively for occupancy exclusively by elderly persons or 
     families, including elderly disabled persons or families.
       ``(9) Mixed-income project.--The term `mixed-income 
     project' means a public housing project that meets the 
     requirements of section 28.
       ``(10) Capital fund.--The term `Capital Fund' means the 
     fund established under section 9(c).
       ``(11) Operating fund.--The term `Operating Fund' means the 
     fund established under section 9(d).''.

     SEC. 105. CONTRIBUTIONS FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 5 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437c) is amended by striking subsections 
     (h) through (l).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--The United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 21(d), by striking ``section 5(h) or'';
       (2) in section 25(l)(1), by striking ``and for sale under 
     section 5(h)''; and
       (3) in section 307, by striking ``section 5(h) and''.

     SEC. 106. PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY PLAN.

       (a) In General.--Title I of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended by inserting 
     after section 5 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 5A. PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY PLAN.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Submission.--Each public housing agency shall submit 
     to the Secretary a written public housing agency plan 
     developed in accordance with this section.
       ``(2) Consistency requirement.--Each public housing agency 
     plan submitted to the Secretary under paragraph (1) shall 
     be--
       ``(A) made in consultation with the local advisory board 
     established under subsection (c);
       ``(B) consistent with the comprehensive housing 
     affordability strategy for the jurisdiction in which the 
     public housing agency is located, as provided under title I 
     of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, or, 
     with respect to any Indian tribe, a comprehensive plan 
     developed by the Indian tribe, if applicable; and
       ``(C) accompanied by a certification by an appropriate 
     State, tribal, or local public official that the plan meets 
     the requirements of subparagraph (B).
       ``(b) Contents.--Each public housing agency plan shall 
     contain, at a minimum, the following:
       ``(1) Certification.--
       ``(A) In general.--With respect to a public housing agency 
     that has not received assistance under this title as of the 
     date on which the public housing agency plan of that public 
     housing agency is submitted, or a public housing agency that 
     is subject to amended authority, a written certification that 
     the public housing agency is a governmental entity or public 
     body (or an agency or instrumentality thereof) that is 
     authorized to engage or assist in the development or 
     operation of low-income housing under this title.
       ``(B) Identification of certain references.--Subject to 
     subparagraph (A), any reference in any provision of law of 
     the jurisdiction authorizing the creation of the public 
     housing agency shall be identified and any legislative 
     declaration of purpose in regard thereto shall be set forth 
     in the certification with full text.
       ``(2) Statement of policy.--An annual statement of policy 
     identifying the primary goals and objectives of the public 
     housing agency for the year for which the statement is 
     submitted, together with any major developments, projects, or 
     programs, including all proposed costs and activities carried 
     out with the use of Capital Fund and Operating Fund 
     distributions made available to the public housing agency 
     under section 9.
       ``(3) Statement of needs.--An annual statement of the 
     housing needs of low-income families residing in the 
     community, and of other low-income families on the waiting 
     list of the public housing agency (including the housing 
     needs of elderly families and disabled families), and the 
     means by which the public housing agency intends, to the 
     maximum extent practicable, to address those needs.
       ``(4) General policies, rules, and regulations.--The 
     policies, rules, and regulations of the public housing agency 
     regarding--
       ``(A) the requirements for the selection and admission of 
     eligible families into the program or programs of the public 
     housing agency, including--
       ``(i) tenant screening policies;
       ``(ii) any preferences or priorities for selection and 
     admission;
       ``(iii) annual income verification procedures; and
       ``(iv) requirements relating to the administration of any 
     waiting lists of the public housing agency;
       ``(B) the procedure for assignment of families admitted 
     into the program to dwelling units owned, leased, managed, or 
     assisted by the public housing agency;
       ``(C) the requirements for occupancy of dwelling units, 
     including all standard lease provisions, and conditions for 
     continued occupancy, termination, and eviction;
       ``(D) procedures for establishing rents, including ceiling 
     rents and adjustments to income; and
       ``(E) procedures for designating certain public housing 
     projects, or portions of projects, for occupancy by elderly 
     families, disabled families, or by elderly and disabled 
     families.
       ``(5) Operation and management.--The policies, rules, and 
     regulations relating to the management of the public housing 
     agency, and the public housing projects and programs of the 
     public housing agency, including--
       ``(A) a description of the manner in which the public 
     housing agency is organized (including any consortia or joint 
     ventures) and staffed to perform the duties and functions of 
     the public housing agency and to administer the Operating 
     Fund distributions of the public housing agency;
       ``(B) policies relating to the rental of dwelling units 
     owned or operated by the public housing agency, including 
     policies designed to reduce vacancies;
       ``(C) policies relating to providing a safe and secure 
     environment in public housing units, including anticrime and 
     antidrug activities;
       ``(D) policies relating to the management and operation, or 
     participation in mixed-income projects, if applicable;
       ``(E) policies relating to services and amenities provided 
     or offered to assisted families, including the provision of 
     service coordinators and services designed for certain 
     populations, such as the elderly and disabled;
       ``(F) procedures for implementing the work requirements of 
     section 12(c);
       ``(G) procedures for identifying management weaknesses;
       ``(H) objectives for improving management practices;
       ``(I) a description of management initiatives to control 
     the costs of operating the public housing agency;

[[Page H4741]]

       ``(J) a plan for preventative maintenance and a plan for 
     routine maintenance;
       ``(K) policies relating to any plans for converting public 
     housing to a system of tenant-based assistance; and
       ``(L) policies relating to the operation of any 
     homeownership programs.
       ``(6) Capital fund requirements.--The policies, rules, and 
     regulations relating to the management and administration of 
     the Capital Fund distributions of the public housing agency, 
     including--
       ``(A) the capital needs of the public housing agency;
       ``(B) plans for capital expenditures related to providing a 
     safe and secure environment in public housing units, 
     including anticrime and antidrug activities;
       ``(C) policies relating to providing a safe and secure 
     environment in public housing units, including anticrime and 
     antidrug activities;
       ``(D) policies relating to the capital requirements of 
     mixed-income projects, if applicable;
       ``(E) an annual plan and, if appropriate, a 5-year plan of 
     the public housing agency for the capital needs of the 
     existing dwelling units of the public housing agency, each of 
     which shall include a general statement identifying the long-
     term viability and physical condition of each of the public 
     housing projects and other property of the public housing 
     agency, including cost estimates;
       ``(F) a plan to handle emergencies and other disasters;
       ``(G) the use of funds for new or additional units, 
     including capital contributions to mixed-income projects, if 
     applicable;
       ``(H) any plans for the sale of existing dwelling units to 
     low-income residents or organizations acting as conduits for 
     sales to such residents under a homeownership plan;
       ``(I) any plans for converting public housing units to a 
     system of tenant-based assistance; and
       ``(J) any plans for demolition and disposition of public 
     housing units, including any plans for replacement units and 
     any plans providing for the relocation of residents who will 
     be displaced by a demolition or disposition of units.
       ``(7) Economic and social self-sufficiency programs.--A 
     description of any policies, programs, plans, and activities 
     of the public housing agency for the enhancement of the 
     economic and social self-sufficiency of residents assisted by 
     the programs of the public housing agency.
       ``(8) Annual audit.--The results of an annual audit 
     (including any audit of management practices, as required by 
     the Secretary) of the public housing agency, which shall be 
     conducted by an independent certified public accounting firm 
     pursuant to generally accepted accounting principles.
       ``(c) Local Advisory Board.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (5), 
     each public housing agency shall establish one or more local 
     advisory boards in accordance with this subsection, the 
     membership of which shall adequately reflect and represent 
     all of the residents of the dwelling units owned, operated, 
     or assisted by the public housing agency.
       ``(2) Membership.--Each local advisory board established 
     under this subsection shall be composed of the following 
     members:
       ``(A) Tenants.--Not less than 60 percent of the members of 
     the board shall be tenants of dwelling units owned, operated, 
     or assisted by the public housing agency, including 
     representatives of any resident organizations.
       ``(B) Other members.--The members of the board, other than 
     the members described in subparagraph (A), shall include--
       ``(i) representatives of the community in which the public 
     housing agency is located; and
       ``(ii) local government officials of the community in which 
     the public housing agency is located.
       ``(3) Purpose.--Each local advisory board established under 
     this subsection shall assist and make recommendations 
     regarding the development of the public housing agency plan. 
     The public housing agency shall consider the recommendations 
     of the local advisory board in preparing the final public 
     housing agency plan, and shall include a copy of those 
     recommendations in the public housing agency plan submitted 
     to the Secretary under this section.
       ``(4) Inapplicability to indian housing.--This subsection 
     does not apply to an Indian housing authority.
       ``(5) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive the requirements of 
     this subsection with respect to tenant representation on the 
     local advisory board of a public housing agency, if the 
     public housing agency demonstrates to the satisfaction of the 
     Secretary that a resident council or other tenant 
     organization of the public housing agency adequately 
     represents the interests of the tenants of the public housing 
     agency.
       ``(d) Publication of Notice.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 45 days before the date 
     of a hearing conducted under paragraph (2) by the governing 
     body of a public housing agency, the public housing agency 
     shall publish a notice informing the public that--
       ``(A) the proposed public housing agency plan is available 
     for inspection at the principal office of the public housing 
     agency during normal business hours; and
       ``(B) a public hearing will be conducted to discuss the 
     public housing agency plan and to invite public comment 
     regarding that plan.
       ``(2) Public hearing.--Each public housing agency shall, at 
     a location that is convenient to residents, conduct a public 
     hearing, as provided in the notice published under paragraph 
     (1).
       ``(3) Adoption of plan.--After conducting the public 
     hearing under paragraph (2), and after considering all public 
     comments received and, in consultation with the local 
     advisory board, making any appropriate changes in the public 
     housing agency plan, the public housing agency shall--
       ``(A) adopt the public housing agency plan; and
       ``(B) submit the plan to the Secretary in accordance with 
     this section.
       ``(e) Coordinated Procedures.--Each public housing agency 
     (other than an Indian housing authority) shall, in 
     conjunction with the State or relevant unit of general local 
     government, establish procedures to ensure that the public 
     housing agency plan required by this section is consistent 
     with the applicable comprehensive housing affordability 
     strategy for the jurisdiction in which the public housing 
     agency is located, in accordance with title I of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act.
       ``(f) Amendments and Modifications to Plans.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     nothing in this section shall preclude a public housing 
     agency, after submitting a plan to the Secretary in 
     accordance with this section, from amending or modifying any 
     policy, rule, regulation, or plan of the public housing 
     agency, except that no such significant amendment or 
     modification may be adopted or implemented--
       ``(A) other than at a duly called meeting of commissioners 
     (or other comparable governing body) of the public housing 
     agency that is open to the public; and
       ``(B) until notification of the amendment or modification 
     is provided to the Secretary and approved in accordance with 
     subsection (g)(2).
       ``(2) Consistency.--Each significant amendment or 
     modification to a public housing agency plan submitted to the 
     Secretary under this section shall--
       ``(A) meet the consistency requirement of subsection 
     (a)(2);
       ``(B) be subject to the notice and public hearing 
     requirements of subsection (d); and
       ``(C) be subject to approval by the Secretary in accordance 
     with subsection (g)(2).
       ``(g) Timing of Plans.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Initial submission.--Each public housing agency shall 
     submit the initial plan required by this section, and any 
     amendment or modification to the initial plan, to the 
     Secretary at such time and in such form as the Secretary 
     shall require.
       ``(B) Annual submission.--Not later than 60 days prior to 
     the start of the fiscal year of the public housing agency, 
     after initial submission of the plan required by this section 
     in accordance with subparagraph (A), each public housing 
     agency shall annually submit to the Secretary a plan update, 
     including any amendments or modifications to the public 
     housing agency plan.
       ``(2) Review and approval.--
       ``(A) Review.--After submission of the public housing 
     agency plan or any amendment or modification to the plan to 
     the Secretary, to the extent that the Secretary considers 
     such action to be necessary to make determinations under this 
     subparagraph, the Secretary shall review the public housing 
     agency plan (including any amendments or modifications 
     thereto) to determine whether the contents of the plan--
       ``(i) set forth the information required by this section to 
     be contained in a public housing agency plan;
       ``(ii) are consistent with information and data available 
     to the Secretary; and
       ``(iii) are prohibited by or inconsistent with any 
     provision of this title or other applicable law.
       ``(B) Approval.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3)(B), 
     not later than 60 days after the date on which a public 
     housing agency plan is submitted in accordance with this 
     section, the Secretary shall provide written notice to the 
     public housing agency if the plan has been disapproved, 
     stating with specificity the reasons for the disapproval.
       ``(ii) Failure to provide notice of disapproval.--If the 
     Secretary does not provide notice of disapproval under clause 
     (i) before the expiration of the 60-day period described in 
     clause (i), the public housing agency plan shall be deemed to 
     be approved by the Secretary.
       ``(3) Secretarial discretion.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary may require such 
     additional information as the Secretary determines to be 
     appropriate for each public housing agency that is--
       ``(i) at risk of being designated as troubled under section 
     6(j); or
       ``(ii) designated as troubled under section 6(j).
       ``(B) Troubled agencies.--The Secretary shall provide 
     explicit written approval or disapproval, in a timely manner, 
     for a public housing agency plan submitted by any public 
     housing agency designated by the Secretary as a troubled 
     public housing agency under section 6(j).
       ``(4) Streamlined plan.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Secretary may establish a streamlined public housing agency 
     plan for--
       ``(A) public housing agencies that are determined by the 
     Secretary to be high performing public housing agencies; and

[[Page H4742]]

       ``(B) public housing agencies with less than 250 public 
     housing units that have not been designated as troubled under 
     section 6(j).''.
       (b) Implementation.--
       (1) Interim rule.--Not later than 120 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue an 
     interim rule to require the submission of an interim public 
     housing agency plan by each public housing agency, as 
     required by section 5A of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 (as added by subsection (a) of this section).
       (2) Final regulations.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, in accordance with the 
     negotiated rulemaking procedures set forth in subchapter III 
     of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, the Secretary 
     shall promulgate final regulations implementing section 5A of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, as added by subsection 
     (a) of this section.
       (3) Indian housing authorities.--In carrying out this 
     subsection, the Secretary may implement separate rules and 
     regulations for the Indian housing program.
       (c) Audit and Review; Report.--
       (1) Audit and review.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     effective date of final regulations promulgated under 
     subsection (b)(2), in order to determine the degree of 
     compliance with public housing agency plans approved under 
     section 5A of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as added 
     by this section, by public housing agencies, the Comptroller 
     General of the United States shall conduct--
       (A) a review of a representative sample of the public 
     housing agency plans approved under such section 5A before 
     that date; and
       (B) an audit and review of the public housing agencies 
     submitting those plans.
       (2) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date on which 
     public housing agency plans are initially required to be 
     submitted under section 5A of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, as added by this section, the Comptroller General of 
     the United States shall submit to the Congress a report, 
     which shall include--
       (A) a description of the results of each audit and review 
     under paragraph (1); and
       (B) any recommendations for increasing compliance by public 
     housing agencies with their public housing agency plans 
     approved under section 5A of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as added by this section.

     SEC. 107. CONTRACT PROVISIONS AND REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Conditions.--Section 6(a) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(a)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by inserting ``, in a manner 
     consistent with the public housing agency plan'' before the 
     period; and
       (2) by striking the second sentence.
       (b) Repeal of Federal Preferences; Revision of Maximum 
     Income Limits; Certification of Compliance With Requirements; 
     Notification of Eligibility.--Section 6(c) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(c)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(c) [Reserved.]''.
       (c) Excess Funds.--Section 6(e) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(e)) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(e) [Reserved.]''.
       (d) Performance Indicators for Public Housing Agencies.--
     Section 6(j) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437d(j)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B)--
       (i) by striking ``obligated'' and inserting ``provided''; 
     and
       (ii) by striking ``unexpended'' and inserting ``unobligated 
     by the public housing agency'';
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``energy'' and 
     inserting ``utility'';
       (C) by redesignating subparagraph (H) as subparagraph (J); 
     and
       (D) by inserting after subparagraph (G) the following new 
     subparagraphs:
       ``(H) The extent to which the public housing agency 
     provides--
       ``(i) effective programs and activities to promote the 
     economic self-sufficiency of public housing tenants; and
       ``(ii) public housing tenants with opportunities for 
     involvement in the administration of the public housing.
       ``(I) The extent to which the public housing agency 
     successfully meets the goals and carries out the activities 
     and programs of the public housing agency plan under section 
     5(A).''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)(A)(i), by inserting after the first 
     sentence the following: ``The Secretary may use a simplified 
     set of indicators for public housing agencies with less than 
     250 public housing units.''.
       (e) Leases.--Section 6(l) of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(l)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``not be less than'' and 
     all that follows before the semicolon and inserting ``be the 
     period of time required under State law''; and
       (2) in paragraph (5), by striking ``on or near such 
     premises''.
       (f) Public Housing Assistance to Foster Care Children.--
     Section 6(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437d(o)) is amended by striking ``Subject'' and all 
     that follows through ``, in'' and inserting ``In''.
       (g) Preference for Areas With Inadequate Supply of Very 
     Low-Income Housing.--Section 6(p) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(p)) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(p) [Reserved.]''.
       (h) Availability of Criminal Records for Screening and 
     Eviction; Eviction for Drug-Related Activity.--Section 6 of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsections:
       ``(q) Availability of Records.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Provision of information.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, except as provided in subparagraph (B), the 
     National Crime Information Center, police departments, and 
     other law enforcement agencies shall, upon request, provide 
     information to public housing agencies regarding the criminal 
     conviction records of adult applicants for, or tenants of, 
     public housing for purposes of applicant screening, lease 
     enforcement, and eviction.
       ``(B) Exception.--Except as provided under any provision of 
     State, tribal, or local law, no law enforcement agency 
     described in subparagraph (A) shall provide information under 
     this paragraph relating to any criminal conviction if the 
     date of that conviction occurred 5 or more years prior to the 
     date on which the request for the information is made.
       ``(2) Opportunity to dispute.--Before an adverse action is 
     taken on the basis of a criminal record, the public housing 
     agency shall provide the tenant or applicant with a copy of 
     the criminal record and an opportunity to dispute the 
     accuracy and relevance of that record.
       ``(3) Fee.--A public housing agency may be charged a 
     reasonable fee for information provided under paragraph (1).
       ``(4) Records management.--Each public housing agency shall 
     establish and implement a system of records management that 
     ensures that any criminal record received by the public 
     housing agency is--
       ``(A) maintained confidentially;
       ``(B) not misused or improperly disseminated; and
       ``(C) destroyed, once the purpose for which the record was 
     requested has been accomplished.
       ``(5) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     term `adult' means a person who is 18 years of age or older, 
     or who has been convicted of a crime as an adult under any 
     Federal, State, or tribal law.
       ``(r) Eviction for Drug-Related Activity.--Any tenant 
     evicted from housing assisted under this title by reason of 
     drug-related criminal activity (as that term is defined in 
     section 8(f)(5)) shall not be eligible for housing assistance 
     under this title during the 3-year period beginning on the 
     date of such eviction, unless the evicted tenant successfully 
     completes a rehabilitation program approved by the public 
     housing agency (which shall include a waiver of this 
     subsection if the circumstances leading to eviction no longer 
     exist).''.
       (i) Transition Rule Relating to Preferences.--During the 
     period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and 
     ending on the date on which the initial public housing agency 
     plan of a public housing agency is approved under section 5A 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as added by this 
     Act, the public housing agency may establish local 
     preferences for making available public housing under the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 and for providing tenant-
     based assistance under section 8 of that Act.

     SEC. 108. EXPANSION OF POWERS.

       (a) In General.--Section 6(j)(3) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(j)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) by redesignating clauses (iii) and (iv) as clauses (iv) 
     and (v), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting after clause (ii) the following new 
     clause:
       ``(iii) take possession of the public housing agency, 
     including any project or function of the agency, including 
     any project or function under any other provision of this 
     title;'';
       (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (D) as 
     subparagraphs (E) through (G), respectively;
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new 
     subparagraphs:
       ``(B)(i) If a public housing agency is identified as 
     troubled under this subsection, the Secretary shall notify 
     the agency of the troubled status of the agency.
       ``(ii) The Secretary may give a public housing agency a 1-
     year period, beginning on the later of the date on which the 
     agency receives notice from the Secretary of the troubled 
     status of the agency under clause (i), and the date of 
     enactment of the Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 
     1995, within which to demonstrate improvement satisfactory to 
     the Secretary. Nothing in this clause shall preclude the 
     Secretary from taking any action the Secretary considers 
     necessary before the commencement or the expiration of the 1-
     year period described in this clause.
       ``(iii) Upon the expiration of the 1-year period described 
     in clause (ii), if the troubled public housing agency has not 
     demonstrated improvement satisfactory to the Secretary and 
     the Secretary has not yet declared the agency to be in breach 
     of the contract of the agency with the Federal Government 
     under this title, the Secretary shall declare the public 
     housing agency to be in substantial default, as described in 
     subparagraph (A).
       ``(iv) Upon declaration of a substantial default under 
     clause (iii), the Secretary--
       ``(I) shall either--

       ``(aa) petition for the appointment of a receiver pursuant 
     to subparagraph (A)(ii);
       ``(bb) take possession of the public housing agency or any 
     public housing projects of the public housing agency pursuant 
     to subparagraph (A)(iii); or

[[Page H4743]]

       ``(cc) take such actions as the Secretary determines to be 
     necessary to cure the substantial default; and

       ``(II) may, in addition, take other appropriate action.
       ``(C)(i) If a receiver is appointed pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A)(ii), in addition to the powers accorded by 
     the court appointing the receiver, the receiver--
       ``(I) may abrogate any contract that substantially impedes 
     correction of the substantial default;
       ``(II) may demolish and dispose of the assets of the public 
     housing agency, in accordance with section 18, including the 
     transfer of properties to resident-supported nonprofit 
     entities;
       ``(III) if determined to be appropriate by the Secretary, 
     may require the establishment, as permitted by applicable 
     State, tribal, and local law, of one or more new public 
     housing agencies; and
       ``(IV) shall not be subject to any State, tribal, or local 
     law relating to civil service requirements, employee rights, 
     procurement, or financial or administrative controls that, in 
     the determination of the receiver, substantially impedes 
     correction of the substantial default.
       ``(ii) For purposes of this subparagraph, the term `public 
     housing agency' includes any project or function of a public 
     housing agency, as appropriate, including any project or 
     function under any other provision of this title.
       ``(D)(i) If the Secretary takes possession of a public 
     housing agency, or any project or function of the agency, 
     pursuant to subparagraph (A)(iii), the Secretary--
       ``(I) may abrogate any contract that substantially impedes 
     correction of the substantial default;
       ``(II) may demolish and dispose of the assets of the public 
     housing agency, in accordance with section 18, including the 
     transfer of properties to resident-supported nonprofit 
     entities;
       ``(III) may require the establishment, as permitted by 
     applicable State, tribal, and local law, of one or more new 
     public housing agencies;
       ``(IV) shall not be subject to any State, tribal, or local 
     law relating to civil service requirements, employee rights, 
     procurement, or financial or administrative controls that, in 
     the determination of the Secretary, substantially impedes 
     correction of the substantial default; and
       ``(V) shall have such additional authority as a district 
     court of the United States has conferred under like 
     circumstances on a receiver to fulfill the purposes of the 
     receivership.
       ``(ii) The Secretary may appoint, on a competitive or 
     noncompetitive basis, an individual or entity as an 
     administrative receiver to assume the responsibilities of the 
     Secretary under this subparagraph for the administration of a 
     public housing agency. The Secretary may delegate to the 
     administrative receiver any or all of the powers given the 
     Secretary by this subparagraph, as the Secretary determines 
     to be appropriate.
       ``(iii) Regardless of any delegation under this 
     subparagraph, an administrative receiver may not require the 
     establishment of one or more new public housing agencies 
     pursuant to clause (i)(III), unless the Secretary first 
     approves an application by the administrative receiver to 
     authorize such establishment.
       ``(iv) For purposes of this subparagraph, the term `public 
     housing agency' includes any project or function of a public 
     housing agency, as appropriate, including any project or 
     function under any other provision of this title.''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(H) If the Secretary (or an administrative receiver 
     appointed by the Secretary) takes possession of a public 
     housing agency (including any project or function of the 
     agency), or if a receiver is appointed by a court, the 
     Secretary or receiver shall be deemed to be acting not in the 
     official capacity of that person or entity, but rather in the 
     capacity of the public housing agency, and any liability 
     incurred, regardless of whether the incident giving rise to 
     that liability occurred while the Secretary or receiver was 
     in possession of the public housing agency (including any 
     project or function of the agency), shall be the liability of 
     the public housing agency.''.
       (b) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to a public housing agency that is found to be in 
     substantial default, on or after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, with respect to the covenants or conditions to 
     which the agency is subject (as such substantial default is 
     defined in the contract for contributions of the agency) or 
     with respect to an agreement entered into under section 
     6(j)(2)(C) of the United States Housing Act of 1937.

     SEC. 109. PUBLIC HOUSING DESIGNATED FOR THE ELDERLY AND THE 
                   DISABLED.

       (a) In General.--Section 7 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437e) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 7. AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE DESIGNATED HOUSING.

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, a public housing agency may, in the discretion of the 
     public housing agency and without approval by the Secretary, 
     designate public housing projects or mixed-income projects 
     (or portions of projects) for occupancy as elderly housing, 
     disabled housing, or elderly and disabled housing. The public 
     housing agency shall establish requirements for this section, 
     including priorities for occupancy, in the public housing 
     agency plan.
       ``(b) Priority for Occupancy.--
       ``(1) In general.--In determining priority for admission to 
     public housing projects (or portions of projects) that are 
     designated for occupancy under this section, the public 
     housing agency may make units in such projects (or portions 
     of projects) available only to the types of families for whom 
     the project is designated.
       ``(2) Eligibility of near-elderly families.--If a public 
     housing agency determines that there are insufficient numbers 
     of elderly families to fill all the units in a public housing 
     project (or portion thereof) designated under this section 
     for occupancy by only elderly families, the agency may 
     provide that near-elderly families who qualify for occupancy 
     may occupy dwelling units in the public housing project (or 
     portion thereof).
       ``(3) Vacancy.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), in 
     designating a public housing project (or portion thereof) for 
     occupancy by only certain types of families under this 
     section, a public housing agency shall make any dwelling unit 
     that is ready for occupancy in such a project (or portion 
     thereof) that has been vacant for more than 60 consecutive 
     days generally available for occupancy (subject to this 
     title) without regard to that designation.
       ``(c) Availability of Housing.--
       ``(1) Tenant choice.--The decision of any disabled family 
     not to occupy or accept occupancy in an appropriate public 
     housing project or to otherwise accept any assistance made 
     available to the family under this title shall not adversely 
     affect the family with respect to a public housing agency 
     making available occupancy in other appropriate public 
     housing projects or to otherwise make assistance available to 
     that family under this title.
       ``(2) Discriminatory selection.--Paragraph (1) does not 
     apply to any family that decides not to occupy or accept an 
     appropriate dwelling unit in public housing or to accept 
     assistance under this Act on the basis of the race, color, 
     religion, gender, disability, familial status, or national 
     origin of occupants of the housing or the surrounding area.
       ``(3) Appropriateness of dwelling units.--This section may 
     not be construed to require a public housing agency to offer 
     occupancy in any dwelling unit assisted under this Act to any 
     family that is not of appropriate family size for the 
     dwelling unit.
       ``(d) Prohibition of Evictions.--Any tenant who is lawfully 
     residing in a dwelling unit in a public housing project may 
     not be evicted or otherwise required to vacate that unit as a 
     result of the designation of the public housing project (or 
     portion thereof) under this section or as a result of any 
     other action taken by the Secretary or any public housing 
     agency pursuant to this section.
       ``(e) Limitation on Occupancy in Designated Projects.--
       ``(1) Occupancy limitation.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, a dwelling unit in a public housing project 
     (or portion of a project) that is designated under subsection 
     (a) shall not be occupied by any person whose illegal use (or 
     pattern of illegal use) of a controlled substance or abuse 
     (or pattern of abuse) of alcohol--
       ``(A) constitutes a disability; and
       ``(B) provides reasonable cause for the public housing 
     agency to believe that such occupancy could interfere with 
     the health, safety, or right to peaceful enjoyment of the 
     premises by the tenants of the public housing project.
       ``(2) Required statement.--A public housing agency may not 
     make a dwelling unit in a public housing project (or portion 
     of a project) designated under subsection (a) available for 
     occupancy to any family, unless the application for occupancy 
     by that family is accompanied by a signed statement that no 
     person who will be occupying the unit illegally uses a 
     controlled substance, or abuses alcohol, in a manner that 
     would interfere with the health, safety, or right to peaceful 
     enjoyment of the premises by the tenants of the public 
     housing project.''.
       (b) Lease Provisions.--Section 6(l) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437d(l)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (5) following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(6) provide that any occupancy in violation of section 
     7(e)(1) or the furnishing of any false or misleading 
     information pursuant to section 7(e)(2) shall be cause for 
     termination of tenancy; and''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 6(c)(4)(A) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437(b)(4)(A)) is 
     amended by striking ``section 7(a)'' and inserting ``section 
     7''.

     SEC. 110. PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL AND OPERATING FUNDS.

       (a) In General.--Section 9 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 9. PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL AND OPERATING FUNDS.

       ``(a) In General.--Except for assistance provided under 
     section 8 of this Act or as otherwise provided in the Public 
     Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 1995, all programs 
     under which assistance is provided for

[[Page H4744]]

     public housing under this Act on the day before October 1, 
     1997, shall be merged, as appropriate, into either--
       ``(1) the Capital Fund established under subsection (c); or
       ``(2) the Operating Fund established under subsection (d).
       ``(b) Use of Existing Funds.--With the exception of funds 
     made available pursuant to section 8 or section 20(f) and 
     funds made available for the urban revitalization 
     demonstration program authorized under the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Independent Agencies Appropriations Acts--
       ``(1) funds made available to the Secretary for public 
     housing purposes that have not been obligated by the 
     Secretary to a public housing agency as of October 1, 1997, 
     shall be made available, for the period originally provided 
     in law, for use in either the Capital Fund or the Operating 
     Fund, as appropriate; and
       ``(2) funds made available to the Secretary for public 
     housing purposes that have been obligated by the Secretary to 
     a public housing agency but that, as of October 1, 1997, have 
     not been obligated by the public housing agency, may be made 
     available by that public housing agency, for the period 
     originally provided in law, for use in either the Capital 
     Fund or the Operating Fund, as appropriate.
       ``(c) Capital Fund.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a Capital 
     Fund for the purpose of making assistance available to public 
     housing agencies to carry out capital and management 
     activities, including--
       ``(A) the development and modernization of public housing 
     projects, including the redesign, reconstruction, and 
     reconfiguration of public housing sites and buildings and the 
     development of mixed-income projects;
       ``(B) vacancy reduction;
       ``(C) addressing deferred maintenance needs and the 
     replacement of dwelling equipment;
       ``(D) planned code compliance;
       ``(E) management improvements;
       ``(F) demolition and replacement;
       ``(G) tenant relocation;
       ``(H) capital expenditures to facilitate programs to 
     improve the economic empowerment and self-sufficiency of 
     public housing tenants; and
       ``(I) capital expenditures to improve the security and 
     safety of residents.
       ``(2) Establishment of capital fund formula.--The Secretary 
     shall develop a formula for providing assistance under the 
     Capital Fund, which may take into account--
       ``(A) the number of public housing dwelling units owned or 
     operated by the public housing agency and the percentage of 
     those units that are occupied by very low-income families;
       ``(B) if applicable, the reduction in the number of public 
     housing units owned or operated by the public housing agency 
     as a result of any conversion to a system of tenant-based 
     assistance;
       ``(C) the costs to the public housing agency of meeting the 
     rehabilitation and modernization needs, and meeting the 
     reconstruction, development, and demolition needs of public 
     housing dwelling units owned and operated by the public 
     housing agency;
       ``(D) the degree of household poverty served by the public 
     housing agency;
       ``(E) the costs to the public housing agency of providing a 
     safe and secure environment in public housing units owned and 
     operated by the public housing agency; and
       ``(F) the ability of the public housing agency to 
     effectively administer the Capital Fund distribution of the 
     public housing agency.
       ``(d) Operating Fund.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     Operating Fund for the purpose of making assistance available 
     to public housing agencies for the operation and management 
     of public housing, including--
       ``(A) procedures and systems to maintain and ensure the 
     efficient management and operation of public housing units;
       ``(B) activities to ensure a program of routine 
     preventative maintenance;
       ``(C) anticrime and antidrug activities, including the 
     costs of providing adequate security for public housing 
     tenants;
       ``(D) activities related to the provision of services, 
     including service coordinators for elderly persons or persons 
     with disabilities;
       ``(E) activities to provide for management and 
     participation in the management of public housing by public 
     housing tenants;
       ``(F) the costs associated with the operation and 
     management of mixed-income projects, to the extent 
     appropriate (including the funding of an operating reserve to 
     ensure affordability for low-income families in lieu of the 
     availability of operating funds for public housing units in a 
     mixed-income project);
       ``(G) the reasonable costs of insurance;
       ``(H) the reasonable energy costs associated with public 
     housing units, with an emphasis on energy conservation; and
       ``(I) the costs of administering a public housing work 
     program under section 12, including the costs of any related 
     insurance needs.
       ``(2) Establishment of operating fund formula.--The 
     Secretary shall establish a formula for providing assistance 
     under the Operating Fund, which may take into account--
       ``(A) standards for the costs of operation and reasonable 
     projections of income, taking into account the character and 
     location of the public housing project and characteristics of 
     the families served, or the costs of providing comparable 
     services as determined with criteria or a formula 
     representing the operations of a prototype well-managed 
     public housing project;
       ``(B) the number of public housing dwelling units owned and 
     operated by the public housing agency, the percentage of 
     those units that are occupied by very low-income families, 
     and, if applicable, the reduction in the number of public 
     housing units as a result of any conversion to a system of 
     tenant-based assistance;
       ``(C) the degree of household poverty served by a public 
     housing agency;
       ``(D) the extent to which the public housing agency 
     provides programs and activities designed to promote the 
     economic self-sufficiency and management skills of public 
     housing tenants;
       ``(E) the number of dwelling units owned and operated by 
     the public housing agency that are chronically vacant and the 
     amount of assistance appropriate for those units;
       ``(F) the costs of the public housing agency associated 
     with anticrime and antidrug activities, including the costs 
     of providing adequate security for public housing tenants; 
     and
       ``(G) the ability of the public housing agency to 
     effectively administer the Operating Fund distribution of the 
     public housing agency.
       ``(e) Limitations on Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each public housing agency may use not 
     more than 20 percent of the Capital Fund distribution of the 
     public housing agency for activities that are eligible for 
     assistance under the Operating Fund under subsection (d), if 
     the public housing agency plan provides for such use.
       ``(2) New construction.--
       ``(A) In general.--A public housing agency may not use any 
     of the Capital Fund or Operating Fund distributions of the 
     public housing agency for the purpose of constructing any 
     public housing unit, if such construction would result in a 
     net increase in the number of public housing units owned or 
     operated by the public housing agency on the date of 
     enactment of the Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 
     1995, including any public housing units demolished as part 
     of any revitalization effort.
       ``(B) Exception.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), a 
     public housing agency may use the Capital Fund or Operating 
     Fund distributions of the public housing agency for the 
     construction and operation of housing units that are 
     available and affordable to low-income families in excess of 
     the limitations on new construction set forth in subparagraph 
     (A), except that the formulae established under subsections 
     (c)(2) and (d)(2) shall not provide additional funding for 
     the specific purpose of allowing construction and operation 
     of housing in excess of those limitations.''.
       ``(f) Operating and Capital Assistance to Resident 
     Management Corporations.--The Secretary shall directly 
     provide operating and capital assistance under this section 
     to each resident management corporation managing a public 
     housing project pursuant to a contract under this section, 
     which assistance shall be used for purposes of operating the 
     public housing project and performing such other eligible 
     activities with respect to the project as may be provided 
     under the contract.
       ``(g) Indian Housing Programs.--To the extent provided in 
     advance in appropriations Acts, the Secretary shall carry out 
     housing programs for Indians in accordance with such formulas 
     and programs as the Secretary shall establish by regulation.
       ``(h) Technical Assistance.--To the extent approved in 
     advance in appropriations Acts, the Secretary may make grants 
     or enter into contracts in accordance with this subsection 
     for purposes of providing, either directly or indirectly--
       ``(1) technical assistance to public housing agencies, 
     resident councils, resident organizations, and resident 
     management corporations, including assistance relating to 
     monitoring and inspections;
       ``(2) training for public housing agency employees and 
     tenants;
       ``(3) data collection and analysis; and
       ``(4) training, technical assistance, and education to 
     assist public housing agencies that are--
       ``(A) at risk of being designated as troubled under section 
     6(j) from being so designated; and
       ``(B) designated as troubled under section 6(j) in 
     achieving the removal of that designation.
       ``(i) Emergency Reserve.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Set-aside.--In each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
     set aside not more than 2 percent of the amount made 
     available for use under the capital fund to carry out this 
     section for that fiscal year for use in accordance with this 
     subsection.
       ``(B) Use of funds.--
       ``(i) Emergencies.--Amounts set aside under this paragraph 
     shall be available to the Secretary for use in connection 
     with emergencies, as determined by the Secretary, and in 
     connection with housing needs resulting from any settlement 
     of litigation.
       ``(ii) Additional funds.--To the extent that there are 
     funds from amounts set aside under this paragraph in excess 
     to the needs described in clause (i), the Secretary may use 
     those funds for the costs of establishing

[[Page H4745]]

     and administering a witness relocation program, which shall 
     be established by the Secretary in conjunction with the 
     Attorney General of the United States.
       ``(2) Allocation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Amounts set aside under this subsection 
     shall initially be allocated based on the emergency and 
     litigation settlement needs of public housing agencies, in 
     such manner, and in such amounts as the Secretary shall 
     determine.
       ``(B) Publication.--The Secretary shall publish the use of 
     any amounts allocated under this subsection in the Federal 
     Register.''.
       (b) Implementation; Effective Date; Transition Period.--
       (1) Implementation.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, in accordance with the negotiated 
     rulemaking procedures set forth in subchapter III of chapter 
     5 of title 5, United States Code, the Secretary shall 
     establish the formulas described in subsections (c)(3) and 
     (d)(2) of section 9 of the Public Housing Reform and 
     Empowerment Act of 1995, as amended by this section.
       (2) Effective date.--The formulas established under 
     paragraph (1) shall be effective only with respect to amounts 
     made available under section 9 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937, as amended by this section, in fiscal year 1998 
     or in any succeeding fiscal year.
       (3) Transition period.--Prior to the effective date 
     described in paragraph (2), the Secretary shall provide that 
     each public housing agency shall receive funding under 
     sections 9 and 14 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, 
     as those sections existed on the day before the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (c) Drug Elimination Grants.--
       (1) Funding authorization.--
       (A) In general.--To the extent provided in advance in 
     appropriations Acts for fiscal years 1996 and 1997, the 
     Secretary shall make grants for--
       (i) use in eliminating drug-related crime under the Public 
     and Assisted Housing Drug Elimination Act of 1990; and
       (ii) drug elimination clearinghouse services authorized by 
     section 5143 of the Drug-Free Public Housing Act of 1988.
       (B) Set-aside.--Of any amounts made available to carry out 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall set aside amounts for 
     grants, technical assistance, contracts, and other 
     assistance, and for training, program assessment, and 
     execution for or on behalf of public housing agencies and 
     resident organizations (including the cost of necessary 
     travel for participants in such training).
       (2) Program requirements.--The use of amounts made 
     available under paragraph (1) shall be governed by the Public 
     and Assisted Housing Drug Elimination Act of 1990, except as 
     follows:
       (A) Formula allocation.--Notwithstanding the Public and 
     Assisted Housing Drug Elimination Act of 1990, after setting 
     aside amounts for assisted housing under section 5130(b) of 
     such Act, the Secretary may make grants to public housing 
     agencies in accordance with a formula established by the 
     Secretary, which shall--
       (i) take into account the needs of the public housing 
     agency for anticrime funding, and the amount of funding that 
     the public housing agency has received under the Public and 
     Assisted Housing Drug Elimination Act of 1990 during fiscal 
     years 1993, 1994, and 1995; and
       (ii) not exclude an eligible public housing agency that has 
     not received funding during the period described in clause 
     (i).
       (B) Other types of crime.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the Secretary may define the term ``drug-related crime'' to 
     include criminal actions other than those described in 
     section 5126(2) of the Public and Assisted Housing Drug 
     Elimination Act of 1990.
       (3) Sunset.--No grant may be made under this subsection on 
     or after October 1, 1998.

     SEC. 111. LABOR STANDARDS.

       Section 12 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437j) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(c) Work Requirement.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, each adult member of each family assisted under this 
     title shall contribute not less than 8 hours of volunteer 
     work per month (not to include any political activity) within 
     the community in which that adult resides.
       ``(2) Inclusion in plan.--Each public housing agency shall 
     include in the public housing agency plan a detailed 
     description of the manner in which the public housing agency 
     intends to implement and administer paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Exemptions.--The Secretary may provide an exemption 
     from paragraph (1) for any adult who is--
       ``(A) not less than 62 years of age;
       ``(B) a person with disabilities who is unable, as 
     determined in accordance with guidelines established by the 
     Secretary, to comply with this section;
       ``(C) working not less than 20 hours per week, a student, 
     receiving vocational training, or otherwise meeting work, 
     training, or educational requirements of a public assistance 
     program; or
       ``(D) a single parent or the spouse of an otherwise exempt 
     individual who is the primary caretaker of one or more 
     children who are 6 years of age or younger.''.

     SEC. 112. REPEAL OF ENERGY CONSERVATION; CONSORTIA AND JOINT 
                   VENTURES.

       Section 13 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437k) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 13. CONSORTIA, JOINT VENTURES, AFFILIATES, AND 
                   SUBSIDIARIES OF PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCIES.

       ``(a) Consortia.--
       ``(1) In general.--Any 2 or more public housing agencies 
     may participate in a consortium for the purpose of 
     administering any or all of the housing programs of those 
     public housing agencies in accordance with this section.
       ``(2) Effect.--With respect to any consortium described in 
     paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) any assistance made available under this title to 
     each of the public housing agencies participating in the 
     consortium shall be paid to the consortium; and
       ``(B) all planning and reporting requirements imposed upon 
     each public housing agency participating in the consortium 
     with respect to the programs operated by the consortium shall 
     be consolidated.
       ``(3) Restrictions.--
       ``(A) Agreement.--Each consortium described in paragraph 
     (1) shall be formed and operated in accordance with a 
     consortium agreement, and shall be subject to the 
     requirements of a joint public housing agency plan, which 
     shall be submitted by the consortium in accordance with 
     section 5A.
       ``(B) Minimum requirements.--The Secretary shall specify 
     minimum requirements relating to the formation and operation 
     of consortia and the minimum contents of consortium 
     agreements under this paragraph.
       ``(b) Joint Ventures.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, a public housing agency, in accordance with the public 
     housing agency plan, may--
       ``(A) form and operate wholly owned or controlled 
     subsidiaries (which may be nonprofit corporations) and other 
     affiliates, any of which may be directed, managed, or 
     controlled by the same persons who constitute the board of 
     commissioners or other similar governing body of the public 
     housing agency, or who serve as employees or staff of the 
     public housing agency; or
       ``(B) enter into joint ventures, partnerships, or other 
     business arrangements with, or contract with, any person, 
     organization, entity, or governmental unit, with respect to 
     the administration of the programs of the public housing 
     agency, including any program that is subject to this title.
       ``(2) Use of income.--Any income generated under paragraph 
     (1) shall be used for low-income housing or to benefit the 
     tenants of the public housing agency.
       ``(3) Audits.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States, the Secretary, and the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development may conduct an 
     audit of any activity undertaken under paragraph (1) at any 
     time.''.

     SEC. 113. REPEAL OF MODERNIZATION FUND.

       (a) In General.--Section 14 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437l) is repealed.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--The United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 5(c)(5), by striking ``for use under section 
     14 or'';
       (2) in section 5(c)(7)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking clause (iii); and
       (ii) by redesignating clauses (iv) through (x) as clauses 
     (iii) through (ix), respectively; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B)--
       (i) by striking clause (iii); and
       (ii) by redesignating clauses (iv) through (x) as clauses 
     (iii) through (ix), respectively;
       (3) in section 6(j)(1)--
       (A) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) through (H) as 
     subparagraphs (B) through (G), respectively;
       (4) in section 6(j)(2)(A)--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``The Secretary shall also 
     designate,'' and all that follows through the period at the 
     end; and
       (B) in clause (iii), by striking ``(including designation 
     as a troubled agency for purposes of the program under 
     section 14)'';
       (5) in section 6(j)(2)(B)--
       (A) in clause (i), by striking ``and determining that an 
     assessment under this subparagraph will not duplicate any 
     review conducted under section 14(p)''; and
       (B) in clause (ii)--
       (i) by striking ``(I) the agency's comprehensive plan 
     prepared pursuant to section 14 adequately and appropriately 
     addresses the rehabilitation needs of the agency's inventory, 
     (II)'' and inserting ``(I)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``(III)'' and inserting ``(II)'';
       (6) in section 6(j)(3)--
       (A) in clause (ii), by adding ``and'' at the end;
       (B) by striking clause (iii); and
       (C) by redesignating clause (iv) as clause (iii);
       (7) in section 6(j)(4)--
       (A) in subparagraph (D), by adding ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``; and'' at the end 
     and inserting a period; and
       (C) by striking subparagraph (F);
       (8) in section 20--
       (A) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
       ``(c) [Reserved.]''; and
       (B) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following:
       ``(f) [Reserved.]'';
       (9) in section 21(a)(2)--

[[Page H4746]]

       (A) by striking subparagraph (A); and
       (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
       (10) in section 21(a)(3)(A)(v), by striking ``the building 
     or buildings meet the minimum safety and livability standards 
     applicable under section 14, and'';
       (11) in section 25(b)(1), by striking ``From amounts 
     reserved'' and all that follows through ``the Secretary may'' 
     and inserting the following: To the extent approved in 
     appropriations Acts, the Secretary may'';
       (12) in section 25(e)(2)--
       (A) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting ``To the 
     extent approved in appropriations Acts, the Secretary''; and
       (B) by striking ``available annually from amounts under 
     section 14'';
       (13) in section 25(e), by striking paragraph (3);
       (14) in section 25(f)(2)(G)(i), by striking ``including--'' 
     and all that follows through ``an explanation'' and inserting 
     ``including an explanation'';
       (15) in section 25(i)(1), by striking the second sentence; 
     and
       (16) in section 202(b)(2)--
       (A) by striking ``(b) Financial Assistance.--'' and all 
     that follows through ``The Secretary may,'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(b) Financial Assistance.--The Secretary may''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (2).

     SEC. 114. ELIGIBILITY FOR PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING.

       Section 16 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437n) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 16. ELIGIBILITY FOR PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING.

       ``(a) Income Eligibility for Public Housing.--
       ``(1) In general.--Of the dwelling units of a public 
     housing agency, including public housing units in a 
     designated mixed-income project, made available for occupancy 
     in any fiscal year of the public housing agency--
       ``(A) not less than 40 percent shall be occupied by 
     families whose incomes do not exceed 30 percent of the area 
     median income for those families;
       ``(B) not less than 75 percent shall be occupied by 
     families whose incomes do not exceed 60 percent of the area 
     median income for those families; and
       ``(C) any remaining dwelling units may be made available 
     for families whose incomes do not exceed 80 percent of the 
     area median income for those families.
       ``(2) Establishment of different standards.--
     Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if approved by the Secretary, 
     a public housing agency, in accordance with the public 
     housing agency plan, may for good cause establish and 
     implement an occupancy standard other than the standard 
     described in paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Mixed-income housing standard.--Each public housing 
     agency plan submitted by a public housing agency shall 
     include a plan for achieving a diverse income mix among 
     tenants in each public housing project of the public housing 
     agency and among the scattered site public housing of the 
     public housing agency.
       ``(b) Income Eligibility for Certain Assisted Housing.--
       ``(1) In general.--Of the dwelling units receiving tenant-
     based assistance under section 8 made available for occupancy 
     in any fiscal year of the public housing agency--
       ``(A) not less than 50 percent shall be occupied by 
     families whose incomes do not exceed 30 percent of the area 
     median income for those families; and
       ``(B) any remaining dwelling units may be made available 
     for families whose incomes do not exceed 80 percent of the 
     area median income for those families.
       ``(2) Establishment of different standards.--
     Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if approved by the Secretary, 
     a public housing agency, in accordance with the public 
     housing agency plan, may for good cause establish and 
     implement an occupancy standard other than the standard 
     described in paragraph (1).
       ``(c) Ineligibility of Illegal Drug Users and Alcohol 
     Abusers.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a 
     public housing agency shall establish standards for occupancy 
     in public housing dwelling units--
       ``(1) that prohibit occupancy in any such unit by any 
     person--
       ``(A) who the public housing agency determines is illegally 
     using a controlled substance; or
       ``(B) if the public housing agency determines that it has 
     reasonable cause to believe that such person's illegal use 
     (or pattern of illegal use) of a controlled substance, or 
     abuse (or pattern of abuse) of alcohol, could interfere with 
     the health, safety, or right to peaceful enjoyment of the 
     premises by the tenants of the public housing project; and
       ``(2) that allow the public housing agency to terminate the 
     tenancy in any public housing unit of any person--
       ``(A) if the public housing agency determines that such 
     person is illegally using a controlled substance; or
       ``(B) whose illegal use of a controlled substance, or whose 
     abuse of alcohol, is determined by the public housing agency 
     to interfere with the health, safety, or right to peaceful 
     enjoyment of the premises by the tenants of the public 
     housing project.
       ``(d) Inapplicability to Indian Housing.--This section does 
     not apply to any dwelling unit assisted by an Indian housing 
     authority.''.

     SEC. 115. DEMOLITION AND DISPOSITION OF PUBLIC HOUSING.

       (a) In General.--Section 18 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437p) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 18. DEMOLITION AND DISPOSITION OF PUBLIC HOUSING.

       ``(a) Applications for Demolition and Disposition.--Except 
     as provided in subsection (b), not later than 60 days after 
     receiving an application by a public housing agency for 
     authorization, with or without financial assistance under 
     this title, to demolish or dispose of a public housing 
     project or a portion of a public housing project (including 
     any transfer to a resident-supported nonprofit entity), the 
     Secretary shall approve the application, if the public 
     housing agency certifies--
       ``(1) in the case of--
       ``(A) an application proposing demolition of a public 
     housing project or a portion of a public housing project, 
     that--
       ``(i) the project or portion of the public housing project 
     is obsolete as to physical condition, location, or other 
     factors, making it unsuitable for housing purposes; and
       ``(ii) no reasonable program of modifications is cost-
     effective to return the public housing project or portion of 
     the project to useful life; and
       ``(B) an application proposing the demolition of only a 
     portion of a public housing project, that the demolition will 
     help to assure the viability of the remaining portion of the 
     project;
       ``(2) in the case of an application proposing disposition 
     of a public housing project or other real property subject to 
     this title by sale or other transfer, that--
       ``(A) the retention of the property is not in the best 
     interests of the tenants or the public housing agency 
     because--
       ``(i) conditions in the area surrounding the public housing 
     project adversely affect the health or safety of the tenants 
     or the feasible operation of the project by the public 
     housing agency; or
       ``(ii) disposition allows the acquisition, development, or 
     rehabilitation of other properties that will be more 
     efficiently or effectively operated as low-income housing;
       ``(B) the public housing agency has otherwise determined 
     the disposition to be appropriate for reasons that are--
       ``(i) in the best interests of the tenants and the public 
     housing agency;
       ``(ii) consistent with the goals of the public housing 
     agency and the public housing agency plan; and
       ``(iii) otherwise consistent with this title; or
       ``(C) for property other than dwelling units, the property 
     is excess to the needs of a public housing project or the 
     disposition is incidental to, or does not interfere with, 
     continued operation of a public housing project;
       ``(3) that the public housing agency has specifically 
     authorized the demolition or disposition in the public 
     housing agency plan, and has certified that the actions 
     contemplated in the public housing agency plan comply with 
     this section;
       ``(4) that the public housing agency--
       ``(A) will provide for the payment of the relocation 
     expenses of each tenant to be displaced;
       ``(B) will ensure that the amount of rent paid by the 
     tenant following relocation will not exceed the amount 
     permitted under this title; and
       ``(C) will not commence demolition or complete disposition 
     until all tenants residing in the unit are relocated;
       ``(5) that the net proceeds of any disposition will be 
     used--
       ``(A) unless waived by the Secretary, for the retirement of 
     outstanding obligations issued to finance the original public 
     housing project or modernization of the project; and
       ``(B) to the extent that any proceeds remain after the 
     application of proceeds in accordance with subparagraph (A), 
     for the provision of low-income housing or to benefit the 
     tenants of the public housing agency; and
       ``(6) that the public housing agency has complied with 
     subsection (c).
       ``(b) Disapproval of Applications.--The Secretary shall 
     disapprove an application submitted under subsection (a) if 
     the Secretary determines that any certification made by the 
     public housing agency under that subsection is clearly 
     inconsistent with information and data available to the 
     Secretary.
       ``(c) Tenant Opportunity To Purchase in Case of Proposed 
     Disposition.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of a proposed disposition of 
     a public housing project or portion of a project, the public 
     housing agency shall, in appropriate circumstances, as 
     determined by the Secretary, initially offer the property to 
     any eligible resident organization, eligible resident 
     management corporation, or nonprofit organization supported 
     by the residents, if that entity has expressed an interest, 
     in writing, to the public housing agency in a timely manner, 
     in purchasing the property for continued use as low-income 
     housing.
       ``(2) Timing.--
       ``(A) Thirty-day notice.--A resident organization, resident 
     management corporation, or other resident-supported nonprofit 
     entity referred to in paragraph (1) may express interest in 
     purchasing property that is the subject of a disposition, as 
     described in paragraph (1), during the 30-day period 
     beginning on the date of notification of a proposed sale of 
     the property.

[[Page H4747]]

       ``(B) Sixty-day notice.--If an entity expresses written 
     interest in purchasing a property, as provided in 
     subparagraph (A), no disposition of the property shall occur 
     during the 60-day period beginning on the date of receipt of 
     that written notice, during which time that entity shall be 
     given the opportunity to obtain a firm commitment for 
     financing the purchase of the property.
       ``(d) Replacement Units.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, replacement housing units for public 
     housing units demolished in accordance with this section may 
     be built on the original public housing location or in the 
     same neighborhood as the original public housing location if 
     the number of those replacement units is fewer than the 
     number of units demolished.''.
       (b) Homeownership Replacement Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Section 304(g) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437aaa-3(g)), as amended by 
     section 1002(b) of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations 
     for Additional Disaster Assistance, for Anti-terrorism 
     Initiatives, for Assistance in the Recovery from the Tragedy 
     that Occurred At Oklahoma City, and Rescissions Act, 1995, is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(g) [Reserved.]''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall be effective with respect to any plan for the 
     demolition, disposition, or conversion to homeownership of 
     public housing that is approved by the Secretary after 
     September 30, 1995.
       (c) Uniform Relocation and Real Property Acquisition Act.--
     The Uniform Relocation and Real Property Acquisition Act 
     shall not apply to activities under section 18 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, as amended by this section.

     SEC. 116. REPEAL OF FAMILY INVESTMENT CENTERS; VOUCHER SYSTEM 
                   FOR PUBLIC HOUSING.

       (a) In General.--Section 22 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437t) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 22. VOUCHER SYSTEM FOR PUBLIC HOUSING.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Authorization.--A public housing agency may convert 
     any public housing project (or portion thereof) owned and 
     operated by the public housing agency to a system of tenant-
     based assistance in accordance with this section.
       ``(2) Requirements.--In converting to a tenant-based system 
     of assistance under this section, the public housing agency 
     shall develop a conversion assessment and plan under 
     subsection (b) in consultation with the appropriate public 
     officials, with significant participation by the residents of 
     the project (or portion thereof), which assessment and plan 
     shall--
       ``(A) be consistent with and part of the public housing 
     agency plan; and
       ``(B) describe the conversion and future use or disposition 
     of the public housing project, including an impact analysis 
     on the affected community.
       ``(b) Conversion Assessment and Plan.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of the Public Housing Reform and Empowerment Act of 
     1995, each public housing agency shall assess the status of 
     each public housing project owned and operated by that public 
     housing agency, and shall submit to the Secretary an 
     assessment that includes--
       ``(A) a cost analysis that demonstrates whether or not the 
     cost (both on a net present value basis and in terms of new 
     budget authority requirements) of providing tenant-based 
     assistance under section 8 for the same families in 
     substantially similar dwellings over the same period of time 
     is less expensive than continuing public housing assistance 
     in the public housing project proposed for conversion for the 
     remaining useful life of the project;
       ``(B) an analysis of the market value of the public housing 
     project proposed for conversion both before and after 
     rehabilitation, and before and after conversion;
       ``(C) an analysis of the rental market conditions with 
     respect to the likely success of tenant-based assistance 
     under section 8 in that market for the specific residents of 
     the public housing project proposed for conversion, including 
     an assessment of the availability of decent and safe 
     dwellings renting at or below the payment standard 
     established for tenant-based assistance under section 8 by 
     the public housing agency;
       ``(D) the impact of the conversion to a system of tenant-
     based assistance under this section on the neighborhood in 
     which the public housing project is located; and
       ``(E) a plan that identifies actions, if any, that the 
     public housing agency would take with regard to converting 
     any public housing project or projects (or portions thereof) 
     of the public housing agency to a system of tenant-based 
     assistance.
       ``(2) Streamlined assessment.--At the discretion of the 
     Secretary or at the request of a public housing agency, the 
     Secretary may waive any or all of the requirements of 
     paragraph (1) or otherwise require a streamlined assessment 
     with respect to any public housing project or class of public 
     housing projects.
       ``(3) Implementation of conversion plan.--
       ``(A) In general.--A public housing agency may implement a 
     conversion plan only if the conversion assessment under this 
     section demonstrates that the conversion--
       ``(i) will not be more expensive than continuing to operate 
     the public housing project (or portion thereof) as public 
     housing; and
       ``(ii) will principally benefit the residents of the public 
     housing project (or portion thereof) to be converted, the 
     public housing agency, and the community.
       ``(B) Disapproval.--The Secretary shall disapprove a 
     conversion plan only if the plan is plainly inconsistent with 
     the conversion assessment under subsection (b) or if there is 
     reliable information and data available to the Secretary that 
     contradicts that conversion assessment.
       ``(c) Other Requirements.--To the extent approved by the 
     Secretary, the funds used by the public housing agency to 
     provide tenant-based assistance under section 8 shall be 
     added to the housing assistance payment contract administered 
     by--
       ``(1) the public housing agency; or
       ``(2) any entity administering the contract on behalf of 
     the public housing agency.
       ``(d) Inapplicability to Indian Housing.--This section does 
     not apply to any Indian housing authority.''.
       (b) Savings Provision.--The amendment made by subsection 
     (a) does not affect any contract or other agreement entered 
     into under section 22 of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, as that section existed on the day before the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 117. REPEAL OF FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY; HOMEOWNERSHIP 
                   OPPORTUNITIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 23 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437u) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 23. PUBLIC HOUSING HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES.

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, a public housing agency may, in accordance with this 
     section--
       ``(1) sell any public housing unit in any public housing 
     project of the public housing agency to--
       ``(A) the low-income tenants of the public housing agency; 
     or
       ``(B) any organization serving as a conduit for sales to 
     those persons; and
       ``(2) provide assistance to public housing residents to 
     facilitate the ability of those residents to purchase a 
     principal residence.
       ``(b) Right of First Refusal.--In making any sale under 
     this section, the public housing agency shall initially offer 
     the public housing unit at issue to the tenant or tenants 
     occupying that unit, if any, or to an organization serving as 
     a conduit for sales to any such tenant.
       ``(c) Sale Prices, Terms, and Conditions.--Any sale under 
     this section may involve such prices, terms, and conditions 
     as the public housing agency may determine in accordance with 
     procedures set forth in the public housing agency plan.
       ``(d) Purchase Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each tenant that purchases a dwelling 
     unit under subsection (a) shall, as of the date on which the 
     purchase is made--
       ``(A) intend to occupy the property as a principal 
     residence; and
       ``(B) submit a written certification to the public housing 
     agency that such tenant will occupy the property as a 
     principal residence for a period of not less than 12 months 
     beginning on that date.
       ``(2) Recapture.--Except for good cause, as determined by a 
     public housing agency in the public housing agency plan, if, 
     during the 1-year period beginning on the date on which any 
     tenant acquires a public housing unit under this section, 
     that public housing unit is resold, the public housing agency 
     shall recapture 75 percent of the amount of any proceeds from 
     that resale that exceed the sum of--
       ``(A) the original sale price for the acquisition of the 
     property by the qualifying tenant;
       ``(B) the costs of any improvements made to the property 
     after the date on which the acquisition occurs; and
       ``(C) any closing costs incurred in connection with the 
     acquisition.
       ``(e) Protection of Nonpurchasing Tenants.--If a public 
     housing tenant does not exercise the right of first refusal 
     under subsection (b) with respect to the public housing unit 
     in which the tenant resides, the public housing agency 
     shall--
       ``(1) ensure that either another public housing unit or 
     rental assistance under section 8 is made available to the 
     tenant; and
       ``(2) provide for the payment of the reasonable relocation 
     expenses of the tenant.
       ``(f) Net Proceeds.--
       ``(1) In general.--The net proceeds of any sales under this 
     section remaining after payment of all costs of the sale and 
     any unassumed, unpaid indebtedness owed in connection with 
     the dwelling units sold under this section unless waived by 
     the Secretary, shall be used for purposes relating to low-
     income housing and in accordance with the public housing 
     agency plan.
       ``(2) Indian housing.--The net proceeds described in 
     paragraph (1) may be used by Indian housing authorities for 
     housing for families whose incomes exceed the income levels 
     established under this title for low-income families.
       ``(g) Homeownership Assistance.--From amounts distributed 
     to a public housing agency under section 9, or from other 
     income earned by the public housing agency, the public 
     housing agency may provide assistance to public housing 
     residents to facilitate the ability of those residents to 
     purchase a principal residence, including a residence other 
     than a residence located in a public housing project.''.

[[Page H4748]]

       (b) Conforming Amendments.--The United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 8(y)(7)(A)--
       (A) by striking ``, (ii)'' and inserting ``, and (ii)''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``, and (iii)'' and all that follows before 
     the period at the end; and
       (2) in section 25(l)(2)--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``, consistent with 
     the objectives of the program under section 23,''; and
       (B) by striking the second sentence.
       (c) Savings Provision.--The amendments made by this section 
     do not affect any contract or other agreement entered into 
     under section 23 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     that section existed on the day before the date of enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 118. REVITALIZING SEVERELY DISTRESSED PUBLIC HOUSING.

       Section 24 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437v) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 24. REVITALIZING SEVERELY DISTRESSED PUBLIC HOUSING.

       ``(a) In General.--To the extent provided in advance in 
     appropriations Acts, the Secretary may make grants to public 
     housing agencies for the purposes of--
       ``(1) enabling the demolition of obsolete public housing 
     projects or portions thereof;
       ``(2) revitalizing sites (including remaining public 
     housing units) on which such public housing projects are 
     located;
       ``(3) the provision of replacement housing, which will 
     avoid or lessen concentrations of very low-income families; 
     and
       ``(4) the provision of tenant-based assistance under 
     section 8 for use as replacement housing.
       ``(b) Competition.--The Secretary shall make grants under 
     this section on the basis of a competition, which shall be 
     based on such factors as--
       ``(1) the need for additional resources for addressing a 
     severely distressed public housing project;
       ``(2) the need for affordable housing in the community;
       ``(3) the supply of other housing available and affordable 
     to a family receiving tenant-based assistance under section 
     8; and
       ``(4) the local impact of the proposed revitalization 
     program.
       ``(c) Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may impose such 
     terms and conditions on recipients of grants under this 
     section as the Secretary determines to be appropriate to 
     carry out the purposes of this section, except that such 
     terms and conditions shall be similar to the terms and 
     conditions of either--
       ``(1) the urban revitalization demonstration program 
     authorized under the Departments of Veterans Affairs and 
     Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies 
     Appropriations Acts; or
       ``(2) section 24 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, 
     as such section existed before the date of enactment of the 
     Public Housing Reform and Empower Act of 1995.
       ``(d) Alternative Management.--The Secretary may require 
     any recipient of a grant under this section to make 
     arrangements with an entity other than the public housing 
     agency to carry out the purposes for which the grant was 
     awarded, if the Secretary determines that such action is 
     necessary for the timely and effective achievement of the 
     purposes for which the grant was awarded.
       ``(e) Inapplicability to Indian Housing.--This section does 
     not apply to any Indian housing authority.
       ``(f) Sunset.--No grant may be made under this section on 
     or after October 1, 1998.''.

     SEC. 119. MIXED-INCOME AND MIXED-OWNERSHIP PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--The United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 28. MIXED-INCOME AND MIXED-OWNERSHIP PROJECTS.

       ``(a) In General.--A public housing agency may own, 
     operate, assist, or otherwise participate in one or more 
     mixed-income projects in accordance with this section.
       ``(b) Requirements.--
       ``(1) Mixed-income project.--For purposes of this section, 
     the term `mixed-income project' means a project that meets 
     the requirements of paragraph (2) and that is occupied both 
     by one or more very low-income families and by one or more 
     families that are not very low-income families.
       ``(2) Structure of projects.--Each mixed-income project 
     shall be developed--
       ``(A) in a manner that ensures that units are made 
     available in the project, by master contract, individual 
     lease, or equity interest for occupancy by eligible families 
     identified by the public housing agency for a period of not 
     less than 20 years;
       ``(B) in a manner that ensures that the number of public 
     housing units bears approximately the same proportion to the 
     total number of units in the mixed-income project as the 
     value of the total financial commitment provided by the 
     public housing agency bears to the value of the total 
     financial commitment in the project, or shall not be less 
     than the number of units that could have been developed under 
     the conventional public housing program with the assistance; 
     and
       ``(C) in accordance with such other requirements as the 
     Secretary may prescribe by regulation.
       ``(3) Types of projects.--The term `mixed-income project' 
     includes a project that is developed--
       ``(A) by a public housing agency or by an entity affiliated 
     with a public housing agency;
       ``(B) by a partnership, a limited liability company, or 
     other entity in which the public housing agency (or an entity 
     affiliated with a public housing agency) is a general 
     partner, managing member, or otherwise participates in the 
     activities of that entity;
       ``(C) by any entity that grants to the public housing 
     agency the option to purchase the public housing project 
     during the 20-year period beginning on the date of initial 
     occupancy of the public housing project in accordance with 
     section 42(l)(7) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or
       ``(D) in accordance with such other terms and conditions as 
     the Secretary may prescribe by regulation.
       ``(c) Taxation.--
       ``(1) In general.--A public housing agency may elect to 
     have all public housing units in a mixed-income project 
     subject to local real estate taxes, except that such units 
     shall be eligible at the discretion of the public housing 
     agency for the taxing requirements under section 6(d).
       ``(2) Low-income housing tax credit.--With respect to any 
     unit in a mixed-income project that is assisted pursuant to 
     the low-income housing tax credit under section 42 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the rents charged to the 
     tenants may be set at levels not to exceed the amounts 
     allowable under that section.
       ``(d) Restriction.--No assistance provided under section 9 
     shall be used by a public housing agency in direct support of 
     any unit rented to a family that is not a low-income family, 
     except that this subsection does not apply to the Mutual Help 
     Homeownership Program authorized under section 202 of this 
     Act.
       ``(e) Effect of Certain Contract Terms.--If an entity that 
     owns or operates a mixed-income project under this section 
     enters into a contract with a public housing agency, the 
     terms of which obligate the entity to operate and maintain a 
     specified number of units in the project as public housing 
     units in accordance with the requirements of this Act for the 
     period required by law, such contractual terms may provide 
     that, if, as a result of a reduction in appropriations under 
     section 9, or any other change in applicable law, the public 
     housing agency is unable to fulfill its contractual 
     obligations with respect to those public housing units, that 
     entity may deviate, under procedures and requirements 
     developed through regulations by the Secretary, from 
     otherwise applicable restrictions under this Act regarding 
     rents, income eligibility, and other areas of public housing 
     management with respect to a portion or all of those public 
     housing units, to the extent necessary to preserve the 
     viability of those units while maintaining the low-income 
     character thereof to the maximum extent practicable.''.
       (b) Regulations.--The Secretary shall issue such 
     regulations as may be necessary to promote the development of 
     mixed-income projects, as that term is defined in section 28 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as added by this 
     Act.

     SEC. 120. CONVERSION OF DISTRESSED PUBLIC HOUSING TO TENANT-
                   BASED ASSISTANCE.

       Title I of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 29. CONVERSION OF DISTRESSED PUBLIC HOUSING TO TENANT-
                   BASED ASSISTANCE.

       ``(a) Identification of Units.--To the extent approved in 
     advance in appropriations Acts, each public housing agency 
     shall identify all public housing projects of the public 
     housing agency--
       ``(1) that are on the same or contiguous sites;
       ``(2) that the public housing agency determines to be 
     distressed, which determination shall be made in accordance 
     with guidelines established by the Secretary, which 
     guidelines shall be based on the criteria established in the 
     Final Report of the National Commission on Severely 
     Distressed Public Housing (August 1992);
       ``(3) identified as distressed housing under paragraph (2) 
     for which the public housing agency cannot assure the long-
     term viability as public housing through reasonable 
     modernization expenses, density reduction, achievement of a 
     broader range of family income, or other measures; and
       ``(4) for which the estimated cost, during the remaining 
     useful life of the project, of continued operation and 
     modernization as public housing exceeds the estimated cost, 
     during the remaining useful life of the project, of providing 
     tenant-based assistance under section 8 for all families in 
     occupancy, based on appropriate indicators of cost (such as 
     the percentage of total development costs required for 
     modernization).
       ``(b) Consultation.--Each public housing agency shall 
     consult with the appropriate public housing tenants and the 
     appropriate unit of general local government in identifying 
     any public housing projects under subsection (a).
       ``(c) Removal of Units From the Inventories of Public 
     Housing Agencies.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Development of plan.--Each public housing agency 
     shall develop and, to the extent provided in advance in 
     appropriations Acts, carry out a 5-year plan in conjunction 
     with the Secretary for the removal of public housing units 
     identified under subsection (a)

[[Page H4749]]

     from the inventory of the public housing agency and the 
     annual contributions contract.
       ``(B) Approval of plan.--The plan required under 
     subparagraph (A) shall--
       ``(i) be included as part of the public housing agency 
     plan;
       ``(ii) be certified by the relevant local official to be in 
     accordance with the comprehensive housing affordability 
     strategy under title I of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1992; and
       ``(iii) include a description of any disposition and 
     demolition plan for the public housing units.
       ``(2) Extensions.--The Secretary may extend the 5-year 
     deadline described in paragraph (1) by not more than an 
     additional 5 years if the Secretary makes a determination 
     that the deadline is impracticable.
       ``(d) Conversion to Tenant-Based Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--With respect to any public housing 
     project that has not received a grant for assistance under 
     the urban revitalization demonstration program authorized 
     under the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and 
     Urban Development and Independent Agencies Appropriations 
     Acts or under section 24 of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937, the Secretary shall make authority available to a 
     public housing agency to provide assistance under this Act to 
     families residing in any public housing project that is 
     removed from the inventory of the public housing agency and 
     the annual contributions contract pursuant to this section.
       ``(2) Plan requirements.--Each plan under subsection (c) 
     shall require the agency to--
       ``(A) notify families residing in the public housing 
     project, consistent with any guidelines issued by the 
     Secretary governing such notifications, that--
       ``(i) the public housing project will be removed from the 
     inventory of the public housing agency; and
       ``(ii) the families displaced by such action will receive 
     tenant-based or project-based assistance or occupancy in a 
     unit operated or assisted by the public housing agency;
       ``(B) provide any necessary counseling for families 
     displaced by such action; and
       ``(C) provide any reasonable relocation expenses for 
     families displaced by such action.
       ``(e) Removal by Secretary.--The Secretary shall take 
     appropriate actions to ensure removal of any public housing 
     project identified under subsection (a) from the inventory of 
     a public housing agency, if the public housing agency fails 
     to adequately develop a plan under subsection (c) with 
     respect to that project, or fails to adequately implement 
     such plan in accordance with the terms of the plan.
       ``(f) Administration.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may require a public 
     housing agency to provide to the Secretary or to public 
     housing tenants such information as the Secretary considers 
     to be necessary for the administration of this section.
       ``(2) Applicability of section 18.--Section 18 does not 
     apply to the demolition of public housing projects removed 
     from the inventory of the public housing agency under this 
     section.
       ``(g) Inapplicability to Indian Housing.--This section does 
     not apply to any Indian housing authority.''.

     SEC. 121. PUBLIC HOUSING MORTGAGES AND SECURITY INTERESTS.

       Title I of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 30. PUBLIC HOUSING MORTGAGES AND SECURITY INTERESTS.

       ``(a) General Authorization.--The Secretary may, upon such 
     terms and conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, 
     authorize a public housing agency to mortgage or otherwise 
     grant a security interest in any public housing project or 
     other property of the public housing agency.
       ``(b) Terms and Conditions.--
       ``(1) Criteria for approval.--In making any authorization 
     under subsection (a), the Secretary may consider--
       ``(A) the ability of the public housing agency to use the 
     proceeds of the mortgage or security interest for low-income 
     housing uses;
       ``(B) the ability of the public housing agency to make 
     payments on the mortgage or security interest; and
       ``(C) such other criteria as the Secretary may specify.
       ``(2) Terms and conditions of mortgages and security 
     interests obtained.--Each mortgage or security interest 
     granted under this section shall be--
       ``(A) for a term that--
       ``(i) is consistent with the terms of private loans in the 
     market area in which the public housing project or property 
     at issue is located; and
       ``(ii) does not exceed 30 years; and
       ``(B) subject to conditions that are consistent with the 
     conditions to which private loans in the market area in which 
     the subject project or other property is located are subject.
       ``(3) No full faith and credit.--No action taken under this 
     section shall result in any liability to the Federal 
     Government.''.

     SEC. 122. LINKING SERVICES TO PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS.

       Title I of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 31. SERVICES FOR PUBLIC HOUSING RESIDENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--To the extent provided in advance in 
     appropriations Acts, the Secretary may make grants to public 
     housing agencies (including Indian housing authorities) on 
     behalf of public housing residents, or directly to resident 
     management corporations, resident councils, or resident 
     organizations (including nonprofit entities supported by 
     residents), for the purposes of providing a program of 
     supportive services and resident empowerment activities to 
     assist public housing residents in becoming economically 
     self-sufficient.
       ``(b) Eligible Activities.--Grantees under this section may 
     use such amounts only for activities on or near the public 
     housing agency or public housing project that are designed to 
     promote the self-sufficiency of public housing residents, 
     including activities relating to--
       ``(1) physical improvements to a public housing project in 
     order to provide space for supportive services for residents;
       ``(2) the provision of service coordinators;
       ``(3) the provision of services related to work readiness, 
     including academic skills, job training, job search skills, 
     tutoring, adult literacy, transportation, and child care, 
     except that grants received under this section shall not 
     comprise more than 50 percent of the costs of providing such 
     services;
       ``(4) resident management activities; and
       ``(5) other activities designed to improve the economic 
     self-sufficiency of residents.
       ``(c) Funding Distribution.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except for amounts provided under 
     subsection (d), the Secretary may distribute amounts made 
     available under this section on the basis of a competition or 
     a formula, as appropriate.
       ``(2) Factors for distribution.--Factors for distribution 
     under paragraph (1) shall include--
       ``(A) the demonstrated capacity of the applicant to carry 
     out a program of supportive services or resident empowerment 
     activities; and
       ``(B) the ability of the applicant to leverage additional 
     resources for the provision of services.
       ``(d) Funding for Resident Councils.--Of amounts 
     appropriated for activities under this section, not less than 
     $25,000,000 shall be provided directly to resident councils, 
     resident organizations, and resident management 
     corporations.''.

     SEC. 123. APPLICABILITY TO INDIAN HOUSING.

       In accordance with section 201(b)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, except as otherwise provided in this 
     Act, this title and the amendments made by this title shall 
     apply to public housing developed or operated pursuant to a 
     contract between the Secretary and an Indian housing 
     authority, as that term is defined in section 3(b) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937.
                 TITLE II--SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE

     SEC. 201. MERGER OF THE CERTIFICATE AND VOUCHER PROGRAMS.

       Section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f(o)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(o) Voucher Program.--
       ``(1) Payment standard.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary may provide assistance to 
     public housing agencies for tenant-based assistance using a 
     payment standard established in accordance with subparagraph 
     (B). The payment standard shall be used to determine the 
     monthly assistance that may be paid for any family, as 
     provided in paragraph (2).
       ``(B) Establishment of payment standard.--The payment 
     standard shall not exceed 120 percent of the fair market 
     rental established under subsection (c) and shall be not less 
     than 90 percent of that fair market rental.
       ``(C) Set-aside.--The Secretary may set aside not more than 
     5 percent of the budget authority available under this 
     subsection as an adjustment pool. The Secretary shall use 
     amounts in the adjustment pool to make adjusted payments to 
     public housing agencies under subparagraph (A), to ensure 
     continued affordability, if the Secretary determines that 
     additional assistance for such purpose is necessary, based on 
     documentation submitted by a public housing agency.
       ``(D) Approval.--The Secretary may require a public housing 
     agency to submit the payment standard of the public housing 
     agency to the Secretary for approval.
       ``(E) Review.--The Secretary--
       ``(i) shall monitor rent burdens and review any payment 
     standard that results in a significant percentage of the 
     families occupying units of any size paying more than 30 
     percent of adjusted income for rent; and
       ``(ii) may require a public housing agency to modify the 
     payment standard of the public housing agency based on the 
     results of that review.
       ``(2) Amount of monthly assistance payment.--
       ``(A) Families receiving tenant-based assistance; rent does 
     not exceed payment standard.--For a family receiving tenant-
     based assistance under this title, if the rent for that 
     family (including the amount allowed for tenant-paid 
     utilities) does not exceed the payment standard established 
     under paragraph (1), the monthly assistance payment to that 
     family shall be equal to the amount by which the rent exceeds 
     the greatest of the following amounts, rounded to the nearest 
     dollar:
       ``(i) Thirty percent of the monthly adjusted income of the 
     family.
       ``(ii) Ten percent of the monthly income of the family.
       ``(iii) If the family is receiving payments for welfare 
     assistance from a public agency

[[Page H4750]]

     and a part of those payments, adjusted in accordance with the 
     actual housing costs of the family, is specifically 
     designated by that agency to meet the housing costs of the 
     family, the portion of those payments that is so designated.
       ``(B) Families receiving tenant-based assistance; rent 
     exceeds payment standard.--For a family receiving tenant-
     based assistance under this title, if the rent for that 
     family (including the amount allowed for tenant-paid 
     utilities) exceeds the payment standard established under 
     paragraph (1), the monthly assistance payment to that family 
     shall be equal to the amount by which the applicable payment 
     standard exceeds the greatest of the following amounts, 
     rounded to the nearest dollar:
       ``(i) Thirty percent of the monthly adjusted income of the 
     family.
       ``(ii) Ten percent of the monthly income of the family.
       ``(iii) If the family is receiving payments for welfare 
     assistance from a public agency and a part of those payments, 
     adjusted in accordance with the actual housing costs of the 
     family, is specifically designated by that agency to meet the 
     housing costs of the family, the portion of those payments 
     that is so designated.
       ``(C) Families receiving project-based assistance.--For a 
     family receiving project-based assistance under this title, 
     the rent that the family is required to pay shall be 
     determined in accordance with section 3(a)(1), and the amount 
     of the housing assistance payment shall be determined in 
     accordance with subsection (c)(3) of this section.
       ``(3) Forty percent limit.--At the time a family initially 
     receives tenant-based assistance under this title with 
     respect to any dwelling unit, the total amount that a family 
     may be required to pay for rent may not exceed 40 percent of 
     the monthly adjusted income of the family.
       ``(4) Eligible families.--At the time a family initially 
     receives assistance under this subsection, a family shall 
     qualify as--
       ``(A) a very low-income family;
       ``(B) a family previously assisted under this title;
       ``(C) a low-income family that meets eligibility criteria 
     specified by the public housing agency;
       ``(D) a family that qualifies to receive a voucher in 
     connection with a homeownership program approved under title 
     IV of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act; 
     or
       ``(E) a family that qualifies to receive a voucher under 
     section 223 or 226 of the Low-Income Housing Preservation and 
     Resident Homeownership Act of 1990.
       ``(5) Annual review of family income.--Each public housing 
     agency shall, not less frequently than annually, conduct a 
     review of the family income of each family receiving 
     assistance under this subsection.
       ``(6) Selection of families.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each public housing agency may establish 
     local preferences consistent with the public housing agency 
     plan submitted by the public housing agency under section 5A.
       ``(B) Eviction for drug-related activity.--Any individual 
     or family evicted from housing assisted under this subsection 
     by reason of drug-related criminal activity (as defined in 
     subsection (f)(5)) shall not be eligible for housing 
     assistance under this title during the 3-year period 
     beginning on the date of such eviction, unless the evicted 
     tenant successfully completes a rehabilitation program 
     approved by the public housing agency (which shall include a 
     waiver for any member of the family of an individual 
     prohibited from receiving assistance under this title whom 
     the public housing agency determines clearly did not 
     participate in and had no knowledge of that criminal 
     activity, or if the circumstances leading to the eviction no 
     longer exist).
       ``(C) Selection of tenants.--The selection of tenants shall 
     be made by the owner of the dwelling unit, subject to the 
     annual contributions contract between the Secretary and the 
     public housing agency.
       ``(7) Lease.--Each housing assistance payment contract 
     entered into by the public housing agency and the owner of a 
     dwelling unit--
       ``(A) shall provide that the screening and selection of 
     families for those units shall be the function of the owner;
       ``(B) shall provide that the lease between the tenant and 
     the owner shall be for a term of not less than 1 year, except 
     that the public housing agency may approve a shorter term for 
     an initial lease between the tenant and the dwelling unit 
     owner if the public housing agency determines that such 
     shorter term would improve housing opportunities for the 
     tenant;
       ``(C) except as otherwise provided by the public housing 
     agency, may provide for a termination of the tenancy of a 
     tenant assisted under this subsection after 1 year;
       ``(D) shall provide that the dwelling unit owner shall 
     offer leases to tenants assisted under this subsection that--
       ``(i) are in a standard form used in the locality by the 
     dwelling unit owner; and
       ``(ii) contain terms and conditions that--

       ``(I) are consistent with State, tribal, and local law; and
       ``(II) apply generally to tenants in the property who are 
     not assisted under this section;

       ``(E) shall provide that the dwelling unit owner may not 
     terminate the tenancy of any person assisted under this 
     subsection during the term of a lease that meets the 
     requirements of this section unless the owner determines, on 
     the same basis and in the same manner as would apply to a 
     tenant in the property who does not receive assistance under 
     this subsection, that--
       ``(i) the tenant has committed a serious violation of the 
     terms and conditions of the lease;
       ``(ii) the tenant has violated applicable Federal, State, 
     or local law; or
       ``(iii) other good cause for termination of the tenancy 
     exists; and
       ``(F) shall provide that any termination of tenancy under 
     this subsection shall be preceded by the provision of written 
     notice by the owner to the tenant specifying the grounds for 
     that action, and any relief shall be consistent with 
     applicable State, tribal, and local law.
       ``(8) Inspection of units by public housing agencies.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     for each dwelling unit for which a housing assistance payment 
     contract is established under this subsection, the public 
     housing agency shall--
       ``(i) inspect the unit before any assistance payment is 
     made to determine whether the dwelling unit meets housing 
     quality standards for decent and safe housing established--

       ``(I) by the Secretary for purposes of this subsection; or
       ``(II) by local housing codes or by codes adopted by public 
     housing agencies that--

       ``(aa) meet or exceed housing quality standards; and
       ``(bb) do not severely restrict housing choice; and
       ``(ii) make periodic inspections during the contract term.
       ``(B) Leasing of units owned by public housing agency.--If 
     an eligible family assisted under this subsection leases a 
     dwelling unit that is owned by a public housing agency 
     administering assistance under this subsection, the Secretary 
     shall require the unit of general local government, or 
     another entity approved by the Secretary, to make inspections 
     and rent determinations as required by this paragraph.
       ``(9) Expedited inspection procedures.--
       ``(A) Demonstration project.--Not later than 1 year after 
     the date of enactment of the Public Housing Reform and 
     Empowerment Act of 1995, the Secretary shall establish a 
     demonstration project to identify efficient procedures to 
     determine whether units meet housing quality standards for 
     decent and safe housing established by the Secretary.
       ``(B) Procedures included.--The demonstration project shall 
     include the development of procedures to be followed in any 
     case in which a family receiving tenant-based assistance 
     under this subsection is moving into a dwelling unit, or in 
     which a family notifies the public housing agency that a 
     dwelling unit, in which the family no longer resides, fails 
     to meet housing quality standards. The Secretary shall also 
     establish procedures for the expedited repair and inspection 
     of units that do not meet housing quality standards.
       ``(C) Recommendations.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date on which the demonstration under this paragraph is 
     implemented, the Secretary shall submit a report to the 
     Congress, which shall include an analysis of the 
     demonstration and any recommendations for changes to the 
     demonstration.
       ``(10) Vacated units.--If a family vacates a dwelling unit, 
     no assistance payment may be made under this subsection for 
     the dwelling unit after the month during which the unit was 
     vacated.
       ``(11) Rent.--
       ``(A) Reasonable market rent.--The rent for dwelling units 
     for which a housing assistance payment contract is 
     established under this subsection shall be reasonable in 
     comparison with rents charged for comparable dwelling units 
     in the private, unassisted, local market.
       ``(B) Negotiated rent.--A public housing agency shall, at 
     the request of a family receiving tenant-based assistance 
     under this subsection, assist that family in negotiating a 
     reasonable rent with a dwelling unit owner. A public housing 
     agency shall review the rent for a unit under consideration 
     by the family (and all rent increases for units under lease 
     by the family) to determine whether the rent (or rent 
     increase) requested by the owner is reasonable. If a public 
     housing agency determines that the rent (or rent increase) 
     for a dwelling unit is not reasonable, the public housing 
     agency shall not make housing assistance payments to the 
     owner under this subsection with respect to that unit.
       ``(C) Units exempt from local rent control.--If a dwelling 
     unit for which a housing assistance payment contract is 
     established under this subsection is exempt from local rent 
     control provisions during the term of that contract, the rent 
     for that unit shall be reasonable in comparison with other 
     units in the market area that are exempt from local rent 
     control provisions.
       ``(D) Timely payments.--Each public housing agency shall 
     make timely payment of any amounts due to a dwelling unit 
     owner under this subsection. The housing assistance payment 
     contract between the owner and the public housing agency may 
     provide for penalties for the late payment of amounts due 
     under the contract, which shall be imposed on the public 
     housing agency in accordance with generally accepted 
     practices in the local housing market.

[[Page H4751]]

       ``(E) Penalties.--Unless otherwise authorized by the 
     Secretary, each public housing agency shall pay any penalties 
     from administrative fees collected by the public housing 
     agency, except that no penalty shall be imposed if the late 
     payment is due to factors that the Secretary determines are 
     beyond the control of the public housing agency.
       ``(12) Manufactured housing.--
       ``(A) In general.--A public housing agency may make 
     assistance payments in accordance with this subsection on 
     behalf of a family that utilizes a manufactured home as a 
     principal place of residence. Such payments may be made for 
     the rental of the real property on which the manufactured 
     home owned by any such family is located.
       ``(B) Rent calculation.--
       ``(i) Charges included.--For assistance pursuant to this 
     paragraph, the rent for the space on which a manufactured 
     home is located and with respect to which assistance payments 
     are to be made shall include maintenance and management 
     charges and tenant-paid utilities.
       ``(ii) Payment standard.--The public housing agency shall 
     establish a payment standard for the purpose of determining 
     the monthly assistance that may be paid for any family under 
     this paragraph. The payment standard may not exceed an amount 
     approved or established by the Secretary.
       ``(iii) Monthly assistance payment.--The monthly assistance 
     payment under this paragraph shall be determined in 
     accordance with paragraph (2).
       ``(13) Contract for assistance payments.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary enters into an annual 
     contributions contract under this subsection with a public 
     housing agency pursuant to which the public housing agency 
     will enter into a housing assistance payment contract with 
     respect to an existing structure under this subsection--
       ``(i) the housing assistance payment contract may not be 
     attached to the structure unless the owner agrees to 
     rehabilitate or newly construct the structure other than with 
     assistance under this Act, and otherwise complies with this 
     section; and
       ``(ii) the public housing agency may approve a housing 
     assistance payment contract for such existing structure for 
     not more than 15 percent of the funding available for tenant-
     based assistance administered by the public housing agency 
     under this section.
       ``(B) Extension of contract term.--In the case of a housing 
     assistance payment contract that applies to a structure under 
     this paragraph, a public housing agency shall enter into a 
     contract with the owner, contingent upon the future 
     availability of appropriated funds for the purpose of 
     renewing expiring contracts for assistance payments, as 
     provided in appropriations Acts, to extend the term of the 
     underlying housing assistance payment contract for such 
     period as the Secretary determines to be appropriate to 
     achieve long-term affordability of the housing. The contract 
     shall obligate the owner to have such extensions of the 
     underlying housing assistance payment contract accepted by 
     the owner and the successors in interest of the owner.
       ``(C) Rent calculation.--For project-based assistance under 
     this paragraph, housing assistance payment contracts shall 
     establish rents and provide for rent adjustments in 
     accordance with subsection (c).
       ``(D) Adjusted rents.--With respect to rents adjusted under 
     this paragraph--
       ``(i) the adjusted rent for any unit shall not exceed the 
     rent for a comparable unassisted unit of similar quality, 
     type, and age in the market area; and
       ``(ii) the provisions of subsection (c)(2)(A) do not apply.
       ``(14) Inapplicability to tenant-based assistance.--
     Subsection (c) does not apply to tenant-based assistance 
     under this subsection.
       ``(15) Homeownership option.--
       ``(A) In general.--A public housing agency providing 
     assistance under this subsection may, at the option of the 
     agency, provide assistance for homeownership under subsection 
     (y).
       ``(B) Alternative administration.--A public housing agency 
     may contract with a nonprofit organization to administer a 
     homeownership program under subsection (y).
       ``(16) Indian housing programs.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, in carrying out this section, the Secretary 
     shall establish such separate formulas and programs as may be 
     necessary to carry out housing programs for Indians under 
     this section.''.

     SEC. 202. REPEAL OF FEDERAL PREFERENCES.

       (a) Section 8 Existing and Moderate Rehabilitation.--
     Section 8(d)(1)(A) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437f(d)(1)(A)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(A) the selection of tenants shall be the function of the 
     owner, subject to the annual contributions contract between 
     the Secretary and the agency, except that with respect to the 
     certificate and moderate rehabilitation programs only, for 
     the purpose of selecting families to be assisted, the public 
     housing agency may establish, after public notice and an 
     opportunity for public comment, a written system of 
     preferences for selection that are not inconsistent with the 
     comprehensive housing affordability strategy for the 
     jurisdiction in which the project is located, in accordance 
     with title I of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act;''.
       (b) Section 8 New Construction and Substantial 
     Rehabilitation.--
       (1) Repeal.--Section 545(c) of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f note) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) [Reserved.]''.
       (2) Prohibition.--The provisions of section 8(e)(2) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as in existence on the day 
     before October 1, 1983, that require tenant selection 
     preferences shall not apply with respect to--
       (A) housing constructed or substantially rehabilitated 
     pursuant to assistance provided under section 8(b)(2) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as in existence on the day 
     before October 1, 1983; or
       (B) projects financed under section 202 of the Housing Act 
     of 1959, as in existence on the day before the date of 
     enactment of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act.
       (c) Rent Supplements.--Section 101(k) of the Housing and 
     Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s(k)) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(k) [Reserved.]''.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) United states housing act of 1937.--The United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended--
       (A) in section 6(o), by striking ``preference rules 
     specified in'' and inserting ``written selection criteria 
     established pursuant to'';
       (B) in section 7(a)(2), by striking ``according to the 
     preferences for occupancy under'' and inserting ``in 
     accordance with the written selection criteria established 
     pursuant to'';
       (C) in section 7(a)(3), by striking ``who qualify for 
     preferences for occupancy under'' and inserting ``who meet 
     the written selection criteria established pursuant to'';
       (D) in section 8(d)(2)(A), by striking the last sentence;
       (E) in section 8(d)(2)(H), by striking ``Notwithstanding 
     subsection (d)(1)(A)(i), an'' and inserting ``An''; and
       (F) in section 16(c), in the second sentence, by striking 
     ``the system of preferences established by the agency 
     pursuant to section 6(c)(4)(A)(ii)'' and inserting ``the 
     written selection criteria established by the public housing 
     agency pursuant to section 6(c)(4)(A)''.
       (2) Cranston-gonzalez national affordable housing act.--The 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 
     12704 et seq.) is amended--
       (A) in section 455(a)(2)(D)(iii), by striking ``would 
     qualify for a preference under'' and inserting ``meet the 
     written selection criteria established pursuant to''; and
       (B) in section 522(f)(6)(B), by striking ``any preferences 
     for such assistance under section 8(d)(1)(A)(i)'' and 
     inserting ``the written selection criteria established 
     pursuant to section 8(d)(1)(A)''.
       (3) Low-income housing preservation and resident 
     homeownership act of 1990.--The second sentence of section 
     226(b)(6)(B) of the Low-Income Housing Preservation and 
     Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (12 U.S.C. 4116(b)(6)(B)) 
     is amended by striking ``requirement for giving preferences 
     to certain categories of eligible families under'' and 
     inserting ``written selection criteria established pursuant 
     to''.
       (4) Housing and community development act of 1992.--Section 
     655 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42 
     U.S.C. 13615) is amended by striking ``preferences for 
     occupancy'' and all that follows before the period at the end 
     and inserting ``selection criteria established by the owner 
     to elderly families according to such written selection 
     criteria, and to near-elderly families according to such 
     written selection criteria, respectively''.
       (5) References in other law.--Any reference in any Federal 
     law other than any provision of any law amended by paragraphs 
     (1) through (5) of this subsection or section 201 to the 
     preferences for assistance under section 6(c)(4)(A)(i), 
     8(d)(1)(A)(i), or 8(o)(3)(B) of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937, as those sections existed on the day before the 
     effective date of this title, shall be considered to refer to 
     the written selection criteria established pursuant to 
     section 6(c)(4)(A), 8(d)(1)(A), or 8(o)(6)(A), respectively, 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended by this 
     subsection and section 201 of this Act.

     SEC. 203. PORTABILITY.

       Section 8(r) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f(r)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``assisted under subsection (b) or (o)'' 
     and inserting ``receiving tenant-based assistance under 
     subsection (o)''; and
       (B) by striking ``the same State'' and all that follows 
     before the semicolon and inserting ``any area in which a 
     program is being administered under this section'';
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``(b) or''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``The 
     Secretary shall establish procedures for the compensation of 
     public housing agencies that issue vouchers to families that 
     move into or out of the jurisdiction of the public housing 
     agency under portability procedures. The Secretary may 
     reserve amounts available for assistance under subsection (o) 
     to compensate those public housing agencies.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Lease violations.--A family may not receive a voucher 
     from a public housing agency and move to another jurisdiction

[[Page H4752]]

     under the tenant-based assistance program if the family has 
     moved out of the assisted dwelling unit of the family in 
     violation of a lease.''.

     SEC. 204. LEASING TO VOUCHER HOLDERS.

       Section 8(t) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f(t)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(t) [Reserved.]''.

     SEC. 205. HOMEOWNERSHIP OPTION.

       Section 8(y) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f(y)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by inserting before the semicolon 
     ``, or owns or is acquiring shares in a cooperative'';
       (2) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``(i) participates'' 
     and all that follows through ``(ii) demonstrates'' and 
     inserting ``demonstrates'';
       (3) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(2) Determination of amount of assistance.--
       ``(A) Monthly expenses do not exceed payment standard.--If 
     the monthly homeownership expenses, as determined in 
     accordance with requirements established by the Secretary, do 
     not exceed the payment standard, the monthly assistance 
     payment shall be the amount by which the homeownership 
     expenses exceed the highest of the following amounts, rounded 
     to the nearest dollar:
       ``(i) Thirty percent of the monthly adjusted income of the 
     family.
       ``(ii) Ten percent of the monthly income of the family.
       ``(iii) If the family is receiving payments for welfare 
     assistance from a public agency, and a portion of those 
     payments, adjusted in accordance with the actual housing 
     costs of the family, is specifically designated by that 
     agency to meet the housing costs of the family, the portion 
     of those payments that is so designated.
       ``(B) Monthly expenses exceed payment standard.--If the 
     monthly homeownership expenses, as determined in accordance 
     with requirements established by the Secretary, exceed the 
     payment standard, the monthly assistance payment shall be the 
     amount by which the applicable payment standard exceeds the 
     highest of the following amounts, rounded to the nearest 
     dollar:
       ``(i) Thirty percent of the monthly adjusted income of the 
     family.
       ``(ii) Ten percent of the monthly income of the family.
       ``(iii) If the family is receiving payments for welfare 
     assistance from a public agency and a part of those payments, 
     adjusted in accordance with the actual housing costs of the 
     family, is specifically designated by that agency to meet the 
     housing costs of the family, the portion of those payments 
     that is so designated.'';
       (4) by striking paragraphs (3) through (5); and
       (5) by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (8) as 
     paragraphs (3) through (5), respectively.

     SEC. 206. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Contract Provisions and Requirements.--Section 
     6(p)(1)(B) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437d(p)(1)(B)) is amended by striking ``holding 
     certificates and vouchers'' and inserting ``receiving tenant-
     based assistance''.
       (b) Lower Income Housing Assistance.--Section 8 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking the second and third 
     sentences;
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Rental 
     Certificates and''; and
       (B) in the first undesignated paragraph--
       (i) by striking ``The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary''; and
       (ii) by striking the second sentence;
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) by striking ``(A)''; and
       (ii) by striking subparagraph (B);
       (B) in the first sentence of paragraph (4), by striking 
     ``or by a family that qualifies to receive'' and all that 
     follows through ``1990'';
       (C) by striking paragraph (5) and redesignating paragraph 
     (6) as paragraph (5);
       (D) by striking paragraph (7) and redesignating paragraphs 
     (8) through (10) as paragraphs (6) through (8), respectively;
       (E) in paragraph (6), as redesignated, by inserting 
     ``(other than a contract under section 8(o))'' after 
     ``section'';
       (F) in paragraph (7), as redesignated, by striking ``(but 
     not less than 90 days in the case of housing certificates or 
     vouchers under subsection (b) or (o))'' and inserting ``, 
     other than a contract under subsection (o)''; and
       (G) in paragraph (8), as redesignated, by striking 
     ``housing certificates or vouchers under subsection (b) or 
     (o)'' and inserting ``tenant-based assistance under this 
     section'';
       (4) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking ``on or near such 
     premises''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking the third sentence and 
     all that follows through the end of the subparagraph; and
       (ii) by striking subparagraphs (B) through (E) and 
     redesignating subparagraphs (F) through (H) as subparagraphs 
     (B) through (D), respectively;
       ``(B) [Reserved.]'';
       (5) in subsection (f)--
       (A) in paragraph (6), by striking ``(d)(2)'' and inserting 
     ``(o)(11)''; and
       (B) in paragraph (7)--
       (i) by striking ``(b) or''; and
       (ii) by inserting before the period the following: ``and 
     that provides for the eligible family to select suitable 
     housing and to move to other suitable housing'';
       (6) by striking subsection (j) and inserting the following:
       ``(j) [Reserved.]'';
       (7) by striking subsection (n) and inserting the following:
       ``(n) [Reserved.]'';
       (8) in subsection (q)--
       (A) in the first sentence of paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``and housing voucher programs under subsections (b) and 
     (o)'' and inserting ``program under this section'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)(A)(i), by striking ``and housing 
     voucher programs under subsections (b) and (o)'' and 
     inserting ``program under this section''; and
       (C) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``and housing voucher 
     programs under subsections (b) and (o)'' and inserting 
     ``program under this section'';
       (9) in subsection (u), by striking ``certificates or'' each 
     place that term appears; and
       (10) in subsection (x)(2), by striking ``housing 
     certificate assistance'' and inserting ``tenant-based 
     assistance''.
       (c) Public Housing Homeownership and Management 
     Opportunities.--Section 21(b)(3) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437s(b)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``(at the option of 
     the family) a certificate under section 8(b)(1) or a housing 
     voucher under section 8(o)'' and inserting ``tenant-based 
     assistance under section 8''; and
       (2) by striking the second sentence.
       (d) Documentation of Excessive Rent Burdens.--Section 
     550(b) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1437f note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``assisted under the 
     certificate and voucher programs established'' and inserting 
     ``receiving tenant-based assistance'';
       (2) in the first sentence of paragraph (2)--
       (A) by striking ``, for each of the certificate program and 
     the voucher program'' and inserting ``for the tenant-based 
     assistance under section 8''; and
       (B) by striking ``participating in the program'' and 
     inserting ``receiving tenant-based assistance''; and
       (3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``assistance under the 
     certificate or voucher program'' and inserting ``tenant-based 
     assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937''.
       (e) Grants for Community Residences and Services.--Section 
     861(b)(1)(D) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12910(b)(1)(D)) is amended by striking 
     ``certificates or vouchers'' and inserting ``assistance''.
       (f) Section 8 Certificates and Vouchers.--Section 931 of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1437c note) is amended by striking ``assistance under 
     the certificate and voucher programs under sections 8(b) and 
     (o) of such Act'' and inserting ``tenant-based assistance 
     under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937''.
       (g) Assistance for Displaced Tenants.--Section 223(a) of 
     the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 (12 U.S.C. 
     4113(a)) is amended by striking ``assistance under the 
     certificate and voucher programs under sections 8(b) and 
     8(o)'' and inserting ``tenant-based assistance under section 
     8''.
       (h) Rural Housing Preservation Grants.--Section 533(a) of 
     the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490m(a)) is amended in 
     the second sentence by striking ``assistance payments as 
     provided by section 8(o)'' and inserting ``tenant-based 
     assistance as provided under section 8''.
       (i) Repeal of Moving to Opportunities for Fair Housing 
     Demonstration.--Section 152 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note) is repealed.
       (j) Preferences for Elderly Families and Persons.--Section 
     655 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42 
     U.S.C. 13615) is amended by striking ``the first sentence of 
     section 8(o)(3)(B)'' and inserting ``section 8(o)(6)(A)''.
       (k) Assistance for Troubled Multifamily Housing Projects.--
     Section 201(m)(2)(A) of the Housing and Community Development 
     Amendments of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1a(m)(2)(A)) is amended 
     by striking ``section 8(b)(1)'' and inserting ``section 8''.
       (l) Management and Disposition of Multifamily Housing 
     Projects.--Section 203(g)(2) of the Housing and Community 
     Development Amendments of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 1701z-11(g)(2)), as 
     amended by section 101(b) of the Multifamily Housing Property 
     Disposition Reform Act of 1994, is amended by striking 
     ``8(o)(3)(B)'' and inserting ``8(o)(6)(A)''.

     SEC. 207. IMPLEMENTATION.

       In accordance with the negotiated rulemaking procedures set 
     forth in subchapter III of chapter 5 of title 5, United 
     States Code, the Secretary shall issue such regulations as 
     may be necessary to implement the amendments made by this 
     title after notice and opportunity for public comment.

     SEC. 208. DEFINITION.

       For the purposes of this title, public housing agency has 
     the same meaning as section 3 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937, except that such term shall also include any

[[Page H4753]]

     other nonprofit entity serving more than one local government 
     jurisdiction that was administering the section 8 tenant-
     based assistance program pursuant to a contract with the 
     Secretary or a public housing agency prior to the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 209. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--The amendments made by this title shall 
     become effective not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (b) Conversion Assistance.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary may provide for the 
     conversion of assistance under the certificate and voucher 
     programs under subsections (b) and (o) of section 8 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937, as those sections existed 
     on the day before the effective date of the amendments made 
     by this title, to the voucher program established by the 
     amendments made by this title.
       (2) Continued applicability.--The Secretary may apply the 
     provisions of the United States Housing Act of 1937, or any 
     other provision of law amended by this title, as those 
     provisions existed on the day before the effective date of 
     the amendments made by this title, to assistance obligated by 
     the Secretary before that effective date for the certificate 
     or voucher program under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, if the Secretary determines that such 
     action is necessary for simplification of program 
     administration, avoidance of hardship, or other good cause.
                  TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. PUBLIC HOUSING FLEXIBILITY IN THE CHAS.

       Section 105(b) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12705(b)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating the second paragraph designated as 
     paragraph (17) (as added by section 681(2) of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992) as paragraph (20);
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (17) (as added by section 
     220(b)(3) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1992) as paragraph (19);
       (3) by redesignating the second paragraph designated as 
     paragraph (16) (as added by section 220(c)(1) of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1992) as paragraph (18);
       (4) in paragraph (16)--
       (A) by striking the period at the end and inserting a 
     semicolon; and
       (B) by striking ``(16)'' and inserting ``(17)'';
       (5) by redesignating paragraphs (11) through (15) as 
     paragraphs (12) through (16), respectively; and
       (6) by inserting after paragraph (10) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(11) describe the manner in which the plan of the 
     jurisdiction will help address the needs of public housing 
     and coordinate with the local public housing agency plan 
     under section 5A of the United States Housing Act of 1937;''.

     SEC. 302. REPEAL OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS.

       (a) Maximum Annual Limitation on Rent Increases Resulting 
     From Employment.--
       (1) Repeal.--Section 957 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12714) is repealed.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall be deemed to have the same effective date as section 
     957 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act.
       (b) Economic Independence.--
       (1) Repeal.--Section 923 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 12714 note) is repealed.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall be deemed to have the same effective date as section 
     923 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992.

     SEC. 303. DETERMINATION OF INCOME LIMITS.

       (a) In General.--Section 3(b)(2) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in the fourth sentence--
       (A) by striking ``County,'' and inserting ``and Rockland 
     Counties''; and
       (B) by inserting ``each'' before ``such county''; and
       (2) in the fifth sentence, by striking ``County'' each 
     place that term appears and inserting ``and Rockland 
     Counties''.
       (b) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue regulations 
     implementing the amendments made by subsection (a).

     SEC. 304. DEMOLITION OF PUBLIC HOUSING.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 415 of the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development--Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1988 (Public Law 100-202; 101 Stat. 1329-213) is repealed.
       (b) Funding Availability.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, beginning on the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the public housing projects described in section 415 of 
     the Department of Housing and Urban Development--Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1988, as that section existed on 
     the day before the date of enactment of this Act, shall be 
     eligible for demolition under--
       (1) section 14 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     that section existed on the day before the date of enactment 
     of this Act; and
       (2) section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
     amended by this Act.

     SEC. 305. COORDINATION OF TAX CREDITS AND SECTION 8.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rehabilitation 
     activities undertaken in projects using the Low-Income 
     Housing Tax Credit allocated to developments in the City of 
     New Brunswick, New Jersey, in 1991, are hereby deemed to have 
     met the requirements for rehabilitation in accordance with 
     clause (ii) of the third sentence of section 8(d)(2)(A) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended.

     SEC. 306. ELIGIBILITY FOR PUBLIC AND ASSISTED HOUSING.

       Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1980 (42 U.S.C. 1436a) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``and includes any other assistance 
     provided under the United States Housing Act of 1937'';
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Verification of Eligibility.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except in the case of an election under 
     paragraph (2)(A), no individual or family applying for 
     financial assistance may receive such financial assistance 
     prior to the affirmative establishment and verification of 
     eligibility of that individual or family under this section 
     by the Secretary or other appropriate entity.
       ``(2) Rules applicable to public housing agencies.--A 
     public housing agency (as that term is defined in section 3 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937)--
       ``(A) may elect not to comply with this section; and
       ``(B) in complying with this section--
       ``(i) may initiate procedures to affirmatively establish or 
     verify the eligibility of an individual or family under this 
     section at any time at which the public housing agency 
     determines that such eligibility is in question, regardless 
     of whether or not that individual or family is at or near the 
     top of the waiting list of the public housing agency;
       ``(ii) may affirmatively establish or verify the 
     eligibility of an individual or family under this section in 
     accordance with the procedures set forth in section 
     274A(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
       ``(iii) shall have access to any relevant information 
     contained in the SAVE system (or any successor thereto) that 
     relates to any individual or family applying for financial 
     assistance.
       ``(3) Eligibility of families.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, with respect to a family, the term `eligibility' 
     means the eligibility of each family member.''.


                motion offered by mr. lazio of new york

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 2 of House 
Resolution 426, I offer a motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Lazio of New York moves to strike out all after the 
     enacting clause of S. 1260 and insert in lieu thereof the 
     provisions of H.R. 2406 as passed by the House, as follows:

  [The text of H.R. 2406 will appear in a future issue of the Record.]
  The motion was agreed to.
  The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the 
third time and passed.
  The title of the Senate bill was amended so as to read: A bill to 
repeal the United States Housing Act of 1937, deregulate the public 
housing program and the program for rental housing assistance for low-
income families and increase community control over such programs, and 
for other purposes.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  A similar House bill (H.R. 2406) was laid on the table.


                        APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 2 of House 
Resolution 426, I offer a motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Lazio of New York moves that the House insist on its 
     amendments to the bill (S. 1260) and request a conference 
     with the Senate thereon.

  The motion was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the Chair appoints the 
following conferees: Messrs. Leach, Lazio of New York, Bereuter, Baker 
of Louisiana, Castle, Gonzalez, Vento, and Kennedy of Massachusetts.
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________