[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 67 (Tuesday, May 14, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E786]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        U.S. HOUSING ACT OF 1996

                                 ______


                               speech of

                           HON. LOUIS STOKES

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, May 8, 1996

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union 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.

  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2406, 
the United States Housing Act of 1996. Let me say at the outset that, 
while I appreciate the efforts of my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle to improve the Federal housing stock in this Nation, these 
reforms come at the expense of the most vulnerable in our society--the 
poor, elderly, and disabled.
  The most revealing element of this measure can be found in the 
opening section entitled ``Declaration of Policy to Renew American 
Neighborhoods''. This policy statement includes a declaration that 
``the Federal Government cannot through its direct action or 
involvement provide for the housing of every American citizen, or even 
a majority of its citizens, but it is the responsibility of the 
Government to promote and protect the independent and collective 
actions of private citizens to develop housing and strengthen their own 
neighborhoods''.
  This declaration reverses a longstanding policy of nearly 60 years 
which expresses a goal of our Nation that all citizens have decent and 
affordable housing. What follows in H.R. 2406 substantiates this 
reversal from a moral obligation the United States as a world leader 
once advocated on behalf of its citizens.
  For example, take the provision that retreats on the Brooke amendment 
which protects people from paying excessive and disproportionate 
amounts of their income on housing. The bill before us would only apply 
the Brooke amendment to current residents of public housing with 
incomes below 30 percent of median income, and for current elderly and 
disabled residents. No future elderly or disabled recipients would get 
the protection of the Brooke amendment if they are under 30 percent 
of median income.

  This bill would also diminish the percentage of housing units 
available to the very lowest income families; causing irreparable harm 
to those in need. Current law provides that 85 percent of public 
housing units be provided to families with incomes at or below 30 
percent of median income. H.R. 2406 requires only 25 percent of these 
units be set aside for these families. While a local housing authority 
can provide more units to the very poor, they will be losing Federal 
assistance--and will likely be desperate to rent to higher income 
families in order to make up the deficit from the dwindling Federal 
revenues. This situation comes at the expense of the very poor.
  Mr. Chairman, this measure takes housing reform to new heights by 
including a provision that creates tenant self sufficiency contracts. 
We expect a person--who is often uneducated, unskilled and without 
work--to negotiate a contract with a housing authority that states how 
long they think they will need this assistance. What is so damaging 
about this contract is that when it ends, the resident graduates or, 
simply put, loses assistance.
  Like many other Members of Congress, I recognize the need to examine 
and reassess our public and section 8 housing programs because of the 
many changes that have occurred since these programs were first 
established. During the 103d Congress, similar reforms as those 
proposed in H.R. 2406 were passed by the House in a bipartisan vote. 
H.R. 2406 includes most of these reforms. Unfortunately, as we have 
seen with most of the legislation promulgated by our colleagues on the 
majority side of the House, this bill goes too far and will cause 
irreparable harm to thousands of the poorest, the most vulnerable, the 
most needy of our citizens.
  Mr. Chairman, not every community in this Nation can boast the 
leadership of a top-notch and experienced Public Housing Authority 
director as we do in Cleveland. If we had the absolute knowledge that 
this would be the case, few of us would argue against much of what is 
in this bill. But that is not the situation. As proposed in this bill, 
the future of thousands of Americans would be left to local authorities 
without Federal regulation. Reasonable reform is one thing; 
indifference to the plight of the poor is another. I urge my colleagues 
to vote no ``on'' H.R. 2406.

                          ____________________