[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 89 (Tuesday, June 17, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H5424-H5431]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT CONGRESS SHOULD PARTICIPATE IN AND SUPPORT
ACTIVITIES TO PROVIDE DECENT HOMES FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend
the rules and concur in the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res.
43) expressing the sense of Congress that Congress should participate
in and support activities to provide decent homes for the people of the
United States.
The Clerk read as follows:
S. Con. Res. 43
Whereas the United States promotes and encourages the
creation and revitalization of sustainable and strong
neighborhoods in partnership with States, cities, and local
communities;
Whereas the United States promotes and encourages the
creation and revitalization of sustainable and strong
neighborhoods in partnership with States, cities, and local
communities and in conjunction with the independent and
collective actions of private citizens and organizations;
Whereas establishing a housing infrastructure strengthens
neighborhoods and local economies and nurtures the families
who reside in them;
Whereas an integral element of a strong community is a
sufficient supply of affordable housing;
Whereas affordable housing may be provided in traditional
and nontraditional forms, including apartment buildings,
transitional and temporary homes, condominiums, cooperatives,
and single family homes;
Whereas for many families a home is not merely shelter, but
also provides an opportunity for growth, prosperity, and
security;
Whereas homeownership is a cornerstone of the national
economy because it spurs the production and sale of goods and
services, generates new jobs, encourages savings and
investment, promotes economic and civic responsibility, and
enhances the financial security of all people in the United
States;
Whereas although the United States is the first nation in
the world to make owning a home a reality for a vast majority
of its families, \1/3\ of the families in the United States
are not homeowners;
Whereas a disproportionate percentage of families in the
United States that are not homeowners are low-income
families;
Whereas 74.2 percent of Caucasian Americans own their own
homes, only 47.1 percent of African Americans, 47.2 percent
of Hispanic Americans, and 55.8 percent of Asian Americans
and other races are homeowners;
Whereas the community building activities of neighborhood-
based nonprofit organizations empower individuals to improve
their lives and make communities safer and healthier for
families;
Whereas one of the best known nonprofit housing
organizations is Habitat for Humanity, which builds simple
but adequate housing for less fortunate families and
symbolizes the self-help approach to homeownership;
Whereas Habitat for Humanity is organized in all 50 States
with 1,655 local affiliates and its own section 501(c)(3)
Federal tax-exempt status and locally elected completely
voluntary board of directors;
Whereas Habitat for Humanity has built nearly 150,000
houses worldwide and endeavors to complete another 50,000
homes by the year 2005;
Whereas Habitat for Humanity provides opportunities for
people from every segment of society to volunteer to help
make the American dream a reality for families who otherwise
would not own a home; and
Whereas the month of June has been designated as ``National
Homeownership Month'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--
(1) everyone in the United States should have a decent home
in which to live;
(2) Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives
should demonstrate the importance of volunteerism;
(3) during the years of the 108th and 109th sessions of
Congress, Members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, Habitat for Humanity, and contributing
organizations, should sponsor and construct 2 homes in the
Washington, D.C., metro area each as part of the ``Congress
Building America'' program;
(4) each Congress Building America house should be
constructed primarily by Members of the Senate and the House
of Representatives, their families and staffs, and the staffs
of sponsoring organizations working with local volunteers
involving and symbolizing the partnership of the public,
private, and nonprofit sectors of society;
(5) each Congress Building America house should be
constructed with the participation of the family that will
own the home;
(6) in the future, Members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives, their families, and their staff should
participate in similar house building activities in their own
States as part of National Homeownership Month; and
(7) these occasions should be used to emphasize and focus
on the importance of providing decent homes for all of the
people in the United States.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) and the gentleman from Massachusetts
(Mr. Frank) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G.
Miller).
General Leave
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this
legislation.
[[Page H5425]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
I rise in strong support of this resolution expressing support for
Congress Building America and for increased affordable home ownership
opportunities.
This country is home to people of many different origins, but
everyone seems to have the same dream, to own their own home. This
dream means many things: Independence, financial security, geographic
stability, the ability to accumulate personal wealth, a place to raise
a family, or simply a place to go after a long day's work and find
peace.
As a homebuilder for over 30 years, I enjoyed watching many people
achieve this dream. One could always see the excitement and
anticipation in the face of a home buyer. The Congress Building America
program will offer every Member of Congress this opportunity to
experience how the dream of homeownership builds hope in their
communities and across the Nation.
I feel very strongly about this issue, because homeownership is the
key to personal wealth in our country. When someone buys a home, they
purchase an asset which will grow over time.
I started the Building a Better America Caucus, BABAC, when I arrived
in Congress 4\1/2\ years ago, because I thought it was important to
provide a forum for us to start addressing issues that impact
homeownership. One of the objectives of BABAC is to help cultivate an
environment where more Americans turn the dream of homeownership into
reality.
When I first started my business, I had an old van that used more oil
than gas and a cardboard box which held every tool I owned. I started
small. Over 30 years, my business grew, but with each passing year, I
saw the impact of government on the housing industry. With each year
came government laws and regulations making it harder to build homes.
The red tape kept increasing costs. In business, these costs are passed
on to consumers. Homes kept getting more expensive.
It is very important that Congress start talking about how the
government is impacting home prices. In some parts of the country, my
district in southern California is one of them, the heavy burden of
Federal, State and local mandates is creating a generation of people
who cannot afford to live in the communities where they work and grew
up. I call these people the new homeless.
Exactly who are these new homeless? In my district, it might be a
couple. The husband is a firefighter and the wife is a teacher. They
have a good job and they make a good living, but the combined income
does not enable them to purchase a median priced home in southern
California which costs over $300,000 today. This is a national problem,
and Congress must work expeditiously to address it.
I encourage all my colleagues to become active members of BABAC so we
can do something about the housing affordable crisis in this country.
BABAC provides Members a forum where we can discuss ways Congress can
increase homeownership in America. The Congress Building America
program provides Members the opportunity to personally help make
homeownership a reality for a family in their district.
{time} 1245
The Congress Building America program will give every Member of
Congress a chance to express their commitment to affordable
homeownership by picking up a hammer and nails and building alongside
Habitat for Humanity families to make the American Dream of
homeownership a reality.
The goal of this resolution is to encourage Members of Congress to
participate in Congress Building America events with Habitat homeowner
families and local Habitat affiliates in their districts or States
during the 108th and 109th Congress. This new initiative is a
partnership program between Habitat for Humanity International, the
United States Congress, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, and national corporate sponsors.
I urge each Member to support this resolution and to personally join
with the Habitat for Humanity affiliates in their districts to help
low-income families realize the American Dream of homeownership.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, this resolution is really record-setting. I have not
in all my years here seen so much wind up and so little pitch. This
goes on quite eloquently and quite accurately about the importance of
homeownership, and it talks about the need for affordable housing. It
says, ``Whereas an integral element of a strong community is a
sufficient supply of affordable housing.'' It says, on the next page,
``Whereas affordable housing may be provided in traditional and
nontraditional forms.'' It talks a very good game about the importance
of housing, and particularly affordable housing; and it delivers
virtually nothing.
I have been lamenting for some time the opposition of my Republican
colleagues to a housing production program in this country. In many
parts of this country you will not get affordable housing, as we define
that, that is housing for lower-income working people, middle-income
people in some areas, unless there is some element of subsidy. We are
not talking about the Federal Government simply building the housing.
We are talking about a whole range of cooperative programs, many of
them private-public cooperations. But it is clearly the case that
unless the Federal Government contributes something, you will not get
affordable housing.
Now, my Republican colleagues have been strongly against most
production programs, but I see now they have come up with one. It is in
this resolution, which I am going to vote for, because I am all in
favor of good wishes. I think we should all, at all times, be in favor
of things that we should be in favor of. And this resolution is clearly
in favor of a lot of things that we should be in favor of. It just does
not do anything about them. Does not make them worse. And it does have
a production program.
I call Members' attention to page 3, paragraph 3. It says, ``During
the years of the 108th and 109th sessions of Congress, Members of the
Senate and the House should sponsor and construct two homes in the
Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.''
Now, the legislative draftsmanship is perhaps not perfect. I will
read that as being two homes each. I assume this does not mean that we
should all of us build two homes. And I hope not, because there are
people here that I would not want to be near them when they had a
hammer or a saw or a drill. So I would not want to have to be in a
joint effort to build some of these homes.
So we are talking about two homes each for 4 years. Now, there are
535 Members of Congress. Two homes apiece would be 1,070 homes a year
for 4 years. So we now have the affordable housing program of the
Republican Party for production: 4,280 homes over the next 4 years in
the metropolitan Washington area, D.C. and Fairfax County, although
they probably would not get that many, Alexandria, Arlington, parts of
Montgomery and maybe more in Prince George's.
Now, 4,280 houses is better than nothing, although I have to say I am
willing to do my part; and I have to say this, we are not often
sufficiently modest around here, and each of us is supposed to build
two houses, but, Madam Speaker, I would not want to live in a house I
built. There are some things I think I am good at, some things I am not
so good at. The notion of all of us building houses is an interesting
one.
Actually, this is motivated both by a desire to do affordable
housing, but it also carries out the Republican approach to unions.
Because their entire production program would be built by
overwhelmingly nonunion labor. There are a couple of Members here who
are members of unions, although it is rarely the building trades. My
colleague from Boston, the gentleman from Massachusetts, was an iron
worker; but he can only do so much. And I do not know how many of the
houses would be made out of iron or structural steel or whatever
anyway.
[[Page H5426]]
So here they have a housing production program, 4,280 houses for the
entirety of America, built almost exclusively by nonunion labor,
without a penny of Federal Government contribution. Unless we built
them during work hours. I suppose if we built them during working
hours, when we were getting paid, it would be some Federal
contribution. I assume the position is that we do not.
Now, I guess I am a little ambivalent about the notion of unleashing
every Member of the House and the Senate to build two houses. I know
you cannot comment on Senators, I understand that, Madam Speaker; but I
think you can comment on past Senators, and I guess I can say that I am
pleased Strom Thurmond will no longer be covered by this. It is a lucky
thing we did not pass this last year, because Strom Thurmond would have
been charged with building two houses somewhere, and I would want to
live in those even less than the ones I would build.
But the problem is not so much with what it says, but with what it
does not say. We have not for some time had a program in this country
to have Federal resources go for housing production. And in the absence
of a housing production program, families will have a hard time getting
affordable housing. We have some programs that help. We have the
programs that help build housing for the elderly and for the disabled.
We have the low-income tax credit, which does a good job; but it is
limited. We have the section 8 voucher program which works well in a
lot of areas, but the section 8 program does not contribute to
production, particularly when we have rulings now that say you can only
use a voucher 1 year at a time. No one can build a house on a year-by-
year commitment.
So I am all in favor of the goals of this resolution. I just wish it
did something other than asking this workforce to go out and build a
couple of houses a year to carry it out. We have a terrible crisis in
this country with regard to affordable housing. And let me just say,
Madam Speaker, that one of the arguments we have when some of us talk
about the need for the Federal Government to participate in doing
things that are important for the quality of our lives, we are told we
should not worry about it, the private economy will take care of it.
The private economy does a great deal. The private economy supplies
many of our needs, and a private sector is something we should all work
for. But there are some things it will not do. And with the very
prosperity of the 1990s, which was so important in helping people
achieve so many goals, for many people it made the housing situation
worse. Because prosperity is obviously not uniformly distributed. Under
the policies now in power, it is even less uniformly distributed than
ever, as a conscious choice. But even at its best, prosperity will be
uneven.
And many people in this country, in the greater Boston area, in the
area around San Francisco, in Chicago, in many of our great
metropolitan areas people whose incomes were somewhat fixed, many of
them public employees, teachers, firefighters, police officers, and
social workers, and public works people, people on relatively fixed
incomes found themselves worse off in the housing market because
prosperity drove up the value of many properties, and some people
benefited enormously, and some were left behind.
We are told, well, a rising tide will lift all boats. But if you are
too poor to afford a boat, the rising tide will go over your head and
drown you. And that happened to many people. The very prosperity of the
1990s that were so welcome nationally exacerbated the housing crisis.
That does not mean the government building all the housing is the
answer. It does mean that a sensible, well-funded production program,
where the government contributes along with the private sector an
element of subsidy so that new housing can be built in many parts of
the country, is the only way this resolution will be more than just
empty rhetoric.
So at this point we only have this resolution. But we will later in
the year have a chance to address this, I hope. I hope the committee
which brought this out, the Committee on Financial Services, which has
jurisdiction over housing, will be allowed by the leadership of this
House to formulate a sensible production program and bring it forward.
And if we do, we may be able to rescue this resolution from the charge
of being just empty rhetoric.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the author of this resolution.
Mr. WALSH. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for
yielding me this time, and I thank the House for considering Senate
Concurrent Resolution 43.
Just to depart briefly from my prepared comments, I listened to the
gentleman from Massachusetts rail against this legislation. It is just
absolute proof that no good deed goes unpunished. This is a good idea.
This is an idea that is very successful. It is an idea that gives
individuals the opportunity to volunteer to help their neighbors to
build a home. I suspect even if he may be a ham-handed carpenter that
with a good foreman on the job he could learn how to pound nails.
But the point really is this is not about mass-production housing. It
is about creating homeownership. Earlier this week, I had the privilege
of joining a handful of my neighbors at the home of Nyoka Williams, a
participant in the Syracuse Neighborhood Initiative. The Syracuse
Neighborhood Initiative is a city-wide effort to expand homeownership
opportunities and improve quality of life in Syracuse, my hometown.
We gathered to celebrate the success of the Mini-Grant program, which
provides city families with grants and loans to improve their owner-
occupied homes. At the ceremony, Ms. Williams reflected on her own
hard-fought struggle to purchase a home. This program creates
homeowners.
Now, not everybody in this country can afford to own a home, but we
ought to be doing everything we can to make that possible, and this
program goes a long way.
With Syracuse Neighborhood Initiative's assistance and her hard work,
her previously vacant home is now a showcase on the block. And after
years of renting substandard apartments, she is thrilled to be able to
take care of her aging mother and entertain her multiple grandchildren
in her very own home. Ms. Williams told me that homeownership has not
only provided her with a quality place to live and to spend time with
her family, but has given her a renewed sense of pride in herself and a
new level of confidence that she can meet any challenge.
And I can tell you that Ms. Williams wears that sense of pride and
accomplishment in a big beautiful smile whenever she talks about her
good fortune and her very own home.
Madam Speaker, for many years now, Habitat for Humanity has been
working to offer the same level of accomplishment and that sense of
pride to thousands of families the world over. By making homeownership
affordable and accessible, Habitat has coordinated the construction of
thousands of new homes across the United States, relying upon a great
deal of donated goods and utilizing a volunteer labor force.
Now, those volunteers can be labor union members or nonlabor union
members. The good news is it does not matter. If they are willing to
donate their time and hammer, or carry some lumber, or lay some
concrete, God bless them. Nobody is going to tell them they cannot do
it.
This program has made 50,000 Americans homeowners. I am proud to be a
veteran of previous Habitat builds back home in Syracuse, in my home
town and here in Washington, where I worked with Members of the House
and Senate on two different houses in the Washington, D.C. area. Some
of us were more handy than others, but the good news is we worked
together. Even in Belfast, Northern Ireland, people of both communities
came together, and the Habitat house build provided a vehicle to bring
people together. And it does that here too.
It is our hope that every Member of Congress will build a house, all
535 of us, in their districts, through this program. Habitat for
Humanity provides affordable quality homes for those currently
struggling to achieve the dream of homeownership. There are millions of
Americans who could become homeowners if we helped them through this
program and the many other programs provided through the housing
agency,
[[Page H5427]]
through HUD. They support renewed investment efforts in America's
cities, and they allow for a better quality of life for all involved.
I urge my colleagues to support S. Con. Res. 43 and encourage their
active involvement in the Congress Building America program in the
108th and 109th sessions of Congress. Prideful smiles like Ms. Williams
demonstrate just how rewarding homeownership efforts like Habitat for
Humanity really are.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
I notice on page 4 it says each Congress Building America house
should be constructed primarily by Members of the Senate and House,
their families and staff. Now, presumably, if we do this, it is
voluntarily. But if we pass a bill like this and our staffs do it, it
might not be voluntary. We might need an interpretation from you, Madam
Speaker, under the bill you have been sponsoring. If our staffs show up
to build housing and they have to work overtime, would we pay them
overtime or would they get comp time?
So I think we will have to have further interpretation when our
staffs report for home building, which some of them probably did not
sign up for.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr.
Sanders), a very active leader in the fight for affordable housing in
our committee.
{time} 1300
Mr. SANDERS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time and applaud the gentleman for all of the work he has done on
affordable housing for this country.
Today we are considering legislation which encourages Members of
Congress ``to participate in and support activities to provide decent
homes for the people of the United States.''
I have no problem with this legislation. It would be very nice if
Members of Congress worked together to build a few hundred units of
affordable housing. The problem is that in the United States of America
today, we have a housing crisis, and we do not need a few hundred units
of new housing, we need hundreds of thousands of units of new housing.
It is not acceptable for people to say it is so nice, we are
volunteering our efforts.
Madam Speaker, we have children sleeping out in the street all over
America. We have working families working 40 hours a week living in
their cars, and Members of Congress building a few hundred housing
units might make for good press releases and photos in newspapers, but
it does nothing to address the housing crisis in this country.
While the affordable housing crisis in this country deepens,
President Bush's proposed housing budget is 63 percent less than it was
in 1976 during the last year of the Ford administration. While more
than 3 million Americans will experience homelessness this year,
including 1.3 million children, President Bush proposes to eliminate a
$574 million a year program to revitalize public housing and recently
refused to fully fund public housing operating expenses. While 4.9
million American families pay more than 50 percent of their limited
incomes on housing, President Bush has proposed to block grant the
Federal section 8 rental assistance program which would raise rents and
jeopardize rental assistance for tens of thousands of families.
While President Bush says he supports expanding homeownership, the
reality is that his initiatives have not produced a single home buyer
in 2.5 years, and since the President took office, housing foreclosures
have increased by 39 percent and home loan delinquencies have increased
by 26 percent.
Last year the Bush administration care so much about affordable
housing that they worked to defeat legislation that I introduced to
provide the tools necessary to construct, rehabilitate and preserve at
least 1.5 million affordable housing rental units over the last decade
through a national affordable housing trust fund.
Madam Speaker, we are not going to give up. Just a few months ago, I
reduced the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund, a proposal that
would not only provide real solutions to the affordable housing crisis,
but would also lead to the creation of some 1.8 million new jobs and
nearly $50 billion in wages. This legislation currently has 200
tripartisan cosponsors, including 11 Republicans.
This bill currently has 200 tri-partisan co-sponsors, including 11
Republicans, and has been endorsed by over 4,000 groups representing
labor unions, business leaders, religious organizations, environmental
groups, bankers and affordable housing advocates.
At a time when 4.9 million Americans families are paying more than 50
percent of their limited incomes on housing and at least 800,000
people, including 200,000 children, are homeless on any given night,
the federal government has a responsibility to correct this crisis.
If the Republican leadership and the Bush Administration truly wanted
to ``participate in and support activities to provide decent homes for
the people of the United States'' they would join me in supporting a
National Affordable Housing Trust Fund and get this bill signed into
law as soon as possible.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I want to associate myself with
the comments that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) and the
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) have made. While I stand in strong
support of this resolution, and it is a great resolution, great ideas
about what need to be done, but in reality, we need to get serious
about the business of doing it.
The Congressional Black Caucus has a program called WOW, With
Ownership Wealth, and in my congressional district, we have been going
around promoting the purchase of homes by African Americans. We find
that many people, once they reach the point where homeownership is in
their mind, there is not the availability of homes that they can
purchase. When we start talking about incomes of $25,000 and $30,000,
people cannot purchase a $250,000 home. There must be affordable homes
built.
Just recently a study was done that the gentlewoman from Illinois
(Mrs. Biggert) is associated with the organization, pointed out there
are 850,000 individuals at the Chicago metropolitan area who live at or
near the level of poverty. If these individuals are going to be able to
purchase a home, not only must there be mortgage money available, but
there also has to be the affordability of a house that they can buy.
Madam Speaker, I support this resolution, strongly suggest that we
find ways to implement the concepts of it and make real the idea that
people can live in their house by the side of the road, and the only
way we will do it is have affordable housing that they are able to
purchase.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) who is the ranking member of
the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity of the Committee
on Financial Services, and a great leader in this field.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in respect for and in support of this
resolution. Habitat for Humanity is a wonderful organization, with
1,655 affiliates in all 50 States. Habitat for Humanity has built
nearly 150,000 houses worldwide, and it has an ambitious goal of
building another 50,000 homes by 2005. So I certainly support their
efforts, and I am pleased the House and Senate staff and Members will
join Habitat for Humanity in building a couple of homes right here in
Washington, D.C.
Yet, even as I congratulate Habitat for Humanity for all of its work,
I believe that all of us need to take a broader look at the issues of
affordable housing and housing policy generally. We are falling very
short of where we need to be in order to make the goal of affordable
housing a goal that is obtainable for all Americans. Much more work
needs to be done.
The unfortunate reality is that the Bush administration's
homeownership record is one of feel-good rhetoric and photo
opportunities, not one of substance. When it comes to creating
affordable housing and helping to revitalize sustainable community
development, the Bush administration is simply missing in action. Only
47.1 percent of African American and Latino communities respectively
are homeowners.
[[Page H5428]]
Where is the administration's plan to improve percentages to those of
other populations?
We need to put a stop to predatory lending to vulnerable consumers.
Where is the administration's plan to eliminate predatory lending to
consumers who are new to the homeownership process? As Members know,
predatory lending is the making of unethical and abusive mortgage loans
that include excessive fees, inflated rates and such practices as
making loans that the borrower cannot repay. The predatory lending
industry has grown significantly over the past 10 years.
The Federal Government has a responsibility to protect homeowners who
are subject to predatory practices. Predatory lending affects borrowers
of all races and income levels, but such lenders often target elderly
homeowners and people of color. For example, borrowers 65 and older are
3 times more likely to hold subprime mortgages than borrowers 35 years
of age. Simply put, when it comes to housing, there is much more we
need to be doing than just commending Habitat for Humanity for building
some housing. For example, we need to adopt legislation that ensures
that consumers will pay no penalties when prepaying all or part of a
mortgage credit loan balance. We should be working to ensure that there
is no financing of credit, life, disability or unemployment insurance
on a single premium basis. We also need to protect anyone from
knowingly engaging in the practice of flipping a mortgage loan or
extension of credit.
We also need policies and practices that will nullify any mortgage or
loan contract that does not contain all the written terms of the
contract or has blank spaces for such terms to be filled in after the
contract is signed.
Mr. Speaker, increasing the supply of affordable housing, protecting
consumers from predatory lending and predatory mortgage servicing. This
is the housing agenda we need to be pursuing. I urge the Bush
administration to join us in this effort.
I commend Habitat for Humanity for its tremendous work and urge all
my Colleagues to support this Resolution.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to
the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).
Mr. WATT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlemen for yielding me this
time to give me an opportunity to express myself on this resolution.
We obviously are all supportive of the resolution dealing with
Habitat for Humanity and encouraging our colleagues to participate in
the effort here in the District of Columbia. We are supportive of
anything that does decent and affordable housing for people in this
country.
Mr. Speaker, it is for that reason that we are so perplexed by the
President's decision not to go forward with the Hope VI project by
zeroing out Hope VI and saying that Hope VI has apparently served its
purpose in this country.
I just came from a meeting with a group of students, one of whom was
Ms. Audrey Evans who is a student at North Carolina A&T State
University, and without knowing I was coming here, she said I want to
commend you on the Hope VI program. She said she was raised in public
housing, and our commitment to Hope VI helped to change her life
because putting public housing in communities and allowing her to be
exposed to people around her who are interested in succeeding
educationally and economically and personally is something that has
meant so much to her.
Throughout America, we have heard these stories about how successful
Hope VI has been. On a bipartisan basis in our committee, just like
both of these gentlemen have yielded me time, we are perplexed as to
why such a successful program, which coincidentally was a Republican
program instituted by Secretary Kemp when he was Secretary of Housing
and Urban Development, how could we terminate such a program as this?
We are supportive of this resolution, but we also want this
administration to be committed to housing in general in this country.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
As I read this resolution, I really did think I was reading the
fundamental arguments for the establishment of a national affordable
housing trust fund which has been sponsored by over 200 members of this
body. So I would like to read just a couple of whereas clauses which
explain why I think this resolution sounds like the provisions of the
National Housing Trust Fund.
Whereas establishing a housing infrastructure strengthens
neighborhoods and local economies and nurtures the families who reside
in them; whereas homeownership is a cornerstone of the national economy
because it spurs the production and sale of goods and services,
generates new jobs, encourages savings and investment, promotes
economic and civic responsibility and enhances the financial security
of all people in the United States.
That is some of what this resolution says. I fully support and
appreciate the efforts of Habitat for Humanity and really agree that
they should be applauded and supported. However, this resolution is
just another vehicle for Republicans to talk about their nonexistent
housing agenda. This Congress must allow us to debate and vote on
significant housing legislation.
My frustration with my Republican colleagues for failing to bring
significant housing legislation to the floor and for ignoring the
dismal housing and economic outlook in this country is really only
compounded by the Republican attempts to clock weak homeowner
initiatives by pretending to support the American dream of
homeownership.
While the nationwide homeownership rate is approaching 70 percent,
the African American and Latino homeownership rate pale in comparison,
to about 46 percent; and in the administration's Homeownership
Downpayment Assistance Program, they would not even support foreclosure
assistance to help these homeowners keep their homes and protect
taxpayer investment.
Of the 3.9 million low-income households to be considered working
poor, over two-thirds pay 30 percent or more of their income for
housing costs, with one-quarter paying over half their incomes. In 39
States, 40 percent or more of renters cannot afford fair market for a
2-bedroom unit, and that is why creating more affordable housing and
homeownership should be our focus.
{time} 1315
Consistently since the Bush administration has drafted budgets, they
seem to negate the promise of homeownership, community investment, and
fair, quality housing. This administration continues to cut the HUD
budget and fight successful programs such as HOPE VI, section 8, the
public housing drug elimination program and the creation of a national
affordable housing production program.
I will vote for this resolution, I support it; but I encourage the
other side to bring some real housing bills to the floor very soon.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
I enjoyed the one comment: ``This resolution is here so Republicans
can just talk about affordable housing.'' The gentleman from
Massachusetts and I, we do agree on one major issue: there is a huge
shortage of affordable housing in this country. I believe we both have
a passion in common to try to resolve this problem. Earlier this year,
I brought a bill up before our committee on brownfields. Brownfields
are contaminated sites within inner cities where the infrastructure is
in place and the need for affordable housing is there. The gentleman
from Massachusetts has worked hand in hand with me to bring this to the
floor; but because of a lack of agreement on his side of the aisle,
none to his blame, we are unable to do that because one Member wants to
define brownfields using an EPA definition. The gentleman from
Massachusetts and I realize that if you do that you eliminate petroleum
sites which are 50 percent of the half million sites in this country.
So he and I have worked to resolve something and others are giving lip
service to this issue.
[[Page H5429]]
There has been much talk about subsidies. We deal with section 8
housing and the need for section 8 housing. We come to an agreement
that there is a need for that. But in Los Angeles County, we had the
housing authority here, I asked them the question of what is your
occupancy rate in California, in L.A. County? They said, we are 97
percent occupied. That means 3 percent of the units that are not
occupied are under renovation. Basically, they are 100 percent full.
They have no available section 8 housing for people to go to. We can
increase section 8 vouchers causing more money to chase no product, and
all it does is increase the cost of the product.
But there have been things that have been said here today. We need
subsidies which we do provide some. The President has come up with a
great idea. He said, let us allow people to take section 8 vouchers, up
to 12, and apply them as a down payment to buy a home. That is a great
idea. I hope the appropriators this year will fund that program. What
we are saying is people who have been locked into section 8 housing can
now take the money they would have received in 12 months and put it as
a down payment to buy a home, so 10 years, 15 or 20 years from now
their payment is the same as it is today, not rising as it does in
rental housing. We need to create homeownership rather than just create
renters in this country.
There has been a comment made about we need a housing production
program. We have that in this program. It is called the Building
Industry Association. But government does everything it can to stop
builders from providing affordable homes in this country. We have so
many mandates on builders. I remember 30 years ago when I entered the
industry, you could go out within a matter of 2 months and make
application on a tract map to build a tract of homes, whether it be
five, 10 or 15; and in 60 days you had entitlements, yes or no. They
had to do it because on day 59 you were approved by law. I talk to
builders today that have been 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 years processing
subdivisions trying to provide affordable housing for the people of
this country and they cannot get through the process.
I spend more time helping builders with Fish and Wildlife and Army
Corps of Engineers issues. One thing I wish the other side of the aisle
would agree to do and that is reform the Endangered Species Act. In
Colton, California, there is one project that has 3,000 homes on 3,000
acres. They are only wanting to develop about 300-and-something of
those acres, but they happen to have a rat on that property. It is
called the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. It is becoming extinct. People
who love rats want to set aside habitat for these rats, but they always
want to set the habitat aside on privately owned property. That means
somebody who owns a piece of land, all of a sudden the government
determines that they own habitat that this rat should live on. The
problem with the San Bernardino kangaroo rat is it only lives in
washes, which means every time it rains during the winter, the little
critters drown and the reason they are becoming extinct is the little
critters are too stupid to get out of the wash that they are drowning
in and go somewhere else. So no matter what we do, those little
critters year after year after year are going to continue to be less in
population than they are today because they are too stupid to move out
of a wash.
There is another great one in California called the Delhi sand-loving
fly. I remember years ago when our parents ran this country, we used to
swat flies and poison rats. Now we set aside habitat for them on
privately owned property. Something is wrong with this country. I think
it is incumbent upon us to change it. It is nice to give lip service
about affordable housing, and I believe many of my colleagues who spoke
today are genuine about a passion; but this resolution allows Members
of Congress to actually do something besides give lip service, lean
over and pound some nails, finish some concrete, hang some dry wall,
put some roofing material on, put some plumbing in, run finish on
electrical, paint, hang doors, run casing and base.
We can actually do something besides talk about it. Yes, it is a
small gesture; but if you look at the problems we have caused because
of the stupid laws and regulations we have placed on the building
industry today, anything we do, even if it is small, will help. If we
are really talking about helping people get into affordable housing,
let us do something genuine about it. More government is not going to
solve anything. Yes, more government has created a problem and some
believe that government money now should resolve that problem and that
is wrong.
If we would just step back at the Federal, State and local level and
say, how do we reduce the regulations placed upon the building industry
so a person can go out and reasonably buy a piece of property and in a
given span of time can build homes instead of 3, 4, 5, 10 years of
process. When you take 3 years to get an entitlement, it is costing
somebody a lot of money to buy the property and hold it and pay all
these consultants to work on the property.
In California, we require builders to go through title 24. That is
energy efficiency, which means a home must be airtight, no air
infiltration. They even limit it in most fireplaces you can put in that
are man-made because they do not want air infiltration in a home. When
you have water and no air infiltration, what do you get? Mold. One of
the problems we are facing in this country is that insurance companies
do not want to write policies because of mold. If we did not have the
policies we have today dealing with energy efficiency, perhaps we would
not have some of the mold problems we have in this country.
When we talk about affordable housing, let us talk about it in
reality. If you are going to have section 8 housing that is available,
you have got to have an affordable move-up marketplace, and it is not
there today. People in section 8 housing receiving government
assistance cannot afford to move out of that house because there is not
an affordable unit for them to move into. So if we really want to help
people be able to get out of section 8 housing, to actually attain the
rights that we believe they should have of homeownership and the luxury
that goes along with that, with building assets and everything else, if
we really want to do that, then let us look at the structure we have
created. Let us pass a law that says any regulation at the State level
or the city level that has any negative impact on the cost of housing
must have a cost-benefit analysis and you must be able to determine
that it is really beneficial to do that, not just something that makes
people hug each other and feel good and pat each other on the back. Let
us change the way we do business in this country.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I yield to the gentleman from
Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I just want to make sure I understand.
The gentleman is proposing that we pass a Federal statute that would
say that no local zoning regulation could go into effect?
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I take back my time. What I said is
a cost-benefit analysis. If you can do something and determine that
there is a benefit in the regulations you are placing on affordable
housing, that is fine. But for us to sit here and say, oh, we need to
have more government programs and more government funding and yet we do
not get to the core problem of affordability, you have to get to the
core problem of affordability. There is no difference from us saying,
let us, the Federal Government, fund housing but you have got to have
everybody in agreement we are even going to put it there.
The problem you have with section 8 housing, and the gentleman from
Massachusetts knows this to be a fact himself, is you go to many
communities and you say you are going to build low-income housing and
the whole community is in an uproar because they do not want it in
their community because they start saying, you are going to have gang
violence, you are going to have problems, you are going to have
transients. They do not want it in their communities.
I am not saying that it is bad; I am saying that is just a fact. It
is this NIMBY, not in my backyard attitude. That is a problem we face
in this country, unless you will change the laws to where a builder has
a reasonable time
[[Page H5430]]
to process a subdivision. Yes, let us look at the environmental impact
that might be placed on the community of a project; let us look at the
environment, if there are any species that are going to be harmed
there. But let us do it in a reasonable span of time, not 3, 5, 10
years. I told the gentleman from Massachusetts of a project I owned for
12 years that I finally ended up selling to the city because nobody
wanted it built, yet there was not a bit of flora or fauna that was in
any way impacted, nor was there a species out there that was on the
endangered species list. Let us look at the problem and let us work
together to see that we are not overturning local rights, but let us
work with the local communities.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. If the gentleman will yield further, I
think the gentleman, however, is being inconsistent. I have been
critical of the use of local zoning in many cases to block housing
proposals, but I do want to be clear. These are local and State laws.
The Endangered Species Act is Federal. But most of what the gentleman
talked about are local and State laws, and I am asking the gentleman,
is he proposing that at the Federal level we pass statutes that
regulate and restrict and limit what form local zoning can take, saying
that it has to have a cost-benefit analysis, et cetera? I might be
interested in joining that, if that is what the gentleman is
advocating.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Reclaiming my time, if we look
prior to 1948, the tax revenues in this country generally went to
cities. It started to change after 1948. The State started taking more
and the Federal Government started taking more. About 1972, it got so
bad that locals were being deprived of so much money they could no
longer afford to put the streets and the sewers and the storm drains in
necessary to build homes. Why? Because the Federal Government and the
State government got greedy and started taking the money from the
people who need it, the cities. What we have done is create a situation
where now the tax dollars are not put in the infrastructure; the
builder puts in the infrastructure. Plus he pays for all the local
mitigation and impacts that the community might face in some fashion,
even if it is a signal 5 miles down the road that might be impacted in
some fashion because this tract of 80 people living in it might impact
that intersection.
But we have got to look at what government has done. Government has
changed to such a degree that we have taken the money, become greedy;
and now we do not want to address the problems we can address.
Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 43, which
expresses the sense of Congress that this legislature should
participate in and support activities to provide decent homes for the
people of the United States.
The goal of this resolution is to encourage members of Congress to
participate in Congress Building America build events with Habitat
homeowner families and local Habitat affiliates in their districts or
states during the 108th and 109th Congress, and I urge each member's
support of this resolution and to personally join with the Habitat for
Humanity affiliates in their districts to help low-income families
realize the American dream of homeownership.
I urge my colleagues to endorse this resolution that will not only
express the sense of Congress in support of increased affordable
homeownership opportunities, but will result in the building of
hundreds of new homes for low-income and minority families across the
country.
The fact that June is National Homeownership Month makes the
scheduling of this concurrent resolution especially appropriate. For
the vast majority of families, homeownership serves as an engine of
social mobility and the path to prosperity. We are blessed to live in a
country where every citizen--regardless of race, creed, color, or place
of birth--has the opportunity to own a home of their own. And, new
homeowners can create wealth for their families for generations to
come, while also helping transform neighborhoods and communities.
The home has long held a place of mythic stature in the hearts and
minds of Americans, as many of this country's forebears considered
homeownership a key component of a democratic society. Homeownership
creates stakeholders within a community and inspires civic
responsibility. It offers children a stable living environment that
influences their personal development in many positive ways--including
improving their performance in school. Studies by housing experts show
a clear link between an increase in homeownership and a decrease in
crime rates.
In the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity this year, I
plan to continue working hard to explore new ways to put people on the
path to homeownership, so they can realize its many benefits. The
Financial Services Committee already marked-up three housing bills last
month by voice vote: H.R. 23, The Tornado Shelters Act, H.R. 1614, the
HOPE VI Program Reauthorization and Small Community Main Street
Rejuvenation and Housing Action of 2003, and H.R. 1276, The American
Dream Downpayment Act.
The American Dream Downpayment Act, introduced by Katherine Harris of
Florida, is a vital initiative in the creation of new homeowners. This
bill would provide $200 million in grants to help homebuyers with the
downpayment and closing costs. This has the potential of assisting
40,000 families annually achieve the dream of homeownership and would
make available subsidy assistance, averaging $5,000, to help low-
income, first-time home buying families.
In addition to moving these important pieces of legislation, the
Subcommittee is in the midst of holding a series of hearings examining
the current operation and administration of the Section 8 Housing
Choice voucher program, which provides rental assistance to more than
1.8 million families. While the concept of the program remains sound,
the program has often been criticized for its inefficiency. More than a
billion dollars are recaptured from the program every year, despite
long waiting lists for vouchers in many communities. The rising cost of
the Section 8 program and some of the administrative concerns have
caused many in congress and the Administration to conclude that the
program is in need of reform. In the coming months, I look forward to
hearing the different perspectives from our many distinguished
witnesses as we continue to discuss ways to improve America's
communities and strengthen housing opportunities for all citizens.
Congress Building America will enable Members of Congress to express
their commitment to affordable homeownership by picking up hammers and
nails and building alongside Habitat for Humanity families to make the
American dream of homeownership a reality. This initiative is a hands-
on approach to making affordable homeownership a reality, one family at
a time, one community at a time.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 43, which
expresses the sense that Congress should participate in and support
activities to provide decent homes for the people of the United States.
I urge my colleagues to not only join me in supporting this resolution,
but to also join the thousands of Americans who volunteer their time to
provide for those less fortunate.
This resolution calls upon Congress to support activities to provide
decent homes for Americans and recognizes an organization that has been
working towards improving housing conditions for over 27 years now. Of
course, I'm talking about Habitat for Humanity, an organization that
has built nearly 150,000 affordable houses for families worldwide and
is planning to complete another 50,000 homes by 2005. In fact, Habitat
for Humanity just dedicated two homes in my district in Mansfield, Ohio
on Father's Day and more houses are being dedicated all over Ohio on an
ongoing basis. Several local businesses and charitable organizations
also help support the building of these homes. This kind of effort
provides a great example of what we can accomplish when communities
come together to assist their residents.
The resolution outlines a plan for a new initiative called Congress
Building America, which calls upon the Members of Congress to
demonstrate the importance of volunteer work by working with Habitat
for Humanity and other contributing organizations to construct homes
across the nation. This simple, but adequate, housing for less
fortunate families, symbolizes the self-help approach to homeownership.
Under this model, homeowners contribute sweat equity toward their new
home, building it alongside trained volunteers. The new homeowner then
has the opportunity to buy the home with a no interest mortgage. The
average cost of these homes is $53,000 with a monthly payment of around
$266. In most cases, the payment is even lower than what they were
paying for substandard rental units.
Beyond the obvious benefit to the new homeowner, Habitat's work to
provide safe, decent and affordable shelter for thousands of needy
families adds to the national economy because it spurs the production
and sale of goods and services, generates new jobs, encourages savings
and investment, promotes economic and civic responsibility, and
enhances the financial security of all Americans.
One of the greatest attributes of organizations such as Habitat is
that the benefits of service go both ways. Not only are families in
need of housing receiving benefits, but volunteers often find their
service extremely rewarding as well. It is great to see so many young
[[Page H5431]]
people serving their fellow citizens by volunteering to help those less
fortunate. Over 10,000 students have signed up to help Habitat for
Humanity build houses through their Collegiate Challenge program
breaking down barriers to homeownership and breaking down the
stereotype of a typical college kid on spring break at the same time.
Clearly, there is still much work to be done. We are focusing our
efforts to increase the availability of affordable housing in
communities across the country. Today we are here to reaffirm that
commitment and recognize all the hard work that has already been done.
I would therefore like to take this opportunity during National
Homeownership Month to thank those organizations, such as Habitat for
Humanity, that work to help families achieve the dream of
homeownership.
I would also like to commend the Housing Subcommittee, chaired by
Representative Bob Ney, today for its hard work to break down the
barriers to homeownership faced by too many Americans. By the end of
this week the subcommittee will have held 11 hearings as part of its
effort to pursue an aggressive legislative agenda. At the top of that
list is the American Dream Downpayment Act which will provide $200
million in grant funds assisting approximately 40,000 low-income
families with down payment and closing costs on their first homes.
I encourage my colleagues to join me in participating in the Congress
Building America program and look forward to the many continued efforts
which will build communities across the nation and help thousands of
American families buy homes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for
the passage of Senate Concurrent Resolution 43, the resolution that
expresses the Congress's support for the Habitat For Humanity and the
good work this great organization does for American families throughout
the Nation.
I am proud to say that this wonderful institution was born in
Americus, GA, within the district that I am so privileged to represent.
Since its inception, this model of compassion and commitment to
humanity has spawned similar groups, and has changed the way many
Americans view the problem of homelessness and derelict housing. At
this very moment somewhere in America, a home is being built by the
Habitat For Humanity. The number of volunteers now exceeds 200,000 and
is growing. More than 100,000 homes have been built and renovated, and
more are being completed across the country at a rate of 1,000 per
month. But we can do even more.
This resolution encourages Members of Congress to participate in
``Congress Building America'' events with local Habitat For Humanity
affiliates in their home districts that will continue and increase the
homebuilding effort all across America.
Mr. Speaker, Habitat For Humanity works. What seemed like a dream to
those who had the vision in Americus so many years ago, is now becoming
a reality. Decent housing for every American--thanks to Habitat For
Humanity, this is an idea whose time has come.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Isakson). The time of the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) has expired.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) that the House suspend the rules and
concur in the Senate concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 43.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the
yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________