[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 72 (Thursday, May 20, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Page S5944]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      SECTION 8 HOUSING ASSISTANCE

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators Schumer, 
Kennedy, Reed, and others as an original co-sponsor of this important 
legislation, which would clarify the intent of a provision in the 
fiscal year 2004 appropriations law regarding the Section 8 housing 
voucher program.
  The Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, has claimed 
that language in the FY2004 appropriations law requires it to 
distribute voucher funding in a manner that leaves no alternative but 
to reduce assistance by $191 million nationwide. Subsequently, it 
issued a notice on April 22, 2004 that put in place a new system for 
funding Section 8 vouchers that differed greatly from its usual 
practice. In the past, HUD would reimburse housing authorities for the 
cost of providing housing to low-income individuals based on their 
real, current costs. Under the April 22 guidelines, however, the 
reimbursements will be gauged to August 1, 2003, plus a small 
adjustment for inflation. In addition, the change will be retroactive 
to January 1, 2004, which will create even further confusion for those 
public housing authorities whose vouchers are already issued and whose 
budget are already finalized.
  I strongly believe that that HUD's interpretation of the FY2004 
appropriations law is both unduly restrictive and is in sharp 
contradiction to the intent of Congress to fully fund Section 8 
program. Despite HUD's protestations that Congress forced its hand to 
make these cuts, Congress in fact added funding to the Section 8 
program in FY2004 so that HUD could fully fund all vouchers currently 
in use. Congress appropriated $17.6 billion in FY2004 to renew expiring 
Section 8 contracts, or $1.4 billion above the amount requested by the 
administration. Although the FY2004 appropriations law did make some 
modest changes in how voucher funding is disbursed, nothing in the law 
mandated that HUD take the unprecedented step of cutting housing 
assistance for senior citizens, the disabled, and working families and 
individuals with the greatest housing needs.
  It therefore makes little sense that HUD would insist on reading the 
FY2004 appropriations law in such a way as to produce more homelessness 
across the nation. My own State of Connecticut will be especially hurt 
if HUD's April 22 notice is not changed to reflect the program 
commitments of housing authorities. Many public housing authorities in 
Connecticut are anticipating that the HUD proposal will result in a 
significant reduction in funds needed to honor existing contracts as 
well as effectively administer the voucher program. The current average 
Housing Assistance Payment for many agencies has typically increased 
beyond the August 1, 2003 ``benchmark'' plus the Annual Adjustment 
Factor. In most cases, this result is not due to increases in local 
rental rates but reflects the rise in unemployment among Section 8 
participants and thus an increase in the public housing authority's 
share of the rent.
  The impact of the April 22, 2004 rule on Connecticut will be 
particularly severe given that that it has the sixth most expensive 
rental housing market in the nation and very few vacancies to meet the 
needs of low-income individuals. Coupled with the administration's 
proposed FY2005 budget cuts and block granting of the Section 8 
program, which could adversely affect over 4,000 existing voucher 
holders in Connecticut, it is difficult to understand why HUD would be 
trying to balance its budget on the backs of low-income Americans.
  The Department of Housing and Urban Development's April 22, 2004 
notice is therefore just another salvo in the administration's war on 
the Section 8 program. Section 8 provides more than just rent 
assistance for low and moderate wage individuals in high cost housing 
markets. It also helps to sustain the employee base in urban markets, 
keeps wages for jobs in the service and manufacturing sectors 
competitive, enables corporations to remain and expand in their 
communities, and reduces the strain on vehicular transportation 
systems.
  In an economy that is creating few jobs and producing scant 
affordable housing, HUD should be pursing policies to ensure that no 
family in America loses its housing assistance. HUD's April 22 notice 
should therefore be changed, so I urge my colleagues to support this 
urgent legislation.

                          ____________________