[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 89 (Wednesday, June 29, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H5441-H5445]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY,
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
2006
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 342 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 3058.
{time} 2038
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. 3058) making appropriations for the Departments of
Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the
Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes, with Mr.
Bass (Acting Chairman) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier
today, the amendment by the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis) had been
disposed of and the bill had been read through page 67, line 12.
Pursuant to the order of the House of today, no further amendment to
the bill may be offered except:
Pro forma amendments offered at any point in the reading by the
chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations
or their designees for the purpose of debate;
Amendments printed in the Record and numbered 4, 8 and 13;
An amendment by Mr. Nadler regarding HOPWA;
An amendment by Mr. Pickering regarding enforcement of the
Individuals With Disabilities Parking Reform Amendment Act;
An amendment by Mr. Obey regarding D.C. funding;
An amendment by Mr. Sanders regarding contracting out flight service
stations, which shall be debatable for 20 minutes;
An amendment by Ms. DeLauro regarding corporate entities chartered in
Antigua, Panama, Bermuda, Barbados and the Cayman Islands, which shall
be debatable for 15 minutes;
An amendment by Mr. Obey regarding an OMB Circular, which shall be
debatable for 40 minutes;
An amendment by Mr. Cuellar regarding funding for the Community
Development Fund;
An amendment by Mrs. Jones of Ohio regarding HOME Investment
Partnership Program;
An amendment by Ms. Waters regarding funding for the Community
Development Fund;
An amendment by Mr. Costello regarding cities of Alton and Granite
City, Illinois;
An amendment by Mr. King of Iowa regarding funding for the Supreme
Court;
An amendment by Ms. Herseth regarding judiciary funding;
An amendment by Ms. Hooley regarding increasing funds for HIDTA;
An amendment by Ms. Velazquez regarding e-travel and small business
protection;
An amendment by Ms. Kilpatrick of Michigan regarding the sale of
Unocal Corporation;
An amendment by Mr. Van Hollen regarding revisions to circular A-76;
An amendment by Mr. Tiahrt regarding regulations on U.S. business
competitiveness;
An amendment by Mr. Hefley regarding an across-the-board cut;
An amendment by Mr. Brown of Ohio regarding reporting on the cost of
new prescription drugs;
An amendment by Mr. Hinchey regarding private contractor activity;
An amendment by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey regarding eminent domain;
An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding the travel ban with Cuba;
An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding religious exemption on the travel
ban with Cuba;
An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding cap on remittances with Cuba;
An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding enforcement of the weight limit
on baggage for travel to Cuba;
An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding amateur sports teams travel to
Cuba;
An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding family travel to Cuba by members
of the Armed Forces;
An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding trade agreements and their
relationship with Cuba;
An amendment by Ms. Lee regarding academic institutions and travel to
Cuba;
An amendment by Mr. Rangel regarding enforcement of the economic
embargo on Cuba;
[[Page H5442]]
An amendment by Mr. Honda regarding military recruiters and the
Department of Education;
An amendment by Mr. Markey regarding transfer of tax activity among
countries;
An amendment by Mr. Wynn regarding financial contractors;
An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding section 12 of the
U.S. Housing Act;
An amendment by Mr. Clay regarding FHA loans and abusive lending
practices;
An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding funding for the
FAA;
An amendment by Mr. Souder regarding enforcement of firearms laws in
D.C.;
An amendment by Mr. Simmons regarding private debt collection;
An amendment by Mr. Souder regarding media campaigns; and
An amendment by Mr. Knollenberg regarding funding levels.
Each such amendment may be offered only by the Member named in the
request or a designee, or by the Member who caused it to be printed in
the Record or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall not be
subject to amendment except that the chairman and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Appropriations and the Subcommittee on
Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development each may
offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of debate; and shall not
be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in
the Committee of the Whole.
Except as otherwise specified, each amendment shall be debatable for
10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an
opponent.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Housing Certificate Fund
(rescission)
Of the unobligated balances, including recaptures and
carryover, remaining from funds appropriated to the
Department of Housing and Urban Development under this
heading or the heading ``Annual contributions for assisted
housing'' or any other heading for fiscal year 2005 and prior
years, $2,493,600,000 is rescinded, to be effected by the
Secretary no later than September 30, 2006: Provided, That
any such balances governed by reallocation provisions under
the statute authorizing the program for which the funds were
originally appropriated shall be available for the
rescission: Provided further, That any obligated balances of
contract authority from fiscal year 1974 and prior that have
been terminated shall be cancelled: Provided further, That no
amounts recaptured from amounts appropriated in prior years
under this heading or the heading ``Annual contributions for
assisted housing'' and no carryover of such appropriated
amounts for project-based assistance shall be available for
the calendar year 2006 funding cycle for activities provided
for under the heading ``Tenant-based rental assistance''.
Project-Based Rental Assistance
(including transfer of funds)
For activities and assistance for the provision of project-
based subsidy contracts under the United States Housing Act
of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) (``the Act''
herein), not otherwise provided for, $5,088,300,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That the amounts
made available under this heading are provided as follows:
(1) $4,940,100,000 for expiring or terminating section 8
project-based subsidy contracts (including section 8 moderate
rehabilitation contracts), for amendments to section 8
project-based subsidy contracts (including section 8 moderate
rehabilitation contracts), for contracts entered into
pursuant to section 441 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act, for renewal of section 8 contracts for units
in projects that are subject to approved plans of action
under the Emergency Low Income Housing Preservation Act of
1987 or the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident
Homeownership Act of 1990, and for administrative and other
expenses associated with project-based activities and
assistance funded under this paragraph.
(2) $147,200,000 for performance-based contract
administrators for section 8 project-based assistance:
Provided, That the Secretary may also use such amounts for
performance-based contract administrators for: interest
reduction payments pursuant to section 236(a) of the National
Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(a)); rent supplement payments
pursuant to section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development
Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s); Section 236(f)(2) rental
assistance payments (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(f)(2)); project rental
assistance contracts for the elderly under section 202(c)(2)
of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1701q,
1701q-1); project rental assistance contracts for supportive
housing for persons with disabilities under section 811(d)(2)
of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act;
project assistance contracts pursuant to section 202(h) of
the Housing Act of 1959 (Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667);
and loans under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959
(Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667).
(3) $1,000,000 shall be transferred to the Working Capital
Fund: Provided further, That amounts recaptured under this
heading, the heading, `Annual Contributions for Assisted
Housing,' or the heading, `Housing Certificate Fund,' for
project-based section 8 activities may be used for renewals
of or amendments to section 8 project-based subsidy contracts
or for performance-based contract administrators,
notwithstanding the purposes for which such amounts were
appropriated.
Public Housing Capital Fund
(including transfers of funds)
For the Public Housing Capital Fund Program to carry out
capital and management activities for public housing
agencies, as authorized under section 9 of the United States
Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437g) (the
``Act''), $2,600,000,000, to remain available until September
30, 2009: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision
of law or regulation, during fiscal year 2006, the Secretary
may not delegate to any Department official other than the
Deputy Secretary and the Assistant Secretary for Public and
Indian Housing any authority under paragraph (2) of section
9(j) regarding the extension of the time periods under such
section: Provided further, That for purposes of such section
9(j), the term ``obligate'' means, with respect to amounts,
that the amounts are subject to a binding agreement that will
result in outlays, immediately or in the future: Provided
further, That of the total amount provided under this
heading, up to $11,000,000 shall be for carrying out
activities under section 9(h) of such Act: Provided further,
That $10,000,000 shall be transferred to the Working Capital
Fund: Provided further, That no funds may be used under this
heading for the purposes specified in section 9(k) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended: Provided
further, That of the total amount provided under this
heading, up to $17,000,000 shall be available for the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to make grants,
notwithstanding section 305 of this Act, to public housing
agencies for emergency capital needs resulting from
unforeseen emergencies and natural disasters occurring in
fiscal year 2006: Provided further, That of the total amount
provided under this heading, $24,000,000 shall be for
supportive services, service coordinators and congregate
services as authorized by section 34 of the Act and the
Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act
of 1996: Provided further, That up to $8,820,000 is to
support the costs of administrative and judicial
receiverships.
Public Housing Operating Fund
For 2006 payments to public housing agencies for the
operation and management of public housing, as authorized by
section 9(e) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 1437g(e)), $3,600,000,000: Provided, That
all funds made available under this heading shall be
allocated to public housing agencies in accordance with the
terms, conditions, criteria and methodology set forth in the
``Post 4th Session Rule'' issued on June 10, 2004 and shall
not be allocated using any other formula unless approved by
the Committee: Provided further, That of the total amount
provided under this heading, up to $50,000,000 shall be for
assistance for the conversion to asset management including
project-based accounting, budgeting and management for public
housing agencies operating three or more public housing
projects, which will under the ``Post 4th Session Rule''
formula experience a loss of subsidy greater than 5 percent
from the amount which would otherwise have been receivable
under the Performance Funding System regulations superceded
by such formula: Provided further, That, in fiscal year 2006
and all fiscal years hereafter, no amounts under this heading
in any appropriations Act may be used for payments to public
housing agencies for the costs of operation and management of
public housing for any year prior to the current year of such
Act: Provided further, That no funds may be used under this
heading for the purposes specified in section 9(k) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended.
Native American Housing Block Grants
(including transfer of funds)
For the Native American Housing Block Grants program, as
authorized under title I of the Native American Housing
Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) (25
U.S.C. 4111 et seq.), $600,000,000, to remain available until
expended. Notwithstanding the Native American Housing
Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, to determine
the amount of the allocation under title I of such Act for
each Indian tribe, the Secretary shall apply the formula
under section 302 of such Act with the need component based
on single-race Census data and with the need component based
on multi-race Census data, and the amount of the allocation
for each Indian tribe shall be the greater of the two
resulting allocation amounts. Of funds made available under
this heading, $1,200,000 shall be contracted through the
Secretary as technical assistance and capacity building to be
used by the National American Indian Housing Council in
support of the implementation of NAHASDA; of which $2,308,000
shall be to support the inspection of Indian housing units,
contract expertise, training, and
[[Page H5443]]
technical assistance in the training, oversight, and
management of Indian housing and tenant-based assistance,
including up to $300,000 for related travel; of which
$45,000,000 shall be for the Indian Community Development
Block Grant program under title I of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5301
et seq.), for grants to Indian tribes notwithstanding section
106(a)(1) of such Act, to be allocated using the same
methodology as fiscal year 2005 funds of which up to
$4,000,000 may be used for emergencies that constitute
imminent threats to health and safety, notwithstanding any
other provision of law (including section 205 of the Act):
Provided, That of the amount provided under this heading,
$2,000,000 shall be made available for the cost of guaranteed
notes and other obligations, as authorized by title VI of
NAHASDA: Provided further, That such costs, including the
costs of modifying such notes and other obligations, shall be
as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are
available to subsidize the total principal amount of any
notes and other obligations, any part of which is to be
guaranteed, not to exceed $17,926,000: Provided further, That
for administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan
program, up to $150,000 from amounts in the first proviso,
which shall be transferred to and merged with the
appropriation for ``Salaries and Expenses''.
native hawaiian housing block grant
For the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program, as
authorized under title VIII of the Native American Housing
Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4111
et seq.), $8,815,000, to remain available until expended, of
which $352,606 shall be for training and technical assistance
activities.
Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account
(including transfer of funds)
For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by section
184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12
U.S.C. 1715z-13a), $2,645,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That such costs, including the costs of
modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided
further, That these funds are available to subsidize total
loan principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to
exceed $98,966,942.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
guaranteed loan program, up to $250,000 from amounts in the
first paragraph, which shall be transferred to and merged
with the appropriation for ``Salaries and Expenses''.
Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund Program Account
(including transfer of funds)
For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by section
184A of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12
U.S.C. 1715z-13b), $882,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That such costs, including the costs of
modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided
further, That these funds are available to subsidize total
loan principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to
exceed $35,000,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
guaranteed loan program, up to $35,000 from amounts in the
first paragraph, which shall be transferred to and merged
with the appropriation for ``Salaries and Expenses.''
Community Planning and Development
Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS
For carrying out the Housing Opportunities for Persons with
AIDS program, as authorized by the AIDS Housing Opportunity
Act (42 U.S.C. 12901 et seq.), $285,000,000 to remain
available until September 30, 2007, except that amounts
allocated pursuant to section 854(c)(3) of such Act shall
remain available until September 30, 2008: Provided, That the
Secretary shall renew all expiring contracts for permanent
supportive housing that were funded under section 854(c)(3)
of such Act that meet all program requirements before
awarding funds for new contracts and activities authorized
under this section: Provided further, That the Secretary may
use up to $1,000,000 of the funds under this heading for
training, oversight, and technical assistance activities.
Amendment Offered by Mr. Nadler
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Nadler:
Page 76, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
Page 95, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(reduced by $5,000,000)''.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make sure before I start
that we have the amended amendment that says $5 million, not $10
million.
The ACTING Chairman. Without objection, the Clerk will report the
amendment.
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the amendment.
The ACTING Chairman. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
{time} 2045
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
although I am not going to take 5 minutes.
This amendment would increase the appropriation for the Housing
Opportunity For Persons with AIDS program.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment would increase the appropriation for the
Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS program, or HOPWA, by $5
million.
I thank Chairman Knollenberg and Ranking Member Olver for
recommending a $3 million increase from last year's appropriation,
significantly more than the administration request. But this follows a
$13 million cut last year.
Adequately meeting the housing needs of all those living with HIV/
AIDS would take over $2 billion. More than 100 Members, from both sides
of the aisle, joined me in asking the Appropriations committee for $385
million in HOPWA funding in FY06. This amendment, however, seeks only
to restore the cuts from last year and return HOPWA to the FY04 level
of $295 million.
The costs associated with the new AIDS treatments often force people
to choose between essential medications and other necessities, such as
housing. HOPWA answers this need. With 91 percent of HOPWA recipients
having family incomes less than $1,000 per month, program recipients
simply cannot afford the cuts HOPWA has taken.
HOPWA is an extremely fiscally sound program. It supplies a low-cost
alternative to acute-care hospital beds, typically paid for by
Medicaid. Acute-care facilities cost Medicaid, on average, more than
$1,000 a day, while assistance under HOPWA costs as little as $55 to
$110 a day.
Nationwide, thousands of people are now on waiting lists for HOPWA-
funded housing. The housing crisis facing people living with HIV/AIDS
imposes enormous costs on individuals with the disease and on their
families and communities. Without adequate HOPWA funding, AIDS patients
will continue to flood our emergency rooms and shelters, and our
Medicaid rolls. Let's get back at least to the FY04 funding level.
I thank Messrs. Shays and Crowley for co-sponsoring this amendment,
and demonstrating the bipartisan support HOPWA enjoys. I strongly urge
the adoption of this amendment.
Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. NADLER. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I accept the amendment.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I was going to add that
I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) and the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) for their cooperation, and the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) and the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Crowley) for cosponsoring the amendment. I appreciate the
gentleman's acceptance, and I will take ``yes'' for an answer, happily.
Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent
request to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).
(Mr. SHAYS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of the amendment to increase
HOPWA funding to its Fiscal Year 2004 level of $293 million.
This amendment is tremendously important for thousands of people
afflicted with AIDS. I appreciate the good work the Chairman has done
on this bill, as well as the fiscal constraints of this budget cycle.
The bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is when it comes to the HOPWA program I
think we should provide more.
The Centers for Disease Control, CDC, estimates there are between 1
and 1.2 million Americans living with HIV and AIDS. A majority of these
individuals will face a housing crisis at some point during their
illness as a result of increased medical expenses and lost wages. HOPWA
is the only federal program specifically designed to meet their needs.
The HOPWA program is one of the most cost-effective ways to provide
people living with HIV/AIDS with adequate and affordable housing. Acute
care facilities, under Medicaid cost more than $1,000 a day as compared
to
[[Page H5444]]
HOPWA community housing, which averages $55 to $110 per day.
The program keeps those living with HIV/AIDS off the streets and out
of expensive acute care facilities.
My predecessor, Stewart B. McKinney, died of AIDS-related pneumonia.
His wife, Lucie, carries on his work as chairman of the Stewart B.
McKinney Foundation. This foundation is dedicated to providing housing
to persons and families living with HIV/AIDS. The McKinney House and
other HOPWA programs approach the HIV crisis in a truly caring,
community-based and cost-effective manner.
Because 90 percent of HOPWA funds are distributed to States by
formula, States and localities control how money is spent--not the
Federal Government. Communities, are empowered to use HOPWA funds to
meet their unique housing needs--from providing short-term supportive
housing for low-income persons with HIV/AIDS, to building new community
residences.
The flexibility has, in large measure, contributed to the widespread
success of the HOPWA program. The bottom line is that money for HOPWA
is money well spent. I urge support for this amendment.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Bass). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
rural housing and economic development
For the Office of Rural Housing and Economic Development in
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, $10,000,000
to remain available until expended, which amount shall be
competitively awarded by September 1, 2006, to Indian tribes,
State housing finance agencies, State community and/or
economic development agencies, local rural nonprofits and
community development corporations to support innovative
housing and economic development activities in rural areas.
Community Development Fund
(including transfers of funds)
For assistance to units of State and local government, and
to other entities, for economic and community development
activities, and for other purposes, $4,151,500,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2008, unless otherwise
specified: Provided, That of the amount provided,
$3,859,900,000 is for carrying out the community development
block grant program under title I of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (the ``Act''
herein) (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.): Provided further, That
unless explicitly provided for under this heading not to
exceed 20 percent of any grant made with funds appropriated
under this heading shall be expended for planning and
management development and administration: Provided further,
That $1,600,000 shall be transferred to the Working Capital
Fund.
Amendment Offered by Ms. Waters
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Ms. Waters:
Page 77, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(increased by $6,944,000)''.
Page 157, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(reduced by $6,944,000)''.
Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the
gentlewoman's amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the order of the House today, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) each will 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.
Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment that is basically known as the
section 108 loan guarantee amendment. This is an amendment that is
offered to the Community Development Grant Fund for cities and counties
that would allow them to continue to have a section 108 loan guarantee
program for the purpose of big-scale developments in the cities that
would be guaranteed by the CDBG funds.
These are very important economic development funds. In the past, we
have had a substantial amount of money in this fund, and it has been
used by the cities to create jobs and to rebuild downtowns, to
rehabilitate old towns, to basically not only create jobs, but
revitalize cities.
So we are simply asking that we take a small amount of money from the
advertising section of the drug policy section of the budget so that we
not only not transfer, but we keep some money in this fund by which to
keep section 108 a viable program.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I oppose any amendment to continue the section 108 loan
program which is recommended for elimination as part of a broad sweep
of lower-priority programs. We must reduce or eliminate these programs
in order to free up the funds for the highest priorities in HUD:
assistance to extremely low-income families and restoring funds for
community development.
There are many good reasons for terminating the program which the
administration has proposed to do for the last 4 years. This program
has been rated as ineffective, underutilized, and lacks accountability.
First and foremost, this program duplicates several others that,
relatively speaking, have a long history of success. CDBG economic
development loans and grants average about $500 million annually. New
markets tax credits, $15 billion in subsidy over 5 years. Empowerment
Zones, enterprise and renewal community tax credits and SBA loans are
part as well of this successful side.
Mr. Chairman, I want to state further that section 108 loans are
among the most expensive forms of financing relative to tax-exempt
State and local borrowing. The program is contrary to the Department of
Treasury rules and principles in effect today for all loan programs.
The program is already in decline. Last year, only 74 took out
section 108 loans, 74 out of 4,000 eligible communities.
Finally, the program will not end in 2006 even if there are no funds
in 2006. Ample funds from prior years will carry the program forward
for at least the next 2 years. Over $13 million is still available to
guarantee over 550 million in new loans, even if no new funds are
provided.
So I would urge my colleagues to vote against restoring this program.
I know the gentlewoman wants it very badly, but we really do not have a
need for it; and we want to preserve HUD's highest-priority programs
instead.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Indiana (Mr. Souder).
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I also want to talk briefly about the
offset from ONDCP, the Office of National Drug Control Policy and the
national ad campaign. This was funded under former President Clinton at
a level of $180 million back in the 1990s. What we have seen is it is
reduced all the way down to $120 million in this bill, which means that
it is barely able to sustain itself, given that advertising costs have
gone up.
There is an amendment later in this bill that the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Larson) and I are doing in a bipartisan way to try to
increase the dollars so we can afford and fund anti-meth campaigns
around this country, as we are also doing under ONDCP in the High
Intensity Drug Trafficking area.
This amendment, though it is not a large amount, would potentially be
an absolutely crippling blow to this particular program and certainly
would end any chance for us to do any meth advertising in this budget.
Thus, I ask people who support our efforts to combat methamphetamine to
vote against this amendment.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman from Michigan has described
something other than section 108 loan guarantee programs. Section 108
loan guarantee programs are considered one of the most potent and
important public investment tools that HUD offers to local governments.
It allows agencies to transform a small portion of their CDBG funds
into federally guaranteed loans large enough to pursue physical and
economic revitalization projects that can renew entire neighborhoods.
It is a very effective public investment.
The small amount of money that I am asking to be taken from the drug
program is from the advertising budget. I do not want to spend a lot of
time
[[Page H5445]]
talking about the ineffectiveness of that program; I simply can say
that that program has not reduced drug use in this country, despite the
millions of dollars that we have spent.
Again, $120 million is a lot of money for an advertising program that
does very little to deter anybody from using drugs. I would hope that
some day there will be some restructuring of that program to try and
make it more effective, because I really do think it is a waste,
practically, of the taxpayers' money.
Having said that, I would advise my colleagues that many of you have
section 108 loan programs in your districts that are providing funds
for great revitalization; and should these funds not be available or we
not continue this program or show some support for this program, in
addition to whatever dollars are remaining, I think you will find that
your cities will be very disappointed, because this is the only money
that they have been able to count on that is not scored against the
budget to do this kind of revitalization and job creation.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
The amendment was rejected.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Committee will rise informally.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hayes) assumed the Chair.
____________________