[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 129 (Thursday, October 6, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H8663-H8668]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1515
            HURRICANE KATRINA EMERGENCY HOUSING ACT OF 2005

  Mr. BAKER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 3894) to provide for waivers under certain housing 
assistance programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
to assist victims of Hurricane Katrina in obtaining housing, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3894

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Hurricane Katrina Emergency 
     Housing Act of 2005''.

     SEC. 2. WAIVERS FOR SECTION 8 VOUCHER PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Secretary'') may, for all or any part of the period 
     specified under subsection (c), waive any of the requirements 
     described in subsection (b) in the connection with the 
     provision of assistance under section 8(o) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) on behalf of 
     an individual or family if--
       (1) the individual or family--
       (A) resides or resided, on August 25, 2005, in any area 
     that is subject to a declaration by the President of a major 
     disaster or emergency under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
     Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) 
     in connection with Hurricane Katrina; or
       (B) resides or resided, on September 24, 2005, in any area 
     that is subject to a declaration by the President of a major 
     disaster or emergency under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
     Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) 
     in connection with Hurricane Rita;
       (2) the residence of the individual or family became 
     uninhabitable or inaccessible as result of such major 
     disaster or emergency; and
       (3) as of the date referred to in paragraph (1), as 
     applicable, rental assistance under such section 8(o) was 
     provided on behalf of such individual or family.
       (b) Waiver of Eligibility Requirements.--The requirements 
     described in this subsection are the requirements under--
       (1) paragraph (2) of section 8(o) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(2)), relating to 
     tenant contributions towards rent, except that any such 
     waiver shall expire on an individual's return to work;
       (2) paragraph (4) of such section 8(o), relating to the 
     eligibility of individuals to receive assistance;
       (3) subsection (k) of such section 8 and paragraph (5) of 
     such section 8(o), relating to verification of income;
       (4) paragraph (7)(A) of such section 8(o), relating to the 
     requirement that leases shall be for a term of 1 year;
       (5) paragraph (8) of such section 8(o), relating to initial 
     inspection of housing units by a public housing agency;
       (6) subsection (r)(1)(B) of such section 8, relating to 
     restrictions on portability;
       (7) any regulation, notice, or order requiring prior 
     approval by the Secretary with respect to any addendum to the 
     model lease that permits lease terminations in the event that 
     a tenant--
       (A) was not eligible for assistance at the time of lease 
     approval;
       (B) would not have been eligible for assistance if a 
     criminal background check had been completed prior to lease 
     approval; or
       (C) would not have met that landlord's screening criteria 
     with respect to rent or credit history if a full a screening 
     had been completed prior to lease approval; and
       (8) any regulation or Executive Order providing for access 
     to Federally funded programs by eligible persons having 
     limited English proficiency.
       (c) Termination of Authority.--The period specified under 
     this subsection is the 12-month period beginning on the date 
     of the enactment of this Act., unless before the expiration 
     of the 6-month period beginning on such date of enactment the 
     Secretary makes a determination that waivers under this 
     section are no longer needed, in which case the period 
     specified under this subsection is the 6-month period 
     beginning on such date of enactment.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY TO DIRECTLY ADMINISTER 
                   VOUCHERS WHEN PHAS ARE UNABLE TO DO SO.

       If the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     determines that a public housing agency is unable to 
     implement the provisions of subsection (o) of section 8 of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) or 
     section 2 of this Act due to the effects of Hurricane Katrina 
     or Hurricane Rita, the Secretary may--
       (1) directly administer any voucher program described in 
     such subsection or in section 2 of this Act; and
       (2) perform the functions assigned to a public housing 
     agency by such subsection or section 2 of this Act.

     SEC. 4. WAIVERS FOR PROJECT-BASED SECTION 8 TO FACILITATE 
                   HOUSING OF AFFECTED FAMILIES.

       (a) In General.--For all or part of the period specified 
     under subsection (c), the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Secretary'') may waive the applicability of any of the 
     requirements described subsection (b) with respect to any 
     housing provided project-based assistance under section 8 of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) for 
     any individual or family that meets the requirements of 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 2(a) of this Act.
       (b) Provisions Waived.--The requirements described in this 
     subsection are--
       (1) section 3(a) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)), relating to tenant contributions 
     towards rent, except that any such waiver shall expire on an 
     individual's return to work;
       (2) section 8(k) of such Act, relating to verification of 
     income;
       (3) section 8(d)(1)(B)(i) of such Act, relating to the 
     requirement that leases shall be for a term of 1 year;
       (4) any requirement relating to initial inspection of 
     housing units by a public housing agency;
       (5) any regulation, notice, or order requiring prior 
     approval by the Secretary with respect to any addendum to the 
     model lease that permits lease terminations in the event that 
     a tenant--
       (A) was not eligible for assistance at the time of lease 
     approval;
       (B) would not have been eligible for assistance if a 
     criminal background check had been completed prior to lease 
     approval; or
       (C) would not have met that landlord's screening criteria 
     with respect to rent or credit history if a full a screening 
     had been completed prior to lease approval; and
       (6) any regulation or Executive Order providing for access 
     to Federally funded programs by eligible persons having 
     limited English proficiency.
       (c) Termination.--The period specified under this 
     subsection is the 12-month period beginning on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act., unless before the expiration of 
     the 6-month period beginning on such date of enactment the 
     Secretary makes a determination that waivers under this 
     section are no longer needed, in which case the period 
     specified under this subsection is the 6-month period 
     beginning on such date of enactment.

     SEC. 5. PRESERVATION OF PROJECT-BASED SECTION 8 HOUSING 
                   ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS CONTRACTS FOR DAMAGED OR 
                   DESTROYED HOUSING UNITS.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a project-based 
     housing assistance payments contract entered into pursuant to 
     section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f) covering a project damaged or destroyed by Hurricane 
     Katrina or Hurricane Rita shall not expire or be terminated 
     because of the damage or destruction of dwelling units in the 
     project. The expiration date of the contract shall be deemed 
     to be the later of the date specified in the contract or a 
     date ending three months after the units are first made 
     habitable.

     SEC. 6. REPORT ON INVENTORY OF AVAILABILITY OF FACILITIES AND 
                   PROPERTIES FOR HOUSING USE.

       (a) Compiling of Inventory.--Not later than 20 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the 
     Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of the General 
     Services Administration, the Secretary of Agriculture, the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and such other agency heads as 
     the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development determines 
     appropriate, and the Federal National Mortgage Association 
     and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, shall compile 
     an inventory of Federal civilian and defense facilities (or, 
     in the case of the Federal National Mortgage Association and 
     the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, properties held 
     by such entities) that--
       (A) identifies such facilities and properties that can be 
     used--

[[Page H8664]]

       (i) to provide emergency housing;
       (ii) as locations for the construction or deployment of 
     temporary housing units; or
       (iii) to provide permanent housing; and
       (B) for each such facility and property included, 
     identifies the appropriate use or uses under clauses (i) 
     through (iii) of subparagraph (A); and
       (2) each such agency head and entity shall submit the 
     inventory compiled pursuant to paragraph (1) to the Secretary 
     of Housing and Urban Development.
       (b) Report to Congress.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development shall compile and submit to the 
     Congress an aggregate inventory comprised of the inventory 
     compiled by the Secretary pursuant to subsection (a) and all 
     the inventories submitted to the Secretary pursuant to such 
     subsection.

     SEC. 7. GAO REPORT ON STATE EMERGENCY HOUSING PLANS.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     submit a report to the Congress--
       (1) identifying any States that have developed emergency 
     housing contingency plans for use in the event of a disaster;
       (2) describing such plans; and
       (3) assessing the effectiveness of such plans.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). Pursuant to the rule, the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) and the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Waters) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker).
  Mr. BAKER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3894, Hurricane 
Katrina Emergency Housing Act of 2005. The legislation authorizes the 
Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to waive 
several limitations on the rental voucher programs. These waivers will 
allow us to help families who have been displaced by the hurricanes to 
move quickly to secure shelter they so desperately need.
  Having a roof over your head is one of the most basic human needs. In 
the aftermath of the storms, Federal and local governments now face the 
monumental task of coordinating the relocation of thousands upon 
thousands of individuals across the entire Nation.
  This legislation will assist those displaced individuals and families 
who are already receiving assistance under section 8 to quickly find 
housing, and I wish to reiterate the point: this assistance being 
modified is for those currently qualified to receive section 8 
assistance. Under the bill, HUD is given the statutory authority to 
waive the section 8 voucher eligibility requirements for a period not 
to exceed 1 year. Specifically, HUD is given the authority to waive 
tenant contributions toward rent eligibility of individuals to receive 
assistance, income verification, 1-year lease term, initial inspections 
of housing units, portability restrictions, model leasing, and English 
proficiency regulations.
  This bill provides similar waivers for the project-based section 8 
program with the exception of eligibility of individuals to receive 
assistance.
  In addition, H.R. 3894 includes a provision to preserve existing 
project-based section 8 housing assistance payments contracts for those 
who were either damaged or destroyed due to hurricanes Katrina and 
Rita.
  In an effort to better address the needs of individuals and families 
displaced by the storms, DOD, HUD, Veterans Affairs, and government-
sponsored enterprises are instructed to compile a list of Federal, 
civilian, and defense facilities that can be used as temporary housing, 
as locations to construct or deploy temporary housing or provide 
permanent housing. This information is to be coordinated by HUD within 
30 days of enactment of the bill, and the Secretary of HUD is required 
to report to the Congress accordingly. GAO is also instructed to 
conduct a study of State emergency plans to assess their effectiveness.
  I would also want to speak to the role of the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Alexander), who has worked tirelessly on this important 
legislation, is the principal author of the measure, and with his 
assistance brings it to the floor for consideration of the bill.
  I would urge my colleagues to support final passage.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, a little over a month ago, the gulf coast region was 
struck with one of the worst natural disasters ever to fall upon this 
country, Hurricane Katrina followed by Hurricane Rita.
  In its wake, Katrina left hundreds of thousands of homes destroyed, 
over 1 million citizens displaced, and countless families separated.
  Madam Speaker, after the hurricane, hundreds of thousands of people 
were forced into churches, armories, hotels, community centers, Red 
Cross-managed shelters, the Cajun Dome, the Superdome, the Astrodome 
and on and on and on. Almost 5 weeks after Katrina, more than 100,000 
people are still living in shelters, over 442,000 more in hotels, 4,600 
on cruise ships, and untold others are camping out.
  Now, certainly shelters are a short-term solution. None of us can be 
satisfied with what we have accomplished to date. We are failing to 
manage a credible program to house these hurricane victims. We can do 
better than that.
  We in the Congress of the United States as public policy-makers have 
a responsibility to these victims to provide swift and targeted 
resources in order to assist in the reconstruction of homes, 
communities, and cities.
  Today, we have three Katrina-related housing bills on the suspension 
calendar. None of them are adequate to do what needs to be done to get 
people out of shelters, to get people into viable temporary housing, or 
to rebuild the housing that has been lost in the gulf region.
  H.R. 3894 provides temporary waivers for several bureaucratic 
provisions within the section 8 housing program, but it does nothing in 
the way of adding new vouchers or addressing the immediate need for 
housing construction in the affected areas; nor does this bill attempt 
to address the existing affordable housing crisis in other parts of the 
country, especially those cities providing shelter for the evacuees.
  Madam Speaker, instead of providing additional resources to programs 
which we know work and which we know have the infrastructure to provide 
immediate relief and assistance to those most in need, we have again 
left the door open for another blank check to be written by FEMA.
  This bill is a bill that would allow for an expedited process within 
the section 8 housing program. It will waive several requirements for 
what have been described as cumbersome roadblocks to housing section 8 
voucher holders, such as income verification, tenant contributions, and 
initial inspections.
  These things are helping, and of course, I am going to support the 
bill; but what I am really concerned about is all of those persons who 
were on the waiting list for vouchers, who are already eligible, even 
if they are given some temporary assistance from FEMA, even if they got 
it for 18 months, what happens then. They still need housing. They 
still are, what, on the waiting list?
  It is all right to waive some of these bureaucratic rules, but this 
is the time that we should be thinking about what we can do about 
homelessness. That is not even addressed here. This simply says, if you 
had a section 8 voucher, we will replace it and we will make it a 
little bit easier for you. It does not talk about the homeless people 
who were not even in the system, nor does it talk about those who are 
on the waiting list.
  There is an article that I would like to just read verbatim because I 
think it describes the mess that we are in; and while I do this, I am 
not placing blame on my friends on the opposite side of the aisle. Even 
though I am very concerned that we were so slow in getting to the floor 
with even this legislation that does not do a lot, I am really 
concerned that we did not take this as an opportunity to really deal 
with the housing crisis in the gulf as it is a housing crisis all over 
the country.
  This is an article that I am just going to read because I think it 
sums it up very well: ``Housing Promises to Evacuees Have Fallen 
Short.'' It is a Washington Post article that was written just a few 
days ago, 10/2/2005, by Spencer S. Hsu and Elizabeth Williamson:
  ``Red Cross to Halt Hotel Stipends in 2 weeks, and Hundreds of 
Shelters Have

[[Page H8665]]

Closed.'' Well, what is important about this is the President of the 
United States said he wanted everybody out of the shelters by October 
15. That deadline is not going to be met.
  ``Two weeks before President Bush's mid-October goal for moving 
Hurricane Katrina victims out of shelters, more than 100,000 people 
still reside in such makeshift housing, and 400,000 more are in hotel 
rooms costing up to $100 a night. Housing options promised by the 
Federal Government a month ago have largely failed to materialize. 
Cruise ships and trailer parks have so far proved in large part to be 
unworkable, while an American Red Cross program, paid for by the 
Federal Government that allows storm victims to stay in motels or 
hotels is scheduled to expire October 15.
  ``It is projected to cost the Federal Emergency Management Agency as 
much as $168 million. Federal officials are struggling to launch an 
alternative interim housing program that would give families whose 
homes are destroyed or uninhabitable a lump sum of $2,358 in rental 
assistance, or $786 a month for 3 months, with the possibility of a 15-
month extension.
  ``So far, 330,000 families have signed up for the housing assistance. 
But if evacuees have to use those stipends to pay for hotel rooms when 
FEMA stops covering such lodging, the funds will not last long. Last 
week, the number of evacuees in hotels increased from 220,000 to more 
than 400,000 people in 140,000 rooms. Many have no idea what they will 
do when the program ends in 2 weeks.'' No idea.
  And they talk about this one man, whose case I am just going to read 
from this article: ``Ronnie Ashworth, a truck driver from Chalmette, 
Louisiana, east of New Orleans, currently lives at the Baton Rouge 
Marriott. If no other housing is forthcoming after October 15, `I'll be 
sleeping in the back of my truck,' Ashworth, 60, said. `I have no funds 
right now.'
  ``Red Cross spokeswoman Carrie Martin said, `We're administering the 
hotel program with the expectation that it ends on October 15. After 
that, we'll still have shelters open, but we definitely don't want to 
move backwards.' Meanwhile, more than 100,000 people remain in about 
1,000 shelters operated by the Red Cross, smaller charities and 
churches, scattered across two dozen States as far flung as New York 
and Washington.''
  I am going to discontinue reading this article because I think my 
colleagues get the picture, and I think we are all desirous of doing 
something substantial. But how long has it taken us to get to the floor 
with this minimal response to the housing problems of the victims of 
Hurricane Katrina and now Rita?
  Madam Speaker, I think we can do better than this, and we should be 
on this floor today not only talking about vouchers simply for those 
who held vouchers before; but we should be talking about those people 
who were waiting for vouchers. We should be talking about how we are 
going to build permanent low- and moderate-income housing. Right now we 
are failing.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BAKER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would just like to state that I agree with much of what the 
gentlewoman had to offer to the House in her comments with regard to 
long-term and permanent assistance for those dislocated by the storms.
  I certainly believe that people should be given the ability to make 
the best choices for their families, take vouchers, and move wherever 
it suits their family's need close to employment, close to job 
training, whatever suits their circumstance best.
  Unfortunately, we in Louisiana who feel that way have had a different 
path outlined by our Governor. I read her most recent comment: ``The 
path I have outlined, moving our people from shelters or the homes of 
in-laws or friends or into hotels and transitional trailer communities 
here in Louisiana, gives our people hope. It gives them a clear path 
that they can see, a path that will help them get their lives together 
and get them home to Louisiana.''
  I do not necessarily share that perspective. I think we should be 
doing the highest and best job with the limited resources that are 
available to us, and I agree with the gentlewoman that we should be 
doing something on a grander scale. The bills before the House today 
are merely modest steps. They are significant progress, but we need to 
do better.
  Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Alexander), the principal sponsor of the bill.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Madam Speaker, to begin with I want to thank the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Baker) for his leadership and his contribution to the 
State of Louisiana, both with the Committee on Financial Services and 
within our delegation.
  Because of the hurricanes in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, over 
1 million households have been affected. Between 40 and 50 percent of 
those households, whether rented or owned, will need to be completely 
replaced. These are high numbers and do not even include Katrina's 
damage in Florida. In fact, FEMA estimates that 300,000 families are 
homeless and 200,000 will require government housing.
  This is a housing crisis unlike anything we have seen in this country 
due to a natural disaster. Here in the United States, a country that 
gives more in aid to countries around the world than any other, we have 
largely been unable to provide the basic need of housing for our 
citizens.
  Today is the 36th day since Hurricane Katrina made landfall, and 
there are still thousands of Louisianans in shelters across this 
country and the State of Louisiana.

                              {time}  1530

  These numbers do not even reflect the number of people living in 
private homes, in churches and motels.
  For 36 days now, these people have slept on cots. They have eaten at 
community tables and showered in communal facilities. These people, the 
citizens of our country, want their privacy. They want to use the phone 
at will. They want to sleep in their own beds. They want to have the 
freedom to walk around without carrying their belongings, and they want 
to tuck their children into bed at night in peace and not have 
strangers watching them. In this country of great prosperity and 
resources, people should not be forced to live like this for over a 
month.
  This act will give the Secretary of HUD the authority to waive 
specific requirements under section 8 and project-based assistance 
programs for victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in order to 
expedite emergency housing assistance to those families that need it 
the most. This waiver authority will last for a period of 6 months, 
with a 6-month extension beyond that if the Secretary deems it 
necessary.
  By waiving the requirements of verification of income and initial 
inspection of units, we are enabling displaced persons who have lost 
documentation due to the hurricanes to obtain vouchers and ensuring 
occupancy immediately by waiving the initial inspections.
  By removing the 1-year rental contract requirement that the vouchers 
be confined to a specific area, we are making sure that people have the 
flexibility to determine where and how they will live. While many 
people are deciding what to do on a permanent basis, they still need 
temporary but independent living arrangements. This bill does just 
that.
  This bill authorizes the Secretary to directly administer section 8 
vouchers if the appropriate housing agency is unable to do so because 
of damage or displaced employees due to the hurricanes. This will 
ensure that those persons traditionally served will continue to be 
served by HUD's programs.
  This bill requires the Secretary to report to Congress within 30 days 
of the enactment of this legislation on Federal, civilian and Defense 
facilities that can be used to provide emergency housing or as 
locations for construction or deployment of temporary housing units.
  Lastly, it requires the Comptroller General to submit a report to 
Congress identifying and describing States that have developed 
emergency housing contingency plans for use in the event of a disaster 
to help us be better prepared the next time.
  While I recognize that this is not all that is needed to address the 
housing

[[Page H8666]]

crisis, this is a step in the right direction and part of the overall 
plan to get people into more permanent living arrangements. We cannot 
solely rely on the trailer plan to house displaced persons. These 
vouchers offer choice to people, use existing housing and do not 
necessitate the need to build additional public housing.
  I am concerned for the people of my State. I am concerned for the 
people of the gulf coast region. It is time for us to take action to 
get these people out of the shelters and into apartments, into homes or 
into a place where they can begin to start their lives over. These are 
Americans. They are our citizens. I urge my colleagues to help pass 
H.R. 3894. It is time that we act to get our citizens out of these 
shelters and into homes.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) for yielding me this time. She 
is the ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee on Housing and Community 
Opportunity and has been playing a very leading role, not just now but 
for years, on housing issues, and I fully subscribe to her really very 
forceful and eloquent description of where we are.
  Let me take up where she left off. I am going to vote for this bill. 
It is later than we would like. It is less, in some ways, than we like, 
but everything it does do, it seems to me, is useful. And I want to 
express my appreciation to the Members on the other side who had, I 
believe, a role in making sure of this.
  There was some original fear that the housing vouchers or the 
equivalence of vouchers which will be funded out of FEMA would somehow 
be competing with the existing voucher program. Several of my 
colleagues told me that they had heard from housing authorities in 
their areas, in other parts of the country that they were being told, 
Okay, here come these FEMA people, they go to the head of the list, and 
they would in effect take a voucher away where there are waiting lists.
  Let us be clear that that is not happening. These are additives. 
These are additional. So it is very important to note that, because as 
the gentlewoman from California noted, we have waiting lists. We have 
an ongoing problem, and this does not make it any worse, but it does 
not make it any better. But let us be clear, it does not make it worse. 
So anyone who was under that misimpression, we had a briefing, and I 
appreciate the majority facilitating this, and staff from both sides 
and Members were there, and FEMA and HUD both made it very explicit to 
us that these are additional to the voucher program. So no one should 
feel they are going to be competing with someone already there.
  The next question, though, is, what do we do next? Yes, it is 
important to get people the vouchers, but they are a short-term 
solution by definition: 6 months and 6 months. We hope people will be 
able to find some alternatives. But what do we do? That is the point I 
want to address, because this underlines the need for us to get back in 
the business of helping construct on a permanent basis new affordable 
housing.
  We made great mistakes as a society decades ago by building for low-
income people Columbia Point or Pruitt Igoe or Cabrini Green, large 
sterile warehouses for far too many people with far too few services, 
and they did not work well, and not because of any character defect in 
the people that lived there but because of the inherent flaw in the way 
they were planned. We have learned since then how to use public money 
to build housing that is desirable; how, in particular, to use public 
money in conjunction with private developers, profit-making and 
nonprofit, to provide decent homes.
  There has been a lot of concern here about making sure that faith-
based organizations are allowed to participate in government programs. 
Well, in the housing area, there is nothing new about that. Faith-based 
organizations for years have been the leaders in using Federal programs 
to provide affordable housing. In my own State of Massachusetts, the 
Boston Archdiocese and Office of Urban Planning has been a superb 
provider of affordable housing. So has the Jewish Community Housing for 
the Elderly. If you talk to the Association of Homes for the Aging, 
religious entities are very much involved.
  I would note that none of them ever told me that they had to 
discriminate in hiring to provide that housing. But what we should be 
doing is taking advantage of that experience and broadening it, because 
we have got to the point where the only housing that has been built has 
been for older people. And that is important, building housing for the 
elderly and the disabled, but as we now see, we also need some family 
housing.
  Here is the problem: If all we do is what we are doing today, and 
what we are doing today is important and I am for it, but if this is 
all we do, a year from now, where will these people live? Because there 
is not this great excess of affordable residential units all over the 
country. There are pockets where there are.
  We also have the question about what happens in New Orleans and other 
areas. Now, I was very distressed to hear the Secretary of HUD say; not 
surprised, I must add but distressed, that when New Orleans is rebuilt, 
there will be fewer African-Americans there. Shame on us if that is the 
result because, where are these people supposed to go? This was their 
home. This was a community. And we should be providing temporary help, 
but we should also be determined to allow this community to rebuild 
itself.
  That does not mean building inadequate housing in the middle of a 
floodplain. It does not mean having people be vulnerable to floods. It 
means we should use our wit and our resources to provide replacement 
housing for people that is better and safer and protected. We know how 
to do that.
  So as I support this bill today, I want to reaffirm, and I know the 
gentlewoman from California has been a leader on this, and I want to 
acknowledge that the gentleman from Louisiana, who is managing this 
bill, he and I and others on our committee are working on one piece of 
legislation that might be a vehicle for this, that there are many ways 
to do it. But I want to stress the importance of, after the vouchers, 
then what?
  If we want to allow people to move back not just to New Orleans but 
to the Mississippi gulf and other communities, then we, in part, should 
be building housing. There are other things we need to today, and our 
committee is working on that and working with the financial community.
  And in this context, I really have to express my great disappointment 
here in the President's approach. When the President gave his major 
speech not for the interim but for the longer-term situation, the only 
housing situation he addressed was the homeownership through an urban 
homesteading plan. Now, homesteading has a great history in the United 
States. And in the 19th century, people were given a piece of land out 
in the unsettled parts of the country, and they could chop down trees, 
and they could build their houses. I do not think that model translates 
all that well to an urban area.
  I do not think, when the people in New Orleans are given a piece of 
land, which is what the President's program says, I will give you the 
land but nothing else, even if there were any trees left after the 
flood, I do not think the average returning resident of New Orleans 
will be able to chop them down and build a house. The urban 
homesteading plan is wholly inadequate. By definition, the President's 
urban homesteading plan helps a very small percentage of those who need 
the help. He is having a lottery.
  Since when for a program to meet basic human needs do you have a 
lottery, which by definition means a very small percentage of the 
people get in there? Just look at the inadequacy of that program. It 
says the Federal Government will try to find property it owns. It will 
not be based on suitability about where to build. It will be on what 
the Federal Government owns and has no use for and then will be made 
available to a small percentage of people. And then they are on their 
own and have to find somehow some money to build on it or to 
rehabilitate it. That just does not make sense.
  What we need to do, following on from this, is a sensible housing 
production program working with the local

[[Page H8667]]

officials in New Orleans and in the gulf and elsewhere, the gulf of 
Mississippi and elsewhere. Let sensible planning go forward at the 
local level, building not large sterile public housing units but mixed 
housing, because people with various incomes will need help, and 
various forms of help will be necessary.
  For some people, because we want to promote home ownership, various 
forms of mortgage assistance will make sense, so working with the 
financial institutions. For others, we will need to build some housing. 
We also, I think, have an obligation to rebuild the public housing 
units that were destroyed, not exactly as they were. We have had some 
experience, and our committee has in general voted often to reauthorize 
the HOPE 6 program, which is a way to take public housing and improve 
it.
  So, yes, I vote for this bill. I also welcome the fact it does not 
take away from the existing voucher program. It does, of course, 
emphasize the importance of the voucher program, but it also will leave 
us, and I hope we will address this in this Congress later this year or 
early next year, a program for the reconstruction of housing in New 
Orleans for people of various incomes, some of whom will not be able to 
return to their homes without the construction, with Federal help, of 
affordable housing.
  We know how to do that. We have very good examples of it. And it is 
very important that we go forward.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I, too, join with my colleague and the 
ranking member of our Financial Services Committee in commending those 
on the opposite side of the aisle who really do have the providing of 
housing for low- and moderate-income persons on the top of their 
priorities.
  And while I commend them because they have always shown an interest 
in doing this, I think we are all to be criticized for how slow this 
process is in dealing with the victims of Katrina and Rita. We have 
just got to be able to move faster than we are moving.
  And while, again, today what we do in replacing those vouchers is a 
good thing, I am still worried about the fact that there are so many 
people who needed housing even before Katrina and who are going to be 
left out there to receive whatever resources are available from FEMA, 
but they will be back in the same situation they were in before, still 
without adequate housing, still, I suppose, on some kind of a waiting 
list and still among those in the United States of America without 
decent and adequate housing for themselves and their families.

                              {time}  1545

  Let me just say, as I raise the question about us being slow and not 
doing enough, one may ask what could have been done in this period of 
time. Well, by now we should have an assessment of all of those 
buildings, all of those apartment buildings, all of those homes, many 
of which are considered dilapidated, sitting everywhere from Baton 
Rouge to Alexandria to New Iberia, on into Texas and other places where 
we could have created a program by which to provide resources to bring 
these houses and units up to code in order to create more housing. 
There are a lot of such homes, a lot of such units.
  Do not forget, many of the areas that we are dealing with were in 
deep housing crisis before Hurricane Katrina. While I am very 
respectful of the fact that FEMA moved people to Utah, California and 
New Jersey, what I am hearing is people do not want to be in New Jersey 
and in California and other places. They want to be near their homes; 
they want to be near their home cities and their home towns.
  I think that we could by now have done an assessment of all of those 
properties that could be rehabilitated, some of which are owned by 
individuals, others owned by corporations, and put together a program 
for rehabbing and rehabilitation and bringing them back online in order 
to make them available.
  We should also be about the business of converting warehouses into 
lofts and moderate-income housing. And even in some of the factory 
areas that are closed down, dilapidated, boarded up throughout the 
South, there are opportunities for the creation of housing. And there 
are many nonprofit, low-income and moderate-income developers who are 
waiting for an opportunity to be of help. I think we could have done 
more.
  While I am going to vote for this bill, I do not pat myself on the 
back, nor do I pat the Members from the other side of the aisle on the 
back. I know they may be confronted with an administration that says it 
does not want to spend any money, but I must say that our citizens do 
not want to hear that the President or this administration does not 
want to spend money to deal with this housing crisis created by a 
natural disaster at a time when we are dumping billions of dollars into 
war, into Iraq, into Afghanistan. Our citizens are disappointed that we 
are not doing better than we are doing.
  Madam Speaker, I include for the Record the complete article that I 
read a portion of titled, ``Housing Promises Made to Evacuees Have 
Fallen Short.''

                [From the Washington Post, Oct. 2, 2005]

          Housing Promises Made to Evacuees Have Fallen Short

              (by Spencer S. Hsu and Elizabeth Williamson)


 Red Cross to Halt Hotel Stipends in 2 Weeks, and Hundreds of Shelters 
                              Have Closed

       Two weeks before President Bush's mid-October goal for 
     moving Hurricane Katrina victims out of shelters, more than 
     100,000 people still reside in such makeshift housing, and 
     400,000 more are in hotel rooms costing up to $100 a night. 
     Housing options promised by the federal government a month 
     ago have largely failed to materialize. Cruise ships and 
     trailer parks have so far proved in large part to be 
     unworkable, while an American Red Cross program--paid for by 
     the federal government--that allows storm victims to stay in 
     motels or hotels is scheduled to expire Oct. 15. It is 
     projected to cost the Federal Emergency Management Agency as 
     much as $168 million. Federal officials are struggling to 
     launch an alternative interim housing program that would give 
     families whose homes are destroyed or uninhabitable a lump 
     sum of $2,358 in rental assistance, or $786 a month for three 
     months, with the possibility of a 15-month extension. So far, 
     330,000 families have signed up for the housing assistance. 
     But if evacuees have to use those stipends to pay for hotel 
     rooms when FEMA stops covering such lodging, the funds will 
     not last long. Last week, the number of evacuees in hotels 
     increased from 220,000 to more than 400,000 people, in 
     140,000 rooms. Many have no idea what they--will do when the 
     program ends in two weeks.
       Ronnie Ashworth, a truck driver from Chalmette, La., east 
     of New Orleans, currently lives at the Baton Rouge Marriott. 
     If no other housing is forthcoming after Oct. 15, ``I'll be 
     sleeping in the back of my truck,'' Ashworth, 60, said. ``I 
     have no funds right now.'' Red Cross spokeswoman Carrie 
     Martin said, ``We're administering the hotel program with the 
     expectation that it ends on October 15th. . . . After that, 
     we'll still have shelters open, but we definitely don't want 
     to move backwards.'' Meanwhile, more than 100,000 people 
     remain in about 1,000 shelters operated by the Red Cross, 
     smaller charities and churches, scattered across two dozen 
     states as far-flung as New York and Washington.
       The Red Cross has said it will keep its shelters open for 
     as long as necessary, but many are in churches and public 
     buildings that are needed for their primary functions. 
     Hundreds of shelters have closed over the past two weeks, and 
     many of their occupants, the Red Cross said, appear to be 
     moving into hotels, in hopes of benefiting from the hotel 
     program in its final days. In search of temporary housing 
     immediately after the hurricane, FEMA officials went on a 
     $1.5 billion spending spree, buying out entire dealerships of 
     recreational vehicles and signing contracts for more than 
     $500 million with one manufacturer of mobile homes. But the 
     plan to create ``cities'' of 500 to 600 RVs across the South 
     has run into major logistical and political problems. In FEMA 
     lots in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, several 
     thousand trailers stand empty, waiting for the agency to 
     navigate land leases, zoning laws, local opposition and 
     policy questions. ``We have 12,000 mobile homes with no place 
     to put them,'' said Rosemarie Hunter, a FEMA spokeswoman in 
     Baton Rouge. To date, only 1,396 trailers in Louisiana house 
     displaced people. About 1,100 are occupied by workers engaged 
     in New Orleans's recovery effort, and 173 house families left 
     homeless by the storm. Policymakers say that warehousing tens 
     of thousands of people in trailer park communities until New 
     Orleans and other cities are rebuilt could lead to the 
     creation of dysfunctional ``FEMAvilles,'' as residents of 
     past encampments have called them.
       Democrats go further, warning that they may become known as 
     ``Bushvilles,'' just as Depression-era shantytowns were 
     called ``Hoovervilles.'' Refugee Council USA, which includes 
     nine U.S. resettlement agencies that have integrated 2.5 
     million global refugees into the United States since 1975, 
     said storm victims would be better off getting on with their 
     lives--finding housing, jobs and counseling services in new 
     communities rather than waiting indefinitely for homes to be 
     rebuilt. FEMA officials agree. Evacuees,

[[Page H8668]]

     said FEMA spokesman Eugene Kinerney, ``need to consider long-
     term housing in areas where there is available rental stock 
     and prospects for employment to take care of other needs, 
     such as food.'' But some civic and political leaders worry 
     that the alternative--resettling storm victims--will lead 
     many to stay permanently in their host communities, 
     fundamentally changing the nature and politics of Louisiana 
     and possibly beyond.
       FEMA initially estimated that the homes of 300,000 families 
     were destroyed by Katrina and that 200,000 of them will need 
     government help with housing but said only time would reveal 
     the true scope of need. The lack of an effective strategy 
     to manage the largest displaced population of Americans in 
     at least 60 years has touched off a furious policy debate. 
     ``The big picture is . . . everyone who has some scheme 
     for how people should live is now living vicariously 
     through the opportunity New Orleans offers'' of a blank 
     slate, said Ronald D. Utt, senior researcher at the 
     Heritage Foundation. ``All this push and pull is 
     happening, and all of which can be lumped in with some 
     notion of social engineering.'' Policy think tanks from 
     the Brookings Institution on the left to Heritage on the 
     right have criticized FEMA for relying on trailers as it 
     traditionally does for hurricane victims, saying Katrina's 
     scale overwhelms that solution. By contrast, they say 
     vouchers provide more choices to individuals, reduce the 
     need for building public housing and take advantage of 
     existing housing stock.
       In a joint statement last week, Senate Minority Leader 
     Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi 
     (D-Calif.) criticized how long it took the Bush 
     administration to implement its voucher program. ``It wasn't 
     until nearly one month after the disaster struck that the 
     Bush Administration finally announced it would begin to 
     provide rent payments to families displaced by the storm,'' 
     as Democrats urged, they said. Under the FEMA housing 
     assistance plan, families that remain eligible can get as 
     much as 18 months of cash assistance for a maximum of 
     $14,148, but the money would count against a cap of $26,200 
     per family that Congress has set for FEMA to give in cash, 
     rental assistance and home repairs.
       Even before FEMA announced the program, Sen. Paul S. 
     Sarbanes (D-Md.) pushed a plan through the Senate last month 
     to provide $3.5 billion in housing vouchers to 350,000 
     Katrina-displaced families. On Friday, Sarbanes called on 
     Bush to transfer control of housing assistance from FEMA to 
     the Department of Housing and Urban Development. ``The scope 
     of this disaster calls for changes in how we think about 
     disaster assistance,'' Sarbanes wrote the White House. 
     ``Hundreds of thousands of people may need housing assistance 
     for 18 months or even longer. We cannot rely on FEMA, an 
     emergency response agency, to provide on-going housing 
     assistance to this large number of families,'' he said, 
     citing HUD's ``experience, staff and infrastructure.''

  Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BAKER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise to respond to the concerns raised by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) with regard to the forward-
looking picture of housing needs in not only the disaster-stricken area 
but across the Nation, but particularly in the Hurricane Katrina area 
which I was fortunate to be adjacent to and not a part of.
  It is certainly clear that a new housing vision is required. Much 
attention has been given to the city of New Orleans where damage was 
significant. Much attention, however, has not been given to areas north 
and south of the city, whether it is St. Bernard Parish or St. Tammany. 
In St. Tammany, the wind damage was extensive. Acres upon acres of 
large trees were blown down across streets, across houses. The damage 
was difficult to believe.
  In St. Bernard Parish where the flooding left 9 to 14 feet of water 
in houses for periods up to 2 weeks, it is tragic to think what people 
will discover when they are finally able to revisit their 
neighborhoods. Certainly normal government strategies will not work in 
the face of such tragedy.
  At the direction of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and working 
with the administration, the President, Secretary Snow and Secretary 
Jackson, we will have a plan to consider in the House of 
Representatives that will be different and unique. We have the 
capability to address this problem that we have never addressed before 
with a response that has never been proposed before. We hope to have 
such legislation before the break next week; but if not, immediately 
upon our return.
  I look forward to working with the Members on the other side of the 
aisle and all Members from the affected areas. We understand that the 
needs are great, and the needs will not be met in one year or two. This 
is going to be a decades-long remedy requiring the patience of the 
Congress and the continuing generosity of all Americans.
  None of us could foresee the scope of devastation. None of us would 
wish this on any place in the world; but it has happened and there are 
people who are living in shelters without resources, without futures, 
not knowing what tomorrow will bring. We have a high obligation to 
respond, and the Members of the Louisiana delegation fully intend to do 
their best in meeting this need.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3894, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Ms. WATERS. Madam 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.

                          ____________________