[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 28, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H3190-H3191]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             HAWAIIAN HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 2007

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Baldwin). Pursuant to section 2 of House 
Resolution 269, proceedings will now resume on the bill (H.R. 835), to 
reauthorize the programs of the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development for housing assistance for Native Hawaiians.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. When proceedings were postponed on Tuesday, 
March 27, 2007, 10 minutes of debate remained on the bill.
  The gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Campbell) each have 5 minutes remaining.
  Who yields time?

                              {time}  1030

  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. We are virtually at the end of our remarks, so it 
would probably be useful, Madam Speaker, to reiterate from last 
evening's proceedings.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I thank the gentleman from Hawaii.
  Madam Speaker, I do claim the time in opposition. However, I do think 
the arguments relative to the bill were made last night.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Madam Speaker, I will just recapitulate for a couple 
of moments, then perhaps we can move to the conclusion.
  I indicated last night, and I think it was agreed to by Mr. Bachus of 
Alabama and others, by way of material that has been entered into the 
Record, like Mr. Renzi of Arizona, that this should not be a partisan 
fight. In fact, ``fight'' probably is the wrong word, but, I mean, even 
a disagreement here.
  The reason that this bill passed overwhelmingly last week, with 
significant support from the Republican side of the aisle, was that it 
was supported in committee by Republicans and Democrats. The bill is 
here before the Congress as a result of a request by Hawaii's 
Republican Governor, and the former Chair of the Hawaii Republican 
Party, who is now the head of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.
  We have always had legislation in this area based on the underlying 
law, which was passed in 1921, by the Congress, setting aside certain 
lands for Hawaiians. The issue before us is about refinancing of home 
mortgages. This is not about whether the original law, under which the 
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands was established, it is 
constitutional.
  On the contrary, that issue has been raised, and it perhaps should be 
raised in another context; namely, if someone wants to change the 
underlying law. But we should not punish my constituents or anybody's 
constituents for the fact that they appear before us in the form of a 
bill trying to carry forward on the admonitions required of them, in 
this instance, by the Department of Housing and Urban Development in 
order to get their mortgages refinanced.
  Let me say, just as recently as February 9 of this year, the U.S. 
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against a group of individuals who came 
before the court, saying that funding for programs that benefit 
Hawaiians, in this instance, of this bill, the Department of Hawaiian 
Home Lands, constitutes an unconstitutional discrimination against non-
Hawaiians.
  The Federal appeals court ruled that was not the case. In fact, they 
returned it to the U.S. District Court to see if the plaintiffs were 
eligible ``in any

[[Page H3191]]

other capacity.'' That is to say, other than whether it was 
constitutional.
  So we have, as recently as the last 30 days, appeals court 
admonitions that the constitutionality of having programs for Hawaiians 
is, in fact, constitutional.
  If someone wants to argue that, please let's argue it on the basis of 
a bill that addresses that itself, rather than the bill which is before 
us, which has to do with the refinancing of mortgages. Please don't 
punish people that are trying to own their own homes, to keep their own 
homes, because of some ideological difference that we might have.
  Mr. RENZI. Madam Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 835, the 
Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2007.
  This bill is a reauthorization of Title 8 of the Native American 
Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act--commonly known as 
NAHASDA.
  H.R. 835 reauthorizes the program within the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development that provides low-income Native Hawaiian families 
the opportunity for homeownership on their Hawaiian home lands.
  Back in 1996, Congress passed NAHASDA--which reorganized the system 
of housing assistance provided to tribes through HUD.
  The Indian Housing Block Grant program was created to provide funds 
directly to tribes for housing services as determined by the tribes 
themselves.
  In 2000, NAHASDA was amended to include Title 8 so that Native 
Hawaiians could receive block grant funding as well through a separate 
grant program--the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program.
  This program funds housing programs on Hawaiian Home Lands--through 
the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, a Federal agency established by 
Congress in 1921 to administer trust land in Hawaii.
  Title 8 funding has allowed the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to 
target housing assistance to families at or below 80 percent of median 
income.
  This funding is used for such assistance as infrastructure 
development, downpayment assistance, self-help home repair programs, 
and financial literacy programs.
  Additionally, Habitat for Humanity has also received funding through 
this program.
  Title 8 of NAHASDA was originally authorized for 5 years, through 
2005, and has not been formally reauthorized since, although 
appropriations acts have continued to provide de facto 1-year 
reauthorizations for the program.
  This bill would reauthorize the program through fiscal year 2012.
  In addition to reauthorization, the bill makes two changes to 
existing law.
  First, it makes the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands eligible for 
loan guarantees authorized under Title 6 of NAHASDA. Giving the 
Department Title 6 access would allow the Department to help more low-
income families become homeowners without a large increase in Federal 
appropriations by partnering with the private market.
  Second, this legislation allows Native Hawaiians the use of HUD's 
Section 184(a) guaranteed loans for refinancing in addition to 
construction. Adding the refinance authority reduces the cost of 
homeownership for low-income families and can also reduce risk by 
lowering monthly mortgage payments.
  Congress must continue to embrace initiatives such as the one we are 
considering today that encourage Americans to own a home.
  Last week, this bill failed to receive the two-thirds majority 
necessary to pass under the suspension calendar, although the majority 
of members voted to approve the bill.
  I believe that the bill's failure to pass was the result of 
misconceptions about this bill that I would like to address.
  This is not a bill about Native Hawaiian sovereignty.
  The subject of Native Hawaiian sovereignty is a separate issue 
altogether and is not addressed in this legislation.
  This bill simply reauthorizes and makes some small improvements to an 
existing program. It does not confer any special rights to the Native 
Hawaiians--nor does the bill suggest that Native Hawaiians should be 
given a status equal to that of Native Americans.
  It simply reauthorizes a program created by Congress in the year 
2000, just 7 years ago.
  At that time, Congress chose to establish a housing program to 
benefit poor Native Hawaiians living on their home lands--200,000 acres 
scattered throughout the islands of Hawaii.
  In the 7 years since the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program 
has been in place, it has enabled thousands of Hawaiians to live in 
decent, safe, and sanitary housing and helped thousands to achieve the 
dream of homeownership.
  This program is a model for Federal-State cooperation and also an 
example for how Federal resources can support the efforts of the 
private market in providing the capital necessary for homeownership.
  Yesterday, Hawaiians celebrated Prince Kuhio Day, a State holiday 
recognizing the contributions of a great leader who was a leading 
member of the Republican Party in Hawaii and a delegate to the House of 
Representatives for nearly 20 years.
  I ask my colleagues that we honor the memory of Representative Kuhio, 
and that we continue to support the Native Hawaiians living on the Home 
Lands.
  I would like to recognize Mr. Abercrombie for introducing this 
legislation.
  Also, I thank Chairman Frank and Ranking Member Bachus of the 
Financial Services Committee for working to bring this bill to the 
floor, which was approved by the Financial Services Committee by voice 
vote.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation 
to reauthorize a program to help Native Hawaiians living in poverty.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Madam Speaker, I rise today to support the final 
passage of H.R. 835, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 
2007.
  Opponents of this bill believe this program may be unconstitutional 
based upon a mistaken interpretation of Rice v. Cayetano. But Rice v. 
Cayetano was a voting rights case. The question put to the Court was 
whether limiting the right to vote for trustees of the Office of 
Hawaiian Affairs to Native Hawaiians violated the 15th amendment. The 
court in Rice specifically declined to rule on the status of Native 
Hawaiians and Native Hawaiian programs created by Congress.
  Moreover, this bill and these programs have never been a partisan 
issue in the past. This reauthorization and improvements were requested 
by Hawaii's Republican administration and Governor Linda Lingle. The 
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands is chaired by the former head of 
Hawaii's State Republican Party. This bill was introduced last year by 
Congressman Bob Ney and was reported out of the Financial Services 
Committee by voice vote and without amendment. Last Congress's 
Republican chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Mike Oxley, 
cosponsored this bill.
  I mention these pieces of background information to illustrate the 
wide support for the program and the fact that it has been both 
Democratic and Republican. Last week, when this bill was up for 
consideration in the House under a suspension of the rules, the GOP 
leadership issued a statement just hours before the vote, calling the 
bill ``unconstitutional'' and charged that it would ``confer on Native 
Hawaiian an arrangement like that between the federal government and 
American Indian tribes.'' Despite these charges, the bill was able to 
garner 34 Republican votes.
  The status of Native Hawaiians needs to be debated and should be 
debated in the House. However, this is the wrong venue for that. I have 
another bill pending in the House of Representatives that would 
establish a process for the Federal recognition of Native Hawaiians. I 
hope to have this legislation considered by the House Natural Resources 
Committee and will gladly debate these issues at that time.
  This measure is about helping low-income Native Hawaiians own their 
own home. The programs reauthorized by H.R. 835 simply provide funds 
for infrastructure, helps Native Hawaiians obtain mortgages and allows 
for refinancing to lower the cost of homeownership. This bill is about 
assisting Native Hawaiians to reach the American dream of owning their 
own home.
  I believe this bill can, and should, pass with overwhelming 
bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to vote for final passage of 
this bill and support efforts to get more low-income people into their 
own homes.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 269, the bill 
is considered read and the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. CAMPBELL 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, further 
proceedings on this question are postponed.




                          ____________________