[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 111 (Thursday, July 12, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H7726-H7760]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SECTION 8 VOUCHER REFORM ACT OF 2007
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Castor). Pursuant to House Resolution
534 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 1851.
{time} 1902
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 consideration of the bill
(H.R. 1851) to reform the housing choice voucher program under section
8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, with Mr. Weiner in the
chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and the gentlewoman from
Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1851, the Section 8
Voucher Reform Act of 2007. As you know, I introduced H.R. 1851 on
March 29, 2007. I want to thank each of my colleagues, both on the
Committee on Financial Services and in the House, who have joined with
me to see that this important legislation passes the House. I
especially want to thank Chairman Barney Frank for his leadership,
Ranking Member Judy Biggert, and Christopher Shays for their original
cosponsorship and support of H.R. 1851.
It has been less than 2 months since the Committee on Financial
Services considered major reforms to the section 8 program. The Section
8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007, which passed the Committee on Financial
Services by a vote of 52-9, is truly the culmination of work that began
in the 109th Congress.
There are many Members of Congress who have expressed major concerns
to me about the future stability of the section 8 voucher program,
given the recent changes in the funding formula and its impact on
tenants. This bill addresses many of those problems and will return
much needed stability to the section 8 program and the 2 million low-
income families who rely upon it.
We heard from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
public housing agencies, national housing interest groups and
advocates, and other housing experts about the importance of reforming
the section 8 program. While there is consensus that the section 8
program needed to be reformed, HUD disagrees on how to reform the
program.
National housing organizations like the National Low Income Housing
Coalition and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities which
represent those directly affected by the change in the funding formula
agree that basing the funding for a program as important as the voucher
program on data that is 3 years old is just simply bad policy.
In 2004, Congress changed how we paid public housing authorities for
vouchers under lease. Instead of paying the actual cost of the voucher,
the decision was made to pay for what the
[[Page H7727]]
voucher cost during a 3-month period in the previous year. This had
disastrous consequences for PHAs. Many saw a cut in their funding.
While section 8 recipients had to bear the brunt of this policy
change as waiting lists closed, many low-income families who had been
waiting for affordable housing for years suddenly found housing denied
to them. Because of cost concerns, some families were denied their
right to move to areas that may have been a bit more expensive but had
better job and educational opportunities. Some families saw an increase
in rent as many PHAs scrambled to cut costs.
As families struggled under this formula, so did some of our Nation's
largest PHAs. The snapshot funding system had consistently and has
consistently underpaid some PHAs to the benefit of others. Because of
the funding instability, these PHAs had no reason to house more
families. As a result, housing authorities are sitting on $1.4 billion
in unspent voucher funds. This nonuse of our voucher dollars is
unacceptable because we have lost 150,000 vouchers as a direct result
of the funding formula.
Clearly, this formula must be changed for the good of public housing
agencies and the families they serve. HUD is just wrong in this issue.
I flatly reject their just-released statement of policy on the bill.
H.R. 1851 updates the voucher formula by basing funding for vouchers on
the previous year's leasing and cost data.
The use of more accurate data will ensure that we stop overpaying and
underpaying PHAs for vouchers, but instead come as close as we can to
paying the actual cost of the voucher. This will enable HUD to better
control costs than the section 8 voucher program. This funding approach
was recently embraced by both Houses of Congress in H.J. Res. 20.
Vouchers are a scarce resource, but are even scarcer since the
funding formula changed in 2004. Only one out of four families who are
eligible for housing assistance, including vouchers, actually receive
it. H.R. 1851 provides PHAs with several resources for increasing the
number of families they serve.
First, the bill provides for the recapture and redistribution of most
unspent voucher funds for housing agencies that have chosen not to use
these dollars to PHAs that are capable and willing to spend them. This
reallocation system will provide PHAs with an incentive to house more
families.
Second, the bill provides tools for PHAs to pay for increased costs
or emergencies without having to cut assistance to families or to
request new funding from the HUD or the Congress. The bill allows PHAs
to retain up to a 1-month reserve in the formula's first year. For
those PHAs that need additional funds, the bill allows them to borrow
up to 2 percent of their budget authority, to be repaid within the
first 3 months of the following year.
Third, the bill provides an authorization of appropriation for 20,000
new incremental vouchers per year for 5 years. Congress has not
authorized new vouchers since 2002.
During this period, we all know that the need for voucher assistance
has grown, not declined. We are not meeting the need for housing
vouchers for very low-income persons in this country, working families,
the disabled and elderly. Additional vouchers are needed to make sure
that the voucher program continues to keep up with the ever-expanding
need for affordable housing in this Nation.
Fourth, the bill provides incentives for PHAs to increase families
served by tying administrative funding to the number of families
housed.
Fifth, the bill restores housing choice, an important feature of the
voucher program which has been lost because of cost concerns. H.R. 1851
would eliminate the complex billing process between PHAs using portable
vouchers.
Mr. Chairman, this is a bill that will restore stability and
predictability to the Nation's largest Federal housing program by
fixing the broken funding formula. H.R. 1851 provides for the needs of
the families, public housing agencies and landlords who participate in
this program.
The funding formula, however, is not the only aspect of the section 8
program in need of reform. Today, housing agencies and program
recipients must deal with the complicated set of rules for the
determination of rent, recertification of income and inspection of
housing units. H.R. 1851 simplifies those requirements, while
maintaining current affordable standards.
H.R. 1851 also includes tools to encourage voucher families to move
to economic self-sufficiency. Families should not have to pay more in
rent because they want to work to provide for their families. By
disregarding a portion of earned income, H.R. 1851 would protect
families from any resultant increases in rent.
Families also shouldn't be penalized for pursuing educational
opportunities. Currently, many families in the voucher and public
housing programs can find themselves excluded from work and economic
opportunities because of a lack of credit history or low credit scores.
The bill would allow the Department to work with the Nation's credit
bureaus to allow for the reporting of the rental payment history of
voucher and public housing recipients.
In addition, the bill will increase homeownership opportunities for
voucher families by allowing them to use a section 8 voucher to make a
down payment on their first home. Importantly, the bill provides for a
change to the funding structure for family self-sufficiency coordinated
to ensure that families have the tools to take advantage of these
opportunities.
Without going into all of what is taken care of and what is reformed,
I have tried to share the major reforms that we have created for our
families who will be receiving assistance through the section 8
program.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would like first to thank all of my colleagues and
their staffs from both sides of the aisle for working to craft a
bipartisan section 8 reform bill that we are considering today. In
particular I would like to thank Chairman Frank and Subcommittee
Chairwoman Waters for their hard work, committee Ranking Member Bachus
for his support, and the gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Shays, who
joined me as an original cosponsor of this bill.
Mr. Chairman, this is a bipartisan bill that passed out of our
committee by a vote of 52-9. It is similar to the section 8 reform bill
that then Chairman Oxley moved through the Financial Services Committee
during the last Congress. It was a bipartisan bill then too, passing
out of the committee by a voice vote.
The section 8, or Housing Choice Voucher Program, is the major
Federal program helping the elderly, the disabled and the very low-
income families find affordable housing in the private market. Today's
housing vouchers are the primary tool of assistance provided under
section 8.
Many of my colleagues served in this body when housing vouchers were
first proposed and implemented under a Republican administration, that
of President Reagan. The Section 8 Voucher Program was designed to move
people away from large concentrated housing projects, like our Cabrini-
Green or Robert Taylor Homes in Chicago. It allows individuals to make
decisions about where they want to live, instead of forcing them to
live in large public housing projects filled with crime, poverty and
despair.
For the colleagues on my side of the aisle, I should admit, quite
frankly, that this bill is better than I expected it to be. We have
been able to get several key issues addressed in this bill that were
not addressed in last year's Republican legislation.
I want to thank Chairman Waters, who coauthored with me a manager's
amendment that the committee accepted during our markup that includes a
number of provisions to increase the flexibility of project-based
section 8 vouchers. It amended section 8 of the law regarding the use
of vouchers to purchase manufactured homes, voucher reserves,
portability, performance assessment, disabled vouchers and rent levels.
In addition, I am pleased that included in this bill is language that
is identical to the Family Self-Sufficiency Act, or FSS, a bill that I
introduced as a stand-alone measure. This
[[Page H7728]]
bill enhances HUD's FSS program by providing housing authorities with
consistent coordinator funding. Housing authorities can then help more
individuals move from public assistance to being self-sufficient
homeowners.
Perhaps most important for Members on my side of the aisle is that
this bill includes a significant expansion of Moving to Work, or the
MTW program. Members on both sides of the aisle have public housing
authorities in their district that seek to become Moving to Work
housing authorities.
In my district, DuPage Housing Authority would like this status.
However, to date, Congress has only authorized 32 housing authorities
to be MTWs. During the committee markup, we increased the authorization
to a total of 80, which is a remarkable achievement. In addition, the
Moving to Work provisions in this bill require HUD to craft standards
that will govern eligibility requirements from being considered and/or
designated as a Moving to Work authority. This bill includes important
tenant protections that make the MTW Program better than it is today.
Finally, I am also pleased that we included a provision that will
measure the success of the program. Congress created the Moving to Work
program in 1996, but it does not require HUD to establish standards and
evaluate agencies' performance.
{time} 1915
Now granted, the administration does not support this bill, nor did
it support the Oxley bill last year or in the previous Congress.
Why? Well, because in their view, it does not reform the program
enough. They believe it moves the program from one that is currently
budget based to a unit-based system that Mr. Knollenberg spoke about
earlier. But I think that point is subject to interpretation. And
politics is the art of the possible; and absent this bill, no reform is
possible.
This bill does not include everything that I wanted either. The
section 8 funding formula my colleagues will recall was changed in the
CR earlier this year. I have on several occasions offered amendments in
committee to address this formula change, and we did include in the
manager's amendment a provision that will provide PHAs a cushion in the
transition year so they are not penalized for CR formula change.
I believe there is more work to be done. There are 1,200 PHAs. Half
of those across the country do not suffer from unjustified and
significant funding cuts as a result of the new section 8 funding
formula included in the CR.
Chairman Frank has agreed to engage in a colloquy with me about this,
and I look forward to doing that in a few moments. I hope we will
continue to work together as we continue to address the continued
shortcomings of this formula.
This is a good bill and one deserving of our support, and I urge my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield Chairman Frank such time as he may
consume.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentlewoman, not so much for
yielding but for the really extraordinary work she has done on this,
the gentlewoman from California, and I want to say how much I admire
the two tracks she has worked on. On the one track, she has been one of
the leaders on our side in the House on the issue of Iraq and ending
our involvement in the war in Iraq where I am a strong follower of her.
Simultaneously, she has engaged in some very careful and thoughtful
legislative work, and I think that is the mark of a complete
legislator, to be able to do the ideologically based advocacy but also
work in a bipartisan way, continuing work which began when she was the
ranking member and in a seamless way to go forward.
I spoke during the rule where I expressed my strong support for the
legislation. I have rarely seen legislation so broadly supported by the
landlords, by the local housing authorities that administer it and by
the beneficiaries. There is a three-way operation here, and all of them
consider this bill to be an improvement.
As the gentlewoman from Illinois said, it does not improve everything
as much as everybody would like; nothing ever does. But she is correct,
this is an improvement. I would ask my friend from California to yield
to her so we can talk about it, but she has already done some of the
things that she talked about. For instance, in the manager's amendment,
we will increase the reserves available to housing authorities to avoid
any damage that would come in the transition on the new funding
formula. I know the gentlewoman has some other concerns, and I hope if
the gentlewoman from California will yield to her, I can respond to
them.
Ms. WATERS. I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).
Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentlewoman, and I would like to engage in
a colloquy with Chairman Frank at this time.
Chairman Frank, as you may recall, the section 8 funding formula was
changed through provisions in the continuing resolution. I did not
support these changes because they did cut about 1,500 public housing
authority slots in three counties in my congressional district. And as
Chairman Frank can verify, I have on several occasions offered
amendments to change this.
I am pleased that the manager's amendment includes a provision which
addresses this problem. While I am pleased that we can take productive
steps towards addressing the shortcomings, I believe we can do more as
we move on, and it is my understanding that members of the
Appropriations Committee have included a similar provision in the
fiscal year 2008 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Appropriations bill. Would the chairman consider supporting this?
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The gentlewoman has stated this
correctly. I know this is going to be in the appropriations bill. We
expect it. I haven't seen the appropriations bill yet. I have great
confidence in the subcommittee chairman, but I certainly agree with her
in principle. And unless there is some very unusual wording which we
could change, yes, I would be subject to saying, yes, that is exactly
what we intend.
Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the gentleman.
Again regarding the rebenchmarking, both the current formula and the
one in this bill would base a PHA's annual funding level on a
``snapshot'' of the PHA's use of funds from the previous 12 months.
However, I continue to be concerned that his annual benchmarking is
unworkable when coupled with the congressional budget cycle. For this
reason, I hope we can continue to work together as we move forward to
address the continued shortcomings of this formula. PHAs have always
stated and continue to argue that their main concern is to have
predictability and certainty in funding so they can plan both voucher
utilization and staffing. I know they would appreciate more
predictability. If the snapshot and the rebenchmarking were done every
other year, would the chairman continue to explore with me the benefits
of a biennial versus annual rebenchmarking?
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The answer is, again, yes. This is a very
important subject which the gentlewoman from Illinois has identified. I
promise we will work together. If we decide this needs to be a
legislative change, I can promise the gentlelady that the committee
will entertain the appropriate legislation and do that.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Again, I thank the gentleman.
In addition, I would like to ask the chairman to consider other
measures to assist PHAs in the transition period and in the subsequent
years. For example, I would like the chairman to consider a so-called
hold-harmless provision attached to the new section 8 formula. The
provision would provide PHAs with an assurance that they would not lose
more than a certain percentage of funds in any given year due to the
utilization rates in the previous years. The reasons for this are many,
but at the heart of the matter is the simple fact that the so-called
excess in funds that many PHAs were caught with when the new formula
was dropped into the CR were not in fact excess at all but the result
of deliberate choices, court-ordered requirements or special set-aside
categories of
[[Page H7729]]
vouchers. The PHAs should not be losing all of these vouchers in the
first year. The percentage could range from perhaps 10 to 25 percent.
And again, PHAs deserve stability and predictability in funding. Would
the chairman work with me to craft a hold-harmless provision to include
in this bill or the appropriations bill?
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The answer here is definitely yes. I
think a hold-harmless provision is appropriate.
The purpose of the change, as the gentlewoman knows, in our mind was
to prevent a kind of downward ratcheting in the overall usage. But
consistent with that, we don't want to penalize particular authorities.
We have already done some work, for instance, with the Dade County
authority to take into account the fact that their shortfall came
because of a hurricane, so they were not penalized by that. But the
hold-harmless provision is a perfectly reasonable one, and I agree with
the gentlewoman. I promise to work with the gentlewoman to do whatever
we need to do legislatively to accomplish it.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Again, I thank the chairman; and thank the gentlewoman
for the time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller), a member of the Committee on Financial
Services.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of
H.R. 1851, the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act.
This is something we have been working on for years, and I am pleased
we have it to this point today. I commend Chairman Frank. Barney, you
have been great to work with on these issues. When we express concerns,
he is always willing to look at policy rather than politics. We have
arrived at a bill we can all look at and say, there are things we might
change, but overall, we all agree it is a good bill.
I would like to commend Ranking Member Bachus for all of his help and
assistance. Chairman Waters, it has been fun working with you on this
issue, as well as Ranking Member Biggert.
Working together in a bipartisan manner, we have produced a bill that
will help the section 8 program better serve families and communities
across the country.
Over the years, Congress has grappled with the skyrocketing cost of
the section 8 program, which is growing so rapidly that HUD's other
programs are suffering as a result.
It is not feasible for the Federal Government to continue increasing
funds for a program without enacting meaningful reforms.
In the 109th Congress, I introduced legislation to improve the
delivery of housing assistance to families in need by providing
flexibility to local public housing authorities, PHAs, and holding them
accountable for results.
The goal of my legislation was to ensure that PHAs would serve as
many families as possible within their budget. While the bill before us
today does not go as far as my proposal in injecting flexibility to
PHAs in their administration of the entire section 8 program, H.R. 1851
does make a number of improvements to the section 8 program to reform
the simplified regulations for local housing agencies.
I appreciate Chairman Frank's willingness to work with me to allow
for PHA innovation on a scale he is more comfortable with. While the
bill before us does not apply flexibility to the entire program, I am
pleased it at least allows a permanency and expansion of the Moving To
Work program, renamed in this bill as the Housing Innovation Program,
HIP.
The Moving to Work Program has allowed a small group of PHAs to
create locally based housing programs outside of HUD's one-size-fits-
all regulations. The program has enabled PHAs to create jobs for
residents, add affordable housing stock and help families build
savings.
Currently, over 24 of the more than 3,000 PHAs nationwide are
participating in the Moving to Work program. H.R. 1851 provides access
to more agencies nationwide seeking MTW status.
Through the new HIP program, we will be able to take away ``best
practices'' to apply to the entire section 8 program in the future. I
am confident that the innovation that will be produced through the
flexibility provided in the HIP will demonstrate ways to truly reform
section 8 so we can serve more families efficiently and help move them
to self-sufficiency.
The manager's amendment, which will be debated later this evening,
includes language I crafted to provide PHAs with the flexibility to
establish rent structures as they see best to address the needs of
their communities.
The language gives PHAs the flexibility to select from a menu of
tenant rent policies, including flat rent, rents based on income
ranges, rents based on percentage of income, or other innovative rent
policies.
HUD and many PHAs agree that the current Federal approach to tenant
rent contribution is a regressive system that penalizes residents by
charging higher rents for those who gain employment and income.
If a section 8 recipient's salary increases, so does their rent. This
creates a disincentive for work. Our goal should be to provide a
helping hand to those who need it but also ensure that they are on a
path to self-sufficiency. Rather than providing incentives for work,
the current section 8 program provides incentives for people to lie
about their income or to reject opportunities to increase their income
since they would be forced to pay more rent. I don't think this is a
message we should be sending in this program. We should be instilling
responsibility and desire to achieve in our housing assistance policy,
not encouraging dishonesty and creating disincentives for success.
I am pleased the chairman has worked with me on language to allow
PHAs the option of setting rents in innovative ways to help families
achieve self-sufficiency.
The reality is that we face a situation of growing waiting lists for
section 8 vouchers without the resources to serve everyone. The answer
is not to merely throw more money into an existing regressive system in
a department where there are other pressing needs that need to be met.
We need to move current section 8 recipients to self-sufficiency by
allowing PHAs to be innovative with the money they do have, to be
efficient and help as many people in need move through the program as
possible.
While this bill does not go as far as I think we need it to go in
terms of allowing flexibility, I believe it is a step in the right
direction and will make needed improvements to the section 8 program. I
look forward to the debate on the amendments tonight as I believe we
can continue to improve the legislation as we move forward.
I would like to enter into a colloquy with the chairman, the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
There seems to be a misunderstanding on the part of HUD. Mr. Frank,
this bill includes a revision and expansion of the Moving to Work
Program, MTW, renamed the Housing Innovation Program, HIP. Under the
program authority of HIP, the Secretary may designate up to 60 public
housing agencies to fully participate in the program, and an additional
20 public housing agencies may participate in the program under what is
called the HIP-Lite provisions.
Under the current MTW program, authorization has been granted for 32
public housing authorities to participate in the program. However, HUD
narrowly defined the legislative authority under which they could
solicit new applications. HUD decided that once PHAs leave the program,
no new agencies can be selected to fill their vacancy. The result is,
out of 32 authorized, only 24 agencies are currently in the program.
I would like to confirm that the intent of this bill is to allow HUD
to solicit new applications in order to maintain the program at its
fully authorized level and to give PHAs the opportunity to fill any
vacancies.
I would like to confirm that you agree that the secretary of HUD
should promptly solicit new applications from PHAs interested in
participating in the HIP program whenever the number of agencies is
less than the total authorized level, and that would be 60 under this
bill; is that correct, sir?
{time} 1930
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
[[Page H7730]]
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I yield to the gentleman from
Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from
California is absolutely correct. The alternative interpretation would
make no sense.
Of course, HUD should have and does have the authority to select
replacements. What we set was a maximum number of participating
agencies, and if an agency withdraws, then a new agency should be
replaced.
If I may, I should note that the chairman of the subcommittee, who is
such a devoted supporter of fairness, has raised some questions about
the Moving to Work program, or whatever the new name is, and I have
spoken with her. And I think what would be appropriate, and I think we
would all agree, when we return from the summer recess to have a
hearing on how the Moving to Work program is, in fact, operating, and I
think that would be an appropriate thing to do.
But certainly under this law and under the agreements we reached, we
set a number of housing authorities that are eligible to participate,
and there shouldn't be any question, if an authority drops out, then
HUD has the obligation, not just the permission, but the obligation to
replace it.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I thank you.
So HUD understands, if it does drop to 50, it should be moved up
promptly to 60, and I look forward to the hearing.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Andrews) 2 minutes.
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank the chairwoman, my
friend from California, for yielding.
The chairwoman and I came to this Congress on the very same day in
1990, and I'm extremely proud of the work she's done on this bill and
gratified to support it.
I especially want to thank her for including language that I think
will help underdogs, and the chairwoman has been a friend of the
underdog for a very long time, and in her work in Sacramento she
achieved her visions where tenants who were being mistreated by
landlords, where the property was not being properly kept up and was
not habitable, would be given the option of withholding rent in order
to force repairs on the property. She's taken that provision and
extended that principle in this bill in a way for which I salute her.
The bill contains provisions that say in situations where a public
housing authority chooses, when notified of serious code violations by
a tenant, it may take actions to withhold part of the section 8 voucher
payment that would otherwise go to the landlord. And the purpose of
this would be to empower the public housing authority under certain
circumstances to deduct that amount of money and pay for the repairs.
What does this mean? It means a powerless person who doesn't have a
political action committee or a lobbyist or a lot of political power
but who needs their sink fixed or a broken window repaired or a heater
repaired for the first time is going to have sufficient leverage to do
so.
I think this will have three very important effects. First, it will
be fair and right for these tenants. Second, it will be fair for
landlords. If the tenant is the cause of the problem or if a landlord
is acting responsibly, this poses no burden on a landlord. And third,
it will help responsible local officials prevent blight and degradation
of certain neighborhoods so that each person can live in an environment
that's proper and good for their family.
So I want to thank the chairwoman for her characteristic advocacy on
behalf of the underdog, for taking this idea, and I would urge support
of the bill.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), a member of the committee.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my good friend
from Illinois for yielding, and I want to thank also the Chair of the
committee and Chair of the subcommittee for the work that they have
done on this, and the ranking member.
I rise to express a few sincere and serious concerns with section 9
of the bill. This is the section that allows the public housing
authorities, or the PHAs, to report the rental payments of its tenants
to credit reporting agencies.
Reporting alternative data, like rental payments, to the credit
reporting agencies may indeed be a very good thing. The hope obviously
is that increased alternative data will help improve the credit reports
for consumers and, in the long run, provide them with better and less
expensive access to credit. In this increasingly credit-drive society,
that's truly an important thing.
However, I've got four specific concerns with the way that the
language in section 9 of this bill is written.
First is the format that this data will take. The language of the
underlying bill requires the PHAs and credit reporting agencies to
establish a system and format for reporting the new data. This is
obviously new territory for PHAs, and they haven't done it before and
aren't financial institutions and have no history of providing
reporting data in the proper format.
Second concern is that this section may be incorrectly read to
constitute a new requirement on the credit reporting agencies, and I
would submit that this would be a drastic and significant change to our
current system. Currently, credit reporting agencies must consider the
timeliness of the data supplied to them. They must verify that it is
accurate data, ensure that there hasn't been any case of identity fraud
so that false data is not included in an unsuspecting consumer's credit
file. Rental payment, clearly that information is different than other
forms of commerce, and it may need to be treated differently.
A third concern is that the section, as it reads, would apply to
``families receiving tenant-based housing choice vouchers.'' Credit
files historically are unique to individuals. Credit reporting agencies
have no way to adjust their credit files for an entire family. So I
wonder again sincerely what the real consequences of this ambiguity and
potentially harmful aspect are to spreading potential financial
responsibility to some without regard to accountability.
My fourth concern may be the most important, and that is, that the
underlying legislation requires that the PHA, or the public housing
agency, gain the permission of the family in writing before submitting
the data to credit reporting agencies. This provision potentially would
turn our credit reporting system on its head. It's a 100-year-old
system based on the voluntary reporting of data to credit reporting
agencies. If consumers are able to turn on or off when the data is
reported, then it, in its essence, undermines completely the accuracy
of the credit reports.
Both those who furnish the data to the credit reporting agencies and
those who use that data to offer credit to consumers rely on the
accuracy of these reports so that they can appropriately and
responsibly price the cost of credit to a specific consumer. If someone
can decide not to submit certain data to a credit reporting agency,
then the accuracy of that data will be greatly compromised.
I sincerely believe that a few minor changes to the underlying
legislation would indeed perfect the language in a way that would allow
for new alternative data to help consumers and also to have that new
data submitted in a way that does not undermine a credit reporting
system that truly has become the envy of the world.
It's my hope that we can work on these concerns as this legislation
moves forward, and once again, I want to thank the gentlewoman from
Illinois for her time and thank the Chair of the committee and
subcommittee for their work on this issue.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Pascrell) 2 minutes.
(Mr. PASCRELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I'm honored to rise in support of H.R.
1851. I commend Chairman Frank and Chairwoman Waters for bringing this
worthy legislation to the floor today.
This bipartisan bill will increase efficiency in our section 8
housing voucher
[[Page H7731]]
program and expand rental assistance opportunities, authorizing 20,000
new section 8 vouchers in each of the next 5 years, with a total of
100,000 new vouchers.
Section 8 rental assistance is a critical and widely used program,
with approximately 2 million vouchers being distributed by more than
2,500 local public housing authorities.
I would like to draw attention to one specific provision of this
legislation which will have widespread benefits, if we did nothing else
today, and I think is the most meaningful thing we're doing today, by
the way, if I may express my opinion, will have widespread benefits for
housing authorities throughout this Nation, including those in my
district.
In 2004, a new formula was instituted to fund public housing
authorities that administer the section 8 program. The formula was
based on a snapshot of PHA activity for May, June, and July of 2004. As
a result, whatever a housing authority's needs were during that short
period, they have been stuck with that number ever since. It is simply
irrational to fund a program today based on what its needs were 3 years
ago.
Some housing authorities were continually overfunded, some were
underfunded. This provision left some housing authorities scrambling
for funds and others with extra funding they couldn't access.
The bill we are considering today fixes this inefficient and outdated
formula, requiring HUD to use data from the most recent 12 months to
determine section 8 voucher funding. It's going to help a lot of
people, a lot of people. Now funding will be guaranteed for all
vouchers in use.
Even this administration has admitted that this flawed formula should
be revised. I applaud the Financial Services Committee for including a
fix in this legislation.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 1851.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Campbell), another member of the Financial Services
Committee, to engage in a colloquy with Chairman Frank.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for
yielding.
I just wanted to bring to the chairman's attention a situation with
HUD financing that kind of makes no sense to me, and a specific
situation which I'm aware of involves the Villa Nueva Apartments, which
are in San Ysidro in the San Diego area of California, where the owner
of this multi-family, affordable housing project wants to sell it. The
buyer wants to keep it as an affordable housing project. He's committed
to keep the rents unchanged, but yet since it is HUD financed, under
current, I guess, rulings or something that HUD is making, that 100
percent of the proceeds of this project would actually not be available
to the seller. I don't know why someone who owns something would want
to sell it if they couldn't have any of the proceeds. So, as a result,
the seller may not sell this project. They may hold on to it for a
couple of years, and then the restrictions will expire and then they
could sell it for something else.
So it seems to me that HUD's procedures on this are actually standing
in the way of affordable housing companies acquiring and continuing
affordable housing multi-unit projects.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. I yield to the gentleman from
Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman from California.
I appreciate the gentleman from California making this very important
point because it gives us a chance to highlight an important issue that
this committee will be acting on.
I should just note that later today we will be considering an
amendment on behalf of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey)
and the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) in similar circumstances, and
we will be directing HUD to allow these to go forward.
The gentleman just learned of this, I know, and brought it to our
attention, and I would begin by saying to him, if necessary, I would be
supportive of doing the same in his case. I hope it won't be necessary.
Here's the situation that may people may not understand. Forty years
ago and more, or about 40 years ago, we began, not us, with the
exception of Mr. Dingell, began a program of affordable housing where
the Federal Government lent people money at either no interest or very
low interest in return for it being affordable, but for some reason
they put what they called an expiration date of 40 years.
Now, we stand to lose a lot of housing that is good housing currently
affordable. We are looking for ways to let that be transferred to
others who would keep that it way. I think HUD is being overly
technical in some of these interpretations. It would clearly be in
everybody's interest, for no budgetary cost we can preserve these
units.
By the way, if the units are lost, what then happens is, under
certain laws, the current tenants are entitled to enhanced vouchers. So
we would then be paying more in enhanced vouchers to a new landlord.
That doesn't make sense.
I just want to make this commitment to the gentleman. I hope after
today's bill, which I hope it passes and the amendments for Mr. Markey
and Ms. Pryce are passed, that we can then sit with HUD on a bipartisan
basis and try and find a way for them to do this administratively. If
they tell us that they need a small fix, if there's some legislative
problem, we could do that on suspension immediately. Even the Senate
would do that one quickly.
I would say this. I hope that we will, today, get HUD's attention so
that we can sit with them and work this out. I would rather have it
done in policy. If necessary, we'll do a little fix.
And I would also say before the end of this year, and this is high on
the agenda of the gentlewoman from California and myself, because this
situation occurs all over the country in everybody's district or in
most districts, if necessary, we will pass a bill that will give HUD
all the authority necessary to prevent this loss of affordable housing
for no good reason.
So I admire the gentleman for bringing it to our attention. I think,
frankly, if we pass this bill and pass the Markey-Pryce amendment,
we'll probably get a better response out of HUD, and if necessary, we
will legislate it.
Mr. CAMPBELL of California. Thank you.
{time} 1945
Ms. WATERS. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Baca).
Mr. BACA. I want to thank my colleague for yielding. I rise also to
support the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007.
I want to thank my good friend from California, Chairman Maxine
Waters, for sponsoring this vital legislation.
I also want to thank our chair, Chairman Frank, for his leadership
and guidance in this committee.
Mr. Chairman, in 2004, when the administration decided to change the
funding formula for section 8 vouchers, drastic cuts were made to the
number of vouchers available. These cuts hurt needy families throughout
the Nation and throughout my district. We are talking about seniors,
low-income families, disabled, the poor, the disadvantaged.
In my district alone, section 8 housing vouchers, public housing
units, provide affordable housing for more than 32,000 people. Can you
imagine, 32,000 people right now, children and others, that would not
have a home, not have a place to rent, that would be homeless if it
hadn't been for section 8? This bill reverses the cut and adds an
additional 20,000 vouchers so that families are not forced to choose
between paying for food, their medication or rent.
We are talking about people that can't afford housing, even right
now, with the inflation and the cost that is going on right now. We
have got to make sure that they have a home, they have stability, and
they have a roof over their head, especially for our children.
I appreciate my colleague on the other side, Gary Miller, supporting
this legislation as well. We worked on some of the amendments. I
appreciate that very much.
It also contains key provisions that strengthen section 8 programs,
including protection for individuals with limited English proficiency
and the expansion to Moving To Work programs. I
[[Page H7732]]
urge my colleagues to support this most vulnerable program that helps
us, and especially as it pertains to helping the poor, the
disadvantaged.
I ask my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire of the time remaining on
either side of the aisle?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Illinois has 10\1/2\ minutes.
The gentlewoman from California has 9 minutes.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman and Members, I am so very proud of the work
of this committee.
I am so very, very pleased and honored to have the opportunity to
work with Barney Frank. Not only is he a committed public policy maker,
he is smart, and he is creative. And he is helping us to understand how
to use this wonderful opportunity that has been afforded to us to do
good for the people of this country.
I am so pleased about this particular bill, because I am so keenly
aware of the housing crisis that we have in this country.
As we stand here this evening, there are people who are sleeping
under bridges; living with them are families, children. Some of them
are veterans. I come from a time and place where people did not have
decent housing. I know, too, that not only has this occurred for many
years in this country, where people have been living in substandard
housing, even today we have people without running water. We have
people without proper health facilities of any kind in their homes.
We have families that are crowded into one and two rooms. We have
people whose roofs were leaking this evening. But because of this
government and our ability to help government understand what it can do
to help the least fortunate, we are able to pass this kind of
legislation.
I want to thank my friends on the opposite side of the aisle, again,
Mrs. Biggert, for the cooperation that I have enjoyed working with her.
Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentlewoman.
Mr. Chairman, again, I want to emphasize, this is a process that
began when the Republicans were in power, when Mr. Ney was the
chairman.
The gentlewoman from California was the ranking minority member and
has continued in her chairmanship. The gentlewoman from Illinois is the
ranking member. This is an example of how you can make something better
and deliver better, with one exception, there is no additional money in
this bill.
I hope that we will succeed in authorizing 20,000 new vouchers.
That's an issue we will debate, although it is subject to
appropriation, as to whether or not it gets done. I think our
appropriator friends would like to do it.
But most of what this does is to improve the delivery. We talk about
it a lot. It isn't always done. And in that context, we often thank the
staff.
This is a case where the staff of the Financial Services Committee
and subcommittee on both sides, we already did a great deal of work;
this is a more technical bill than many that have come forward.
This is a less than ideological breakthrough. We hope to have some of
those. We have had in the past. It's more a systemic examination of a
very large program with improvements of a technical and specific sort
in many aspects of it. It took a good deal of hard work, and it took a
good deal of mutual cooperation.
As I said, there were some differences, and we will debate those
differences, but it should be made clear that those differences come
within a context of a broad agreement on making the program better.
There is a lot of talk about waste and fraud and abuse. Waste and
fraud and abuse are more generally decried around here than diminished.
This is a bill that will make it much less likely that money will be
wasted, much less likely that there will be an abuse of the public
purse. As I said, let me say in closing, it is to the credit of the
gentlewoman from California, the gentlewoman from Illinois, and the
people who have worked with them.
Every stakeholder is a supporter of this bill, the landlords, the
tenants, the advocacy groups, the housing authorities that administer
it. It is rare that you get this degree of agreement. It's a process
that began with civil conversation. I am pleased to see, at least on
this night, it's going to end with a civil conversation, and the
product will be significant improvements in one of the most important
social programs in the Federal Government.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the distinguished gentlelady
from Illinois for yielding me the time.
Mr. Chairman, this is a historic occasion, a historic time. I want to
express my appreciation to the chairman of the full committee, Mr.
Frank, and the chairwoman of the subcommittee, Congresswoman Waters,
and the ranking members, for what I hope will ultimately be an enormous
step forward for the homeless and the underserved.
I also want to acknowledge my colleague and friend, Congressman Al
Green, who has worked so hard to ensure that cities who have the
background of Houston, Texas, are also accounted for. Those are cities
that have for years had thousands of individuals on the waiting list.
I think the number 25,000 in Houston has literally become a number of
the decade, because there has been a waiting list of 25,000 for as long
as I can remember, having served on the Houston City Council.
I am very pleased to acknowledge that we are going to reorder the
formula so that cities can borrow against moneys that are already in
their account, so that the cities that have an excessive number of
individuals on the waiting list can still be able to utilize those
dollars.
I want to pay special attention to the resources that will be
utilized for the disabled and special resources that are going to be
utilized for innovative programs dealing with, for example, the housing
innovation program, which has previously been Moving to Work.
One of the issues that I hope that we will look forward to is giving
incentives to cities to help them reduce the waiting list. Now, you can
change the formula, and I had an amendment that would provide at least
a pilot study to construct, if you will, an incentive to make sure that
cities took advantage of this new structure and worked hard to reduce
the waiting list.
It is one thing to have the laws in place. It is another thing to
have housing authorities sit by and just watch, rather than working
very hard to bring down their list.
I am very grateful that we now have an understanding that there is
less and less affordable housing being built in America. These
individuals that use section 8 vouchers are working people, people who
are paying their taxes, who cannot find housing in high-priced markets.
This section 8 voucher program will allow these individuals to purchase
homes. They are creative, unique and forward thinking, because they are
individuals who have put their stake down in these particular areas.
I am also hoping, as I close, and I am hoping that we will continue
to work on this issue, is to ensure individuals will not be put out
because of combat pay for soldiers who are coming back.
I ask my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1851, the ``Section 8
Voucher Reform Act of 2007.'' I support this bipartisan measure for
three important reasons. First, H.R. 1851 reforms Section 8 vouchers to
make their allocation more efficient and targets them based on need.
Second, the legislation also increases access for rural families, and
expands the number of families receiving housing vouchers. Third, the
bill permits families to use housing vouchers as a down payment on a
first-time home purchase, and includes other provisions to encourage
family self-sufficiency including incentives for families to obtain
employment, increase earned income, pursue higher education, and save
for retirement.
I wish to express my special thanks to the Chair of the Financial
Services Committee, Mr. Frank, for his leadership and commitment to
affordable housing for low and moderate income families. Let me also
thank the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Waters, the Chair
[[Page H7733]]
of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity for her yeoman
work in bringing this important and much needed legislation to the
House floor today.
Mr. Chairman, a strong America requires strong families and
communities. Affordable housing is critical to maintaining strong
families and communities. Section 8 housing vouchers provide vital
rental assistance for low-income families, seniors, and the disabled to
help them afford housing. The Section 8 housing voucher program
contributes to the strengthening of our nation. Let me discuss briefly
for our colleagues some of the more beneficial provisions in the
legislation.
The legislation eliminates inefficiencies that have resulted in $1.4
billion in unused funds and provides incentives for agencies to use
funds to assist more families. Thus, the voucher Funding Formula is
made more efficient and will lead to an increase in the number of
families receiving vouchers. And that is good because the number of
housing vouchers issued has declined more than 150,000 since 2004. The
bill authorizes 20,000 incremental vouchers in each of the next five
years, for a total of 100,000 new vouchers.
Mr. Chairman, I also support this legislation because it protects
tenant rights, promotes home ownership, and encourages economic self-
sufficiency for low income voucher and public housing families. The
legislation also protects housing agencies adversely affected by
formula changes, by allowing them to use voucher reserves in the
transition to maintain the number of families being assisted.
Homeownership is promoted because, for the first time, families will
be permitted to use housing vouchers as a down-payment on a first-time
home purchase, and to use vouchers for purchase of a manufactured home
on leased land. Economic self-sufficiency for low income voucher and
public housing families is encouraged because H.R. 1851 includes
several incentives for families to obtain employment, increase earned
income, pursue higher education, and save for retirement. The bill also
increases voucher opportunities for lower-income working families in
rural areas.
Finally, the bill contains several tenant protections, including
provisions to preserve voucher families' ability to move to other
areas, to address excessive voucher rent burdens, to provide for more
accurate fair market rent calculations, and to protect voucher holders
in units that are in need of repair.
Mr. Chairman, for millions of our fellow citizens, finding safe and
affordable housing is still a constant and often futile struggle.
Today, about 1.4 million households nationwide participate in the
voucher program; but not all qualified applicants are guaranteed
housing. The demand for housing assistance consistently exceeds the
limited resources available from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development and local government agencies. Long waiting lists have,
unfortunately, become very common.
In my hometown of Houston, the largest city in Texas, and the fourth
largest in the United States, there is a multi-year backlog of
applications for individuals seeking government assistance. It is not
unusual for individuals and families to be placed on the waiting list
for more than three years.
I believe it imperative that something be done to reduce this
backlog. That is why I offered an amendment to the bill that would
establish a pilot program to aid in the reduction of Section 8 waiting
list.
Mr. Chairman, I also offered an amendment providing that funds
received by a section 8 family from a family member serving in the
Armed Forces in a hostile combat theater be excluded from the
computation of income for eligibility purposes.
The military is one of Americans most precious resources and one
whose efforts ought to never be taken for granted. Daily, these men and
women in uniform risk their lives to ensure the national security and
safety of our country. One way to express our gratitude to them is to
offer relief to their family members.
Eligibility for housing vouchers is typically based on the family
size and the total annual gross income, which ought to not exceed 50
percent of the median income for the area in which they choose to live.
HUD's Housing Voucher (HCV) handbook lists both special pay (except pay
received by a service member who is exposed to hostile fire) and the
Base Housing Allowance (BAH) as income for purposes of determining a
family's income eligibility. Excluding monies received by section 8
tenants from family members serving in combat zones when evaluating
income eligibility for Section 8 housing would provide a little piece
of mind to the families of these soldiers serving overseas.
The final amendment I offered sought to provide economic
opportunities to Section 8 tenants by requiring the Secretary of the
Housing and Urban Development carry out programs whereby public housing
agencies develop curriculums and policies designed to increase
employment and contracting opportunities for recipients of tenant-based
rental assistance under the United States Housing Act of 1937. These
economic opportunities can be in the form of maintenance, inspection,
and management of rental properties for which rental assistance is
provided.
Families living with Section 8 vouchers can achieve self-sufficiency
through active participation in education and employment. Self-
sufficiency eliminates the need to be dependent on public assistance
and increase one's self esteem and sense of accomplishment. My
amendment was intended to help section 8 become more economically
independent.
But taken as a whole, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1851 is a very good bill and
represents a significant step forward in the direction of an
enlightened policy of affordable housing. Accordingly, I strongly
support H.R. 1851, the ``Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007.'' I urge
my colleagues to join in voting for this much need legislation.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller).
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, we have been working
on housing issues for several years. I think we do have a very good job
in this House coming to an agreement. Moving to the Senate, for some
reason, things just don't happen as they should on that side of the
Capitol.
But we have got tremendous housing shortages in this country that we
have to deal with. We have to work on HOPE VI program to be more
innovative to allow the private sector to get involved. We need to be
able to take and move people through the system for public housing
section 8 vouchers.
But the area we are really hurting in in this country is the move-up
marketplace for people coming out of section 8, coming out of public
housing and to be able to move into a house that's affordable. We all
have problems in many of our districts where our children go away to
college; we know people who, when their kids come back, they can't
afford to live in the communities in which they were raised. We know
many people who may be a school teacher, a police officer, a fireman,
who drive 2 hours back and forth to work because they can't afford to
live within the community in which they work. That should be a focus of
Congress.
We not only have to deal with the HOPE VI program, we have to deal
with the public housing program, the section 8. We have to look at
streamlining the system where builders and developers in this country
can bring affordable housing on line and make it available for people
who are moving out of government assistance into homes of their home.
The Moving To Work program, I think, is going to work very well. It
allows people to retain some earnings, to build up the savings to be
able to afford to move into a home for the first time. We have a lot of
nonprofits in this country that provide down-payment assistance,
programs who help people that can afford a payment but don't have the
cash on hand within which to be able to put down and pay the closing
costs to move into a home.
We have got to look at the overall industry and say, how can we be
innovative? How can we be creative? And how can we help people to help
themselves? Now, I am a conservative. I don't believe in government
programs going on forever. But I think people come to a point in their
life where they need a helping hand.
We need to look at ways to help them go on their open to become self-
sufficient. That's what I hope we do in Congress, not only look at
reforming the government programs we have here today to make them more
innovative, make them work for people. In L.A. County, there is a 10-
year wait for people to go on vouchers or public housing. That has to
change.
People wait for 10 years who are just as needy or more needy
sometimes than people who are receiving assistance. But we have no way
of moving those people out of government programs into their own homes.
That's what we need to look at, streamlining, removing the red tape,
fast tracking, have some nexus between the cost that's assessed against
the project and the actual cost of that project.
I want to commend Barney Frank. Over the years, he and I have worked
on more legislation on housing I think than any two Members from the
Republican and Democrat side together that try to create programs that
work for people. Tonight's bill might not be everything they want. I
know it's not
[[Page H7734]]
everything that Maxine Waters and Barney Frank wants, but it was an
agreement between the two of us in a bipartisan fashion, Republicans
and Democrats, to come and fashion a bill that would work.
I think this bill has some innovation. It makes some changes, and I
think it moves us in a better direction. Are we where we should be
completely? No, but we are moving in a good direction.
I look forward to cooperation from both sides.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might
consume.
In closing, I would again like to thank the subcommittee chairwoman,
Ms. Waters, Chairman Frank and Mr. Shays for introducing and working on
this bill. I urge my colleagues to support the bill, which received a
52-9 vote coming out of our committee.
The bill we will vote on today is a good bill. It is the result of
bipartisan cooperation. It contains many provisions more than in last
year's bill that help families dependent upon public assistance become
families that are independent and self-sufficient tax-paying productive
members of society.
It's my sincere hope that we can further improve the bill, especially
the sections involving the funding formula. I thank the chairman for
agreeing to work with me on this.
I truly hope that we can move this bill beyond the House during this
Congress and that the Senate and the administration will work with us
to reform this important program.
{time} 2000
America's families and American children deserve a 21st-century
section 8 program.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this moment to thank
someone who is not here in the Congress with us at this time.
When we first started this legislation in the previous Congress, it
was with Mr. Bob Ney who served as chair of the subcommittee; I was the
ranking member; and we put this bill out on the floor where it passed
this House, and he deserves credit for all the work that was done.
I would also like to thank some of the other members who we have not
heard from this evening in general debate and hopefully we will hear
from a little later on. Mr. Green from Texas who insisted that we
expand the vouchers to make them available to the needy families who
certainly have been standing in line waiting on section 8 vouchers.
I would like to thank Mr. David Scott for being one of the most
adamant and fierce defenders of the work that we have done and who has
taken on the work of trying to educate some of our Members from the
other side of the aisle, not only about the need, but how not to
penalize the victims and people who are looking for housing
opportunities who would not be able to get them but for section 8 and
the work that we are doing.
With that, I would like to close by thanking the chairman who is so
committed to helping those who need us most. He is certainly the kind
of leader that we can depend on to make sure that everything possible
is done, to utilize the time that we have been given in this committee
to work for people who oftentimes have been dropped off of America's
agenda. Again, he provides strong leadership. He is generous with
sharing opportunities with everybody that serves on that committee. And
it is because of that kind of leadership and, again, the cooperation
from my friends on the opposite side of the aisle, Mrs. Biggert, Mr.
Miller, Mr. Shays, and others that we come to this floor tonight with a
good strong bill that is going to help so very many people in this
country, and it is the kind of public policy that makes us all feel
very good about being elected officials.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R.
1851, to reform the housing choice voucher program under section 8 of
the United States Housing Act of 1937. I commend the Honorable Maxine
Waters for her leadership on this issue of pressing socioeconomic
concern.
In 1937, we had a Nation still suffering from the Great Depression.
In fact, in 1937, the economy fell into a recession which caused high
unemployment and left many wondering how they would put a roof over
their family's heads at night. In response to this problem, the United
States Housing Act was enacted, which helped hard-working American
families to stay off of the streets.
This bill also helped to push the United States policy of spending on
infrastructure to help the economy, as promoted by the principles of
Keynesian economics. In today's economy we are seeing a new problem
emerge--the growing income gap.
According to a January 27, 2007, CNN report entitled, ``Mind the gap:
Income Inequality, State by State,'' Americans whose annual income
places them in the top 5 percent of the income bracket ``saw their
incomes rise as much as 132 percent between 1980 and 2003. The bottom
20 percent of families, meanwhile, saw their incomes rise by no more
than 24 percent.'' With such inequality today's housing crisis becomes
obvious--the ``haves'' are purchasing more real-estate and thus driving
housing costs to levels far above the budget of ``have-nots.''
Just as the Federal Government took the lead and helped struggling
American families in 1937, we must step in and make sure their efforts
are applicable to today's specific housing crisis by amending Section 8
of the United States Housing Act 1937 to address the problems of 2007.
In my district of the Virgin Islands I see multimillion dollar
estates constructed in areas of previously low to moderate income.
Often times this works to drive up property values and drive out those
who can no longer afford to live in the area. It has driven up housing
costs and even rental prices. This bill will help address this issue by
adding 100,000 new Section 8 vouchers, and by expanding their use for
home purchase as well as rent. It will allow a public housing agency to
authorize a family in crisis to occupy housing immediately so they are
not left on the streets while a slow moving bureaucratic agency
``evaluates'' them. H.R. 1851 also includes provisions to address
existing inadequacies in the programs that have created long waiting
lists and a program that has more applicants than available housing.
By passing H.R. 1851, Congress will take a much needed step towards
improving a much needed program. I urge my colleagues to support this
bill and help make a good program stronger and better.
Mr. ENGEL. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1851, the
Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007. This bill will expand Section 8
Vouchers to improve system efficiency, encourage self-sufficiency, and
increase the number of families who can participate. There are
currently 20,370 vouchers in use in New York's 17th district which I
proudly represent, and 2 million families using vouchers nationwide.
These Section 8 Vouchers allow low-income families to choose the
housing option that best fits their needs, and encourages permanent
economic stability.
According to the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment
Officials, there is funding for 150,000 vouchers that are not in use
under the current Section 8 Voucher formula. By reforming Section 8
Vouchers, we put funding and vouchers in the hands of people who need
them the most.
Madam Chairman, in New York we highly value Section 8 Vouchers
housing. The vouchers provide much-needed assistance to families and
individuals wishing to become more economically self-sufficient, but
who lack the means to do so on their own. Simplifying and expanding
Section 8 Vouchers will help alleviate a monumental housing crisis in
the state of New York and throughout the country. H.R. 1851 relieves
pressure on struggling communities and families and will bring economic
security and self-sufficiency within their reach. H.R. 1851 reforms
Section 8 Vouchers in a comprehensive and logical way, and I encourage
my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Chairman, today's passage of H.R. 1851, the
Section 8 Voucher Act (SERVA) will improve greatly the housing voucher
system--which is already successful and has been described by the
Administration as one of the federal government's most effective
programs.
Safe and affordable housing is one of my priorities and should be a
national priority. Section 8 vouchers are a great tool for getting
families into decent homes. Studies have shown that Section 8 vouchers
reduce homelessness, overcrowding, and frequent moves from apartment to
apartment. Affordable housing is critical to strong families and
communities, and vouchers have allowed families to move to lower-
poverty neighborhoods with better schools and less exposure to crime.
H.R. 1851 will only increase the success of Section 8 vouchers, which
currently provides housing assistance to more than 2 million families,
by making the program more efficient and more effective. From 2004 to
2006, voucher funds were allocated using a series of
[[Page H7735]]
ineffectual formulas that gave some agencies less funding than they
needed to cover the costs of their vouchers--forcing them to cut back
for needy families--while other agencies were given more funds than
they could use. This resulted in $1.4 billion of unused funds and, more
importantly, 150,000 more low-income families without vouchers. SERVA
would base funding on the actual cost of each agency's vouchers in the
previous year. This will allow housing agencies, apartment owners, and
families with vouchers to be confident that the program will be funded
on a regular basis. Moreover, SERVA will establish incentives
encouraging agencies to serve as many families as their funding
permits, rather than accumulating large balances of unspent funds.
In addition to establishing such a stable, efficient and equitable
voucher funding policy, SERVA will additionally remove barriers to
voucher ``portability'', as well as streamline the rules for
determining tenants' rent payment. It will authorize 100,000 new
vouchers over five years' time, and include provisions to encourage
economic self-sufficiency. It will also allow families to use housing
vouchers as a down payment on a first-time home purchase, gives a
limited number of Public Housing Agencies some flexibility to
experiment with development and rent policies, and makes it easier for
housing agencies to attach vouchers to housing units. These reforms
will provide vital rental assistance for seniors and the disabled as
well as low-income families, as well as provide a welcome opportunity
for low-income families to achieve the American Dream of home
ownership.
By reforming an already highly successful program, we can improve the
quality of life for many American families, elderly, and disabled
citizen all over the country by offering them more and better choices
of communities to live in.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1851,
the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007.
I want to take this opportunity to commend my good friend
Congresswoman Maxine Waters, chairwoman of the Housing Subcommittee,
for introducing this bill, navigating it through the House Committee on
Financial Services and bringing this important and necessary piece of
legislation to the floor today for consideration by the full House of
Representatives.
I have the utmost respect for Chairwoman Waters--for all that she has
done and is doing to improve the housing conditions for Americans,
especially the moderate- to low-income, minorities, the disabled and
the elderly. She has helped me considerably in my efforts to improve
housing conditions in rural America.
Mr. Chairman, while some form of Section 8 rental assistance has been
in place since the mid-1970s, the modern program was shaped largely by
the 1998 public housing reform act. Nearly 10 years later, the Section
8 Housing Choice Voucher program came under new scrutiny, with Public
Housing Authority industry leaders, low-income housing advocates, and
some Members of Congress calling for reforms.
Chairwoman Waters heeded that call and has brought to the floor today
a bill that will help not only the poorest of the poor with housing
vouchers but also provide the public housing authorities in my district
and across the nation with the tools they need to better serve our
constituents. The bill includes significant improvements to the voucher
program, which provides rental assistance to about 1.8 million
families, the majority of whom are extremely poor.
Applaud the provision in the bill that permits public housing
authorities to let families use housing vouchers as a down payment on a
first-time home purchase, and the section authorizing 20,000 sorely
needed incremental vouchers in each of the next 5 years, for a total of
100,000 new vouchers.
For these reasons and more, I encourage my colleagues to vote in
favor of H.R. 1851, the ``Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007.''
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I regret that I will be unable to vote
``yes'' tonight for passage of H.R. 1851. I was scheduled to be in
Detroit in order to receive the NAACP's most prestigious award, the
``Spingarn award.'' I applaud the vision, courage and compassion of
Representative Maxine Waters for introducing the ``Section 8 Voucher
Reform Act of 2007, H.R. 1851.'' I strongly support the legislation,
because it expands Section 8 vouchers for working families in America
who are in desperate need of affordable housing by creating 20,000
incremental Section 8 vouchers in each of the next 5 years for a total
of 100,000 new vouchers.
In a nation where affordable housing is scarce, and family homeless
shelters continue to be built across the nation, passage of H.R. 1851
is a vitally important step in having the Federal Government take the
lead in expanding affordable housing for deserving families and
children in America. There are approximately 16,000 individuals and
families who are currently on the Detroit Public Housing Waiting List.
H.R. 1851 will help reduce the affordable housing crisis in Detroit, by
increasing the availability of housing units through the expansion of
Section 8 housing. It clearly does not make sense, nor is it fair, to
have apartments available for rent in Detroit, but not enough citizens
to move into them, only because there have not been a sufficient supply
of Section 8 vouchers in the past.
H.R. 1851 also changes rent calculation, recertification, and
inspection rules for the voucher, public housing, and project based
Section 8 programs, to reduce costs and compliance burdens for public
housing agencies, landlords, and families. These changes are made while
maintaining rules that target scarce resources to those families most
in need and while maintaining rent calculation rules that ensure rents
are affordable. This will mean that Section 8 apartments will now
become more affordable due to changes in rent calculation formulas
mandated in H.R. 1851.
H.R. 1851 also permits public housing agencies across this country to
allow families in need of affordable housing to use a Section 8 housing
voucher as a down payment on a first time home purchase. Passage of
this legislation means scores of working families in Detroit, many who
have saved and sacrificed the entire lives to buy a home, will be now
able to do so.
The ``Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007, H.R. 1851.'' Is a
critically important piece of legislation because it reforms HUD
Section 8 guidelines to ensure that the approximately $1.4 billion in
unused Section 8 funds will now be spent. This legislation mandates
reforms in the Section 8 program that will eliminate inefficiencies,
streamline paper work, and provide more incentives for public housing
agencies to assist more families who qualify for Section 8 housing.
Having an additional $1.4 billion dollars to be used for Section 8
housing vouchers means that there will be a substantial increase in
families in Detroit who will live in safe and decent affordable
housing. There are too many working families in Detroit, and across
this nation, who are living in homeless shelters, expensive inner city
hotels, and staying with friends and relatives until they can locate
housing. This is a moral outrage. All Americans deserve safe, decent,
and affordable permanent housing.
Under the leadership of Representative Maxine Waters, passage of H.R.
1851 shows how we as Democrats have always had a historical commitment
to expanding affordable housing to working families, and will continue
to do so.
If we are to be a truly compassionate and moral nation, all
individuals and families, regardless of income, race, or employment
status must have as a fundamental human and civil right safe, decent,
and affordable housing. Passage of H.R. 1851 is a critically important
piece of legislation that will move America closer to this goal. Now,
100,000 additional Americans will have the opportunity to either become
home owners, or move into an apartment, something that we can all agree
on should be one of the highest priorities of this Nation.
Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Ms. Baldwin). All time for general debate has
expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute
printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the
purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered
read.
The text of the committee amendment is as follows:
H.R. 1851
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 ``Section 8 Voucher Reform Act
of 2007''.
SEC. 2. INSPECTION OF DWELLING UNITS.
(a) In General.--Section 8(o)(8) of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(8)) is amended--
(1) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(A) Initial inspection.--
``(i) In general.--For each dwelling unit for which a
housing assistance payment contract is established under this
subsection, the public housing agency (or other entity
pursuant to paragraph (11)) shall inspect the unit before any
assistance payment is made to determine whether the dwelling
unit meets the housing quality standards under subparagraph
(B), except as provided in clause (ii) or (iii) of this
subparagraph.
``(ii) Correction of non-life threatening conditions.--In
the case of any dwelling unit that is determined, pursuant to
an inspection under clause (i), not to meet the housing
quality standards under subparagraph (B), assistance payments
may be made for the unit notwithstanding subparagraph (C) if
failure to meet such standards is a result only of non-life
threatening conditions. A public housing agency
[[Page H7736]]
making assistance payments pursuant to this clause for a
dwelling unit shall, 30 days after the beginning of the
period for which such payments are made, suspend any
assistance payments for the unit if any deficiency resulting
in noncompliance with the housing quality standards has not
been corrected by such time, and may not resume such payments
until each such deficiency has been corrected.
``(iii) Projects receiving certain federal housing
subsidies.--In the case of any property that within the
previous 12 months has been determined to meet housing
quality and safety standards under any Federal housing
program inspection standard, including the program under
section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or under
subtitle A of title II of the Cranston Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act of 1990, a public housing agency may
authorize occupancy before the inspection under clause (i)
has been completed, and may make assistance payments
retroactive to the beginning of the lease term after the unit
has been determined pursuant to an inspection under clause
(i) to meet the housing quality standards under subparagraph
(B).'';
(2) by striking subparagraph (D) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(D) Biennial inspections.--
``(i) Requirement.--Each public housing agency providing
assistance under this subsection (or other entity, as
provided in paragraph (11)) shall, for each assisted dwelling
unit, make biennial inspections during the term of the
housing assistance payments contract for the unit to
determine whether the unit is maintained in accordance with
the requirements under subparagraph (A). The agency (or other
entity) shall retain the records of the inspection for a
reasonable time and shall make the records available upon
request to the Secretary, the Inspector General for the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, and any auditor
conducting an audit under section 5(h).
``(ii) Sufficient inspection.--An inspection of a property
shall be sufficient to comply with the inspection requirement
under clause (i) if--
``(I) the inspection was conducted pursuant to requirements
under a Federal, State, or local housing assistance program
(including the HOME investment partnerships program under
title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing
Act (42 U.S.C. 12721 et seq.)); and
``(II) pursuant to such inspection, the property was
determined to meet the standards or requirements regarding
housing quality or safety applicable to units assisted under
such program, and, if a non-Federal standard was used, the
public housing agency has certified to the Secretary that
such standards or requirements provide the same protection to
occupants of dwelling units meeting such standards or
requirements as, or greater protection than, the housing
quality standards under subparagraph (B).''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(F) Enforcement of housing quality standards.--
``(i) Determination of noncompliance.--A dwelling unit that
is covered by a housing assistance payments contract under
this subsection shall be considered, for purposes of this
subparagraph, to be in noncompliance with the housing quality
standards under subparagraph (B) if--
``(I) the public housing agency or an inspector authorized
by the State or unit of local government determines upon
inspection of the unit that the unit fails to comply with
such standards;
``(II) the agency or inspector notifies the owner of the
unit in writing of such failure to comply; and
``(III) the failure to comply is not corrected within 90
days after receipt of such notice.
``(ii) Withholding and release of assistance amounts.--The
public housing agency shall withhold all of the assistance
amounts under this subsection with respect to a dwelling unit
that is in noncompliance with housing quality standards under
subparagraph (B). Subject to clause (iii), the agency shall
promptly release any withheld amounts to the owner of the
dwelling unit upon completion of repairs that remedy such
noncompliance.
``(iii) Use of withheld assistance to pay for repairs.--The
public housing agency may use such amounts withheld to make
repairs to the dwelling unit or to contract to have repairs
made (or to contract with an inspector referred to in clause
(i)(I) to make or contract for such repairs), and shall
subtract the cost of such repairs from any amounts released
to the owner of the unit upon remedying such noncompliance.
``(iv) Protection of tenants.--An owner of a dwelling unit
may not terminate the tenancy of any tenant or refuse to
renew a lease for such unit because of the withholding of
assistance pursuant to this subparagraph.
``(v) Termination of lease or assistance payments
contract.--If assistance amounts under this section for a
dwelling unit are withheld pursuant to clause (ii) and the
owner does not correct the noncompliance before the
expiration of the lease for the dwelling unit and such lease
is not renewed, the Secretary shall recapture any such
amounts from the public housing agency.
``(vi) Applicability.--This subparagraph shall apply to any
dwelling unit for which a housing assistance payments
contract is entered into or renewed after the date of the
effectiveness of the regulations implementing this
subparagraph.''.
(b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall issue any regulations necessary to carry
out the amendment made by subsection (a)(3) not later than
the expiration of the 12-month period beginning upon the date
of the enactment of this Act. Such regulations shall take
effect not later than the expiration of the 90-day period
beginning upon such issuance. This subsection shall take
effect upon enactment of this Act.
SEC. 3. RENT REFORM AND INCOME REVIEWS.
(a) Rent for Public Housing and Section 8 Programs.--
Section 3 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437a(a)) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1) by inserting ``Low-income occupancy
requirement and rental payments.--'' after ``(1)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(6) Reviews of family income.--
``(A) Frequency.--Reviews of family income for purposes of
this section shall be made--
``(i) in the case of all families, upon the initial
provision of housing assistance for the family;
``(ii) annually thereafter, except as provided in
subparagraph (B)(i);
``(iii) upon the request of the family, at any time the
income or deductions (under subsection (b)(5)) of the family
change by an amount that is estimated to result in a decrease
of $1,500 (or such lower amount as the public housing agency
may, at the option of the agency or owner, establish) or more
in annual adjusted income; and
``(iv) at any time the income or deductions (under
subsection (b)(5)) of the family change by an amount that is
estimated to result in an increase of $1,500 or more in
annual adjusted income, except that any increase in the
earned income of a family shall not be considered for
purposes of this clause (except that earned income may be
considered if the increase corresponds to previous decreases
under clause (iii)), except that a public housing agency or
owner may elect not to conduct such review in the last three
months of a certification period.
``(B) Fixed-income families.--
``(i) Self certification and 3-year review.--In the case of
any family described in clause (ii), after the initial review
of the family's income pursuant to subparagraph (A)(i), the
public housing agency or owner shall not be required to
conduct a review of the family's income pursuant to
subparagraph (A)(ii) for any year for which such family
certifies, in accordance with such requirements as the
Secretary shall establish, that the income of the family
meets the requirements of clause (ii) of this subparagraph,
except that the public housing agency or owner shall conduct
a review of each such family's income not less than once
every 3 years.
``(ii) Eligible families.--A family described in this
clause is a family who has an income, as of the most recent
review pursuant to subparagraph (A) or clause (i) of this
subparagraph, of which 90 percent or more consists of fixed
income, as such term is defined in clause (iii).
``(iii) Fixed income.--For purposes of this subparagraph,
the term `fixed income' includes income from--
``(I) the supplemental security income program under title
XVI of the Social Security Act, including supplementary
payments pursuant to an agreement for Federal administration
under section 1616(a) of the Social Security Act and payments
pursuant to an agreement entered into under section 212(b) of
Public Law 93-66;
``(II) Social Security payments;
``(III) Federal, State, local and private pension plans;
and
``(IV) other periodic payments received from annuities,
insurance policies, retirement funds, disability or death
benefits, and other similar types of periodic receipts.
``(C) In general.--Reviews of family income for purposes of
this section shall be subject to the provisions of section
904 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments
Act of 1988.
``(7) Calculation of income.--
``(A) Use of prior year's income.--Except as otherwise
provided in this paragraph, in determining the income of a
family for a year, a public housing agency or owner may use
the income of the family as determined by the agency or owner
for the preceding year, taking into consideration any
redetermination of income during such prior year pursuant to
clause (iii) or (iv) of paragraph (6)(A).
``(B) Earned income.--For purposes of this section, the
earned income of a family for a year shall be the amount of
earned income by the family in the prior year minus an amount
equal to 10 percent of the lesser of such prior year's earned
income or $10,000, except that the income of a family for
purposes of section 16 (relating to eligibility for assisted
housing and income mix) shall be determined without regard to
any reduction under this subparagraph.
``(C) Inflationary adjustment for fixed income families.--
If, for any year, a public housing agency or owner determines
the income for any family described in paragraph (6)(B)(ii),
or the amount of fixed income of any other family, based on
the prior year's income or fixed income, respectively,
pursuant to subparagraph (A), such prior year's income or
fixed income, respectively, shall be adjusted by applying an
inflationary factor as the Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish.
``(D) Other income.--If, for any year, a public housing
agency or owner determines the income for any family based on
the prior year's income, with respect to prior year
calculations of types of income not subject to subparagraph
(B), a public housing agency or owner may make other
adjustments as it considers appropriate to reflect current
income.
``(E) Safe harbor.--A public housing agency or owner may,
to the extent such information is available to the public
housing agency or owner, determine the family's income for
purposes of this section based on timely income
determinations made for purposes of other means-tested
Federal public assistance programs (including the program for
block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy
families
[[Page H7737]]
under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act, a
program for medicaid assistance under a State plan approved
under title XIX of the Social Security Act, and the food
stamp program as defined in section 3(h) of the Food Stamp
Act of 1977). The Secretary shall, in consultation with other
appropriate Federal agencies, develop procedures to enable
public housing agencies and owners to have access to such
income determinations made by other Federal programs.
``(F) PHA and owner compliance.--A public housing agency or
owner may not be considered to fail to comply with this
paragraph or paragraph (6) due solely to any de minimus
errors made by the agency or owner in calculating family
incomes.'';
(2) by striking subsections (d) and (e); and
(3) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (d).
(b) Income.--Section 3(b) of the United States Housing Act
of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
``(4) Income.--The term `income' means, with respect to a
family, income received from all sources by each member of
the household who is 18 years of age or older or is the head
of household or spouse of the head of the household, plus
unearned income by or on behalf of each dependent who is less
than 18 years of age, as determined in accordance with
criteria prescribed by the Secretary, in consultation with
the Secretary of Agriculture, subject to the following
requirements:
``(A) Included amounts.--Such term includes recurring gifts
and receipts, actual income from assets, and profit or loss
from a business.
``(B) Excluded amounts.--Such term does not include--
``(i) any imputed return on assets; and
``(ii) any amounts that would be eligible for exclusion
under section 1613(a)(7) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 1382b(a)(7)).
``(C) Earned income of students.--Such term does not
include earned income of any dependent earned during any
period that such dependent is attending school on a full-time
basis or any grant-in-aid or scholarship amounts related to
such attendance used for the cost of tuition or books.
``(D) Educational savings accounts.--Income shall be
determined without regard to any amounts in or from, or any
benefits from, any Coverdell education savings account under
section 530 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or any
qualified tuition program under section 529 of such Code.
``(E) Other exclusions.--Such term shall not include other
exclusions from income as are established by the Secretary or
any amount required by Federal law to be excluded from
consideration as income. The Secretary may not require a
public housing agency or owner to maintain records of any
amounts excluded from income pursuant to this
subparagraph.''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (5) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
``(5) Adjusted income.--The term `adjusted income' means,
with respect to a family, the amount (as determined by the
public housing agency or owner) of the income of the members
of the family residing in a dwelling unit or the persons on a
lease, after any deductions from income as follows:
``(A) Elderly and disabled families.--$725 in the case of
any family that is an elderly family or a disabled family.
``(B) Dependents.--In the case of any family that includes
a member or members who--
``(i) are less than 18 years of age or attending school or
vocational training on a full-time basis; or
``(ii) is a person with disabilities who is 18 years of age
or older and resides in the household,
$500 for each such member.
``(C) Health and medical expenses.--The amount, if any, by
which 10 percent of annual family income is exceeded by the
sum of--
``(i) in the case of any elderly or disabled family, any
unreimbursed health and medical care expenses; and
``(ii) any unreimbursed reasonable attendant care and
auxiliary apparatus expenses for each handicapped member of
the family, to the extent necessary to enable any member of
such family to be employed.
``(D) Permissive deductions.--Such additional deductions as
a public housing agency may, at its discretion, establish,
except that the Secretary shall establish procedures to
ensure that such deductions do not increase Federal
expenditures.
The Secretary shall annually adjust the amounts of the
exclusions under subparagraphs (A) and (B), as such amounts
may have been previously adjusted, by applying an
inflationary factor as the Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish. If the dollar amount of any such exclusion
determined for any year by applying such inflationary factor
is not a multiple of $25, the Secretary shall round such
amount to the next lowest multiple of $25.''.
(c) Housing Choice Voucher Program.--Paragraph (5) of
section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437f(o)(5)) is amended--
(1) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``Annual review''
and inserting ``Reviews'';
(2) in subparagraph (A)--
(A) by striking ``the provisions of'' and inserting
``paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 3(a) and to''; and
(B) by striking ``and shall be conducted upon the initial
provision of housing assistance for the family and thereafter
not less than annually''; and
(3) in subparagraph (B), by striking the second sentence.
(d) Enhanced Voucher Program.--Section 8(t)(1)(D) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(t)(1)(D))
is amended by striking ``income'' each place such term
appears and inserting ``annual adjusted income''.
(e) Project-Based Housing.--Paragraph (3) of section 8(c)
of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437f(c)(3)) is amended by striking the last sentence.
(f) Impact on Public Housing Revenues.--
(1) Interaction with asset management rule.--If the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development determines that
the application of the amendments made by this section
results in a reduction in the rental income of a public
housing agency that is not de minimus during the period that
the operating formula income is frozen at a level that does
not fully reflect the changes made by such amendments, the
Secretary shall make appropriate adjustments in the formula
income of the agency.
(2) HUD reports on public housing revenue impact.--For each
of fiscal years 2008 and 2009, the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development shall submit a report to Congress
identifying and calculating the impact of changes made by the
amendments made by this section on the revenues and costs of
operating public housing units.
(g) Effective Date and Transition.--The amendments made by
this section shall apply with respect to fiscal year 2008 and
fiscal years thereafter.
SEC. 4. ELIGIBILITY FOR ASSISTANCE BASED ON ASSETS AND
INCOME.
(a) Assets.--Section 16 of the United States Housing Act of
1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437n) is amended by inserting after
subsection (d) the following new subsection:
``(e) Eligibility for Assistance Based on Assets.--
``(1) Limitation on assets.--Subject to paragraph (3) and
notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a dwelling
unit assisted under this Act may not be rented and assistance
under this Act may not be provided, either initially or at
each recertification of family income, to any family--
``(A) whose net family assets exceed $100,000, as such
amount is adjusted annually by applying an inflationary
factor as the Secretary considers appropriate; or
``(B) who has a present ownership interest in, and a legal
right to reside in, real property that is suitable for
occupancy as a residence, except that the prohibition under
this subparagraph shall not apply to--
``(i) any property for which the family is receiving
assistance under this Act;
``(ii) any person that is a victim of domestic violence; or
``(iii) any family that is making a good faith effort to
sell such property.
``(2) Net family assets.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the
term `net family assets' means, for all members of the
household, the net cash value of all assets after deducting
reasonable costs that would be incurred in disposing of real
property, savings, stocks, bonds, and other forms of capital
investment. Such term does not include interests in Indian
trust land, equity accounts in homeownership programs of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, or Family Self
Sufficiency accounts.
``(B) Exclusions.--Such term does not include--
``(i) the value of personal property, except for items of
personal property of significant value, as the public housing
agency may determine;
``(ii) the value of any retirement account;
``(iii) any amounts recovered in any civil action or
settlement based on a claim of malpractice, negligence, or
other breach of duty owed to a member of the family and
arising out of law, that resulted in a member of the family
being disabled (under the meaning given such term in section
1614 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1382c)); and
``(iv) the value of any Coverdell education savings account
under section 530 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or any
qualified tuition program under section 529 of such Code.
``(C) Trust funds.--In cases where a trust fund has been
established and the trust is not revocable by, or under the
control of, any member of the family or household, the value
of the trust fund shall not be considered an asset of a
family if the fund continues to be held in trust. Any income
distributed from the trust fund shall be considered income
for purposes of section 3(b) and any calculations of annual
family income, except in the case of medical expenses for a
minor.
``(D) Self-certification.--A public housing agency or owner
may determine the net assets of a family, for purposes of
this section, based on the amounts reported by the family at
the time the agency or owner reviews the family's income.
``(3) Compliance for public housing dwelling units.--When
recertifying family income with respect to families residing
in public housing dwelling units, a public housing agency
may, in the discretion of the agency and only pursuant to a
policy that is set forth in the public housing agency plan
under section 5A for the agency, choose not to enforce the
limitation under paragraph (1).
``(4) Authority to delay evictions.--In the case of a
family residing in a dwelling unit assisted under this Act
who does not comply with the limitation under paragraph (1),
the public housing agency or project owner may delay eviction
or termination of the family based on such noncompliance for
a period of not more than 6 months.''.
(b) Income.--The United States Housing Act of 1937 is
amended--
(1) in section 3(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)(1)), by striking
the first sentence and inserting the following: ``Dwelling
units assisted under this Act
[[Page H7738]]
may be rented, and assistance under this Act may be provided,
whether initially or at time of recertification, only to
families who are low-income families at the time such initial
or continued assistance, respectively, is provided, except
that families residing in dwelling units as of the date of
the enactment of the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007
that, under agreements in effect on such date of enactment,
may have incomes up to 95 percent of local area median income
shall continue to be eligible for assistance at
recertification as long as they continue to comply with such
income restrictions. When recertifying family income with
respect to families residing in public housing dwelling
units, a public housing agency may, in the discretion of the
agency and only pursuant to a policy that is set forth in the
public housing agency plan under section 5A for the agency,
choose not to enforce the prohibition under the preceding
sentence. When recertifying family income with respect to
families residing in dwelling units for which project-based
assistance is provided, a project owner may, in the owner's
discretion and only pursuant to a policy adopted by such
owner, choose not to enforce such prohibition. In the case of
a family residing in a dwelling unit assisted under this Act
who does not comply with the prohibition under the first
sentence of this paragraph, the public housing agency or
project owner may delay eviction or termination of the family
based on such noncompliance for a period of not more than 6
months.'';
(2) in section 8(o)(4) (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(4)), by striking
the matter preceding subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following:
``(4) Eligible families.--Assistance under this subsection
may be provided, whether initially or at each
recertification, only pursuant to subsection (t) to a family
eligible for assistance under such subsection or to a family
who at the time of such initial or continued assistance,
respectively, is a low-income family that is--''; and
(3) in section 8(c)(4) (42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(4)), by striking
``at the time it initially occupied such dwelling unit'' and
inserting ``according to the restrictions under section
3(a)(1)''.
SEC. 5. TARGETING ASSISTANCE TO LOW-INCOME WORKING FAMILIES.
(a) Vouchers.--Section 16(b)(1) of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437n(b)(1)) is amended--
(1) by inserting after ``do not exceed'' the following:
``the higher of (A) the poverty line (as such term is defined
in section 673 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1981 (42 U.S.C. 9902), including any revision required by
such section) applicable to a family of the size involved, or
(B)''; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``; and except that clause (A) of this sentence
shall not apply in the case of families residing in Puerto
Rico or any other territory or possession of the United
States''.
(b) Public Housing.--Section 16(a)(2)(A) of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437n(a)(2)(A)) is
amended--
(1) by inserting after ``do not exceed'' the following:
``the higher of (i) the poverty line (as such term is defined
in section 673 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1981 (42 U.S.C. 9902), including any revision required by
such section) applicable to a family of the size involved, or
(ii)''; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``; and except that clause (i) of this sentence
shall not apply in the case of families residing in Puerto
Rico or any other territory or possession of the United
States''.
(c) Project-Based Section 8 Assistance.--Section 16(c)(3)
of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437n(c)(3)) is amended--
(1) by inserting after ``do not exceed'' the following:
``the higher of (A) the poverty line (as such term is defined
in section 673 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1981 (42 U.S.C. 9902), including any revision required by
such section) applicable to a family of the size involved, or
(B)''; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``; and except that clause (A) of this sentence
shall not apply in the case of families residing in Puerto
Rico or any other territory or possession of the United
States''.
SEC. 6. VOUCHER RENEWAL FUNDING.
(a) In General.--Section 8 of the United States Housing Act
of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) is amended by striking subsection
(dd) and inserting the following new subsection:
``(dd) Tenant-Based Vouchers.--
``(1) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated, for each of fiscal years 2008
through 2012, such sums as may be necessary for tenant-based
assistance under subsection (o) for the following purposes:
``(A) To renew all expiring annual contributions contracts
for tenant-based rental assistance.
``(B) To provide tenant-based rental assistance for--
``(i) relocation and replacement of housing units that are
demolished or disposed of pursuant to the Omnibus
Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996
(Public Law 104-134);
``(ii) conversion of section 23 projects to assistance
under this section;
``(iii) the family unification program under subsection (x)
of this section;
``(iv) relocation of witnesses in connection with efforts
to combat crime in public and assisted housing pursuant to a
request from a law enforcement or prosecution agency;
``(v) enhanced vouchers authorized under subsection (t) of
this section;
``(vi) vouchers in connection with the HOPE VI program
under section 24;
``(vii) demolition or disposition of public housing units
pursuant to section 18 of the United States Housing Act of
1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437p);
``(viii) mandatory and voluntary conversions of public
housing to vouchers, pursuant to sections 33 and 22 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937, respectively (42 U.S.C.
1437z-5, 1437t);
``(ix) vouchers necessary to comply with a consent decree
or court order;
``(x) vouchers to replace dwelling units that cease to
receive project-based assistance under subsection (b), (c),
(d), (e), or (v) of this section;
``(xi) tenant protection assistance, including replacement
and relocation assistance; and
``(xii) emergency voucher assistance for the protection of
victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual
assault, or stalking.
Subject only to the availability of sufficient amounts
provided in appropriation Acts, the Secretary shall provide
tenant-based rental assistance to replace all dwelling units
that cease to be available as assisted housing as a result of
clause (i), (ii), (v), (vi), (vii), (viii), or (x).
``(2) Allocation of renewal funding among public housing
agencies.--
``(A) From amounts appropriated for each year pursuant to
paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary shall provide renewal funding
for each public housing agency--
``(i) based on leasing and cost data from the preceding
calendar year, as adjusted by an annual adjustment factor to
be established by the Secretary, which shall be established
using the smallest geographical areas for which data on
changes in rental costs are annually available;
``(ii) by making any adjustments necessary to provide for
the first-time renewal of vouchers funded under paragraph
(1)(B);
``(iii) by making any adjustments necessary for full year
funding of vouchers ported in the prior calendar year under
subsection (r)(2); and
``(iv) by making such other adjustments as the Secretary
considers appropriate, including adjustments necessary to
address changes in voucher utilization rates and voucher
costs related to natural and other major disasters.
``(B) Leasing and cost data.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A)(i), leasing and cost data shall be calculated annually by
using the average for the preceding calendar year. Such
leasing and cost data shall be adjusted to include vouchers
that were set aside under a commitment to provide project-
based assistance under subsection (o)(13) and to exclude
amounts funded through advances under paragraph (3). Such
leasing and cost data shall not include funds not
appropriated for tenant-based assistance under section 8(o),
unless the agency's funding was prorated in the prior year
and the agency used other funds to maintain vouchers in use.
``(C) Overleasing.--For the purpose of determining
allocations under subsection (A)(i), the leasing rate
calculated for the prior calendar year may exceed an agency's
authorized voucher level, except that such calculation in
2009 shall not include amounts resulting from a leasing rate
in excess of 103 percent of an agency's authorized vouchers
in 2008 which results from the use of accumulated amounts, as
referred to in paragraph (4)(A).
``(D) Moving to work; housing innovation program.--
Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B), each public
housing agency participating at any time in the moving to
work demonstration under section 204 of the Departments of
Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and
Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 (42 U.S.C.
1437f note) or in the housing innovation program under
section 36 of this Act shall be funded pursuant to its
agreement under such program and shall be subject to any pro
rata adjustment made under subparagraph (E)(i).
``(E) Pro rata allocation.--
``(i) Insufficient funds.--To the extent that amounts made
available for a fiscal year are not sufficient to provide
each public housing agency with the full allocation for the
agency determined pursuant to subparagraphs (A) and (D), the
Secretary shall reduce such allocation for each agency on a
pro rata basis, except that renewal funding of enhanced
vouchers under section 8(t) shall not be subject to such
proration.
``(ii) Excess funds.--To the extent that amounts made
available for a fiscal year exceed the amount necessary to
provide each housing agency with the full allocation for the
agency determined pursuant to subparagraphs (A) and (D), such
excess amounts shall be used for the purposes specified in
subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (4).
``(F) Prompt funding allocation.--The Secretary shall
allocate all funds under this subsection for each year before
the latter of (i) February 15, or (ii) the expiration of the
45-day period beginning upon the enactment of the
appropriations Act funding such renewals.
``(3) Advances.--
``(A) Authority.--During the last 3 months of each calendar
year, the Secretary shall provide amounts to any public
housing agency, at the request of the agency, in an amount up
to two percent of the allocation for the agency for such
calendar year, subject to subparagraph (C).
``(B) Use.--Amounts advanced under subparagraph (A) may be
used to pay for additional voucher costs, including costs
related to temporary overleasing.
``(C) Use of prior year amounts.--During the last 3 months
of a calendar year, if amounts previously provided to a
public housing agency for tenant-based assistance for such
year or for previous years remain unobligated and available
to the agency--
``(i) the agency shall exhaust such amounts to cover any
additional voucher costs under subparagraph (B) before
amounts advanced under subparagraph (A) may be so used; and
``(ii) the amount that may be advanced under subparagraph
(A) to the agency shall be reduced by an amount equal to the
total of such previously provided and unobligated amounts.
``(D) Repayment.--Amounts advanced under subparagraph (A)
in a calendar year shall be repaid to the Secretary in the
subsequent calendar
[[Page H7739]]
year by reducing the amounts made available for such agency
for such subsequent calendar year pursuant to allocation
under paragraph (2) by an amount equal to the amount so
advanced to the agency.
``(4) Recapture.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall recapture, from
amounts provided under the annual contributions contract for
a public housing agency for a calendar year, all accumulated
amounts allocated under paragraph (2) and from previous years
that are unused by the agency at the end of each calendar
year except--
``(i) with respect to the recapture under this subparagraph
at the end of 2007, an amount equal to one twelfth the amount
allocated to the public housing agency for such year pursuant
to paragraph (2)(A); and
``(ii) with respect to the recapture under this
subparagraph at the end of each of 2008, 2009, 2010, and
2011, an amount equal to 5 percent of such amount allocated
to the agency for such year. Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, each public housing agency may retain all
amounts not authorized to be recaptured under this
subparagraph, and may use such amounts for all authorized
purposes.
``(B) Reallocation.--Not later than May 1 of each calendar
year, the Secretary shall--
``(i) calculate the aggregate unused amounts for the
preceding year recaptured pursuant to subparagraph (A);
``(ii) set aside and make available such amounts as the
Secretary considers appropriate to reimburse public housing
agencies for increased costs related to portability and
family self-sufficiency activities during such year; and
``(iii) reallocate all remaining amounts among public
housing agencies, with priority given based on the extent to
which an agency has utilized the amount allocated under
paragraph (2) for the agency to serve eligible families.
``(C) Use.--Amounts reallocated to a public housing agency
pursuant to subparagraph (B)(iii) may be used only to
increase voucher leasing rates as provided under paragraph
(2)(C).''.
(b) Absorption of Vouchers From Other Agencies.--Section
8(r)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437f(r)(2)) is amended by adding after the period at the end
the following: ``The agency shall absorb the family into its
program for voucher assistance under this section and shall
have priority to receive additional funding from the
Secretary for the housing assistance provided for such family
from amounts made available pursuant to subsection
(dd)(4)(B).''
(c) Vouchers for Persons With Disabilities.--The Secretary
of Housing and Urban Development shall develop and issue, to
public housing agencies that received voucher assistance
under section 8(o) for non-elderly disabled families pursuant
to appropriations Acts for fiscal years 1997 through 2002,
guidance to ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable,
such vouchers continue to be provided upon turnover to
qualified non-elderly disabled families.
SEC. 7. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES.
(a) In General.--Section 8(q) of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(q)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking subparagraphs (B) and (C)
and inserting the following new subparagraphs:
``(B) Calculation.--The fee under this subsection shall--
``(i) be payable to each public housing agency for each
month for which a dwelling unit is covered by an assistance
contract;
``(ii) until superseded through subsequent rulemaking, be
based on the per-unit fee payable to the agency in fiscal
year 2003, updated for each subsequent year as specified in
subsection (iv);
``(iii) include an amount for the cost of issuing voucher
to new participants;
``(iv) be updated each year using an index of changes in
wage data or other objectively measurable data that reflect
the costs of administering the program for such assistance,
as determined by the Secretary; and
``(v) include an amount for the cost of family self-
sufficiency coordinators, as provided in section 23(h)(1).
``(C) Publication.--The Secretary shall cause to be
published in the Federal Register the fee rate for each
geographic area.''; and
(2) in paragraph (4), by striking ``1999'' and inserting
``2007''.
(b) Administrative Fees for Family Self-Sufficiency Program
Costs.--Subsection (h) of section 23 of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437u(h)) is amended by
striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following new
paragraph:
``(1) Section 8 fees.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a fee
under section 8(q) for the costs incurred in administering
the self-sufficiency program under this section to assist
families receiving voucher assistance through section 8(o).
``(B) Eligibility for fee.--The fee shall provide funding
for family self-sufficiency coordinators as follows:
``(i) Base fee.--A public housing agency serving 25 or more
participants in the family self-sufficiency program under
this section shall receive a fee equal to the costs of
employing one full-time family self-sufficiency coordinator.
An agency serving fewer than 25 such participants shall
receive a prorated fee.
``(ii) Additional fee.--An agency that meets minimum
performance standards shall receive an additional fee
sufficient to cover the costs of employing a second family
self-sufficiency coordinator if the agency has 75 or more
participating families, and a third such coordinator if it
has 125 or more participating families.
``(iii) Previously funded agencies.--An agency that
received funding from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development for more than three such coordinators in any of
fiscal years 1998 through 2007 shall receive funding for the
highest number of coordinators funded in a single fiscal year
during that period, provided they meet applicable size and
performance standards.
``(iv) Initial year.--For the first year in which a public
housing agency exercises its right to develop an family self-
sufficiency program for its residents, it shall be entitled
to funding to cover the costs of up to one family self-
sufficiency coordinator, based on the size specified in its
action plan for such program.
``(v) State and regional agencies.--For purposes of
calculating the family self-sufficiency portion of the
administrative fee under this subparagraph, each
administratively distinct part of a State or regional public
housing agency shall be treated as a separate agency.
``(vi) Determination of number of coordinators.--In
determining whether a public housing agency meets a specific
threshold for funding pursuant to this paragraph, the number
of participants being served by the agency in its family
self-sufficiency program shall be considered to be the
average number of families enrolled in such agency's program
during the course of the most recent fiscal year for which
the Department of Housing and Urban Development has data.
``(C) Proration.--If insufficient funds are available in
any fiscal year to fund all of the coordinators authorized
under this section, the first priority shall be given to
funding one coordinator at each agency with an existing
family self-sufficiency program. The remaining funds shall be
prorated based on the number of remaining coordinators to
which each agency is entitled under this subparagraph.
``(D) Recapture.--Any fees allocated under this
subparagraph by the Secretary in a fiscal year that have not
been spent by the end of the subsequent fiscal year shall be
recaptured by the Secretary and shall be available for
providing additional fees pursuant to subparagraph (B)(ii).
``(E) Performance standards.--Within six months after the
date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall
publish a proposed rule specifying the performance standards
applicable to funding under clauses (ii) and (iii) of
subparagraph (B). Such standards shall include requirements
applicable to the leveraging of in-kind services and other
resources to support the goals of the family self-sufficiency
program.
``(F) Data collection.--Public housing agencies receiving
funding under this paragraph shall collect and report to the
Secretary, in such manner as the Secretary shall require,
information on the performance of their family self-
sufficiency programs.
``(G) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall conduct a formal and
scientific evaluation of the effectiveness of well-run family
self-sufficiency programs, using random assignment of
participants to the extent practicable. Not later than the
expiration of the 4-year period beginning upon the enactment
of this paragraph, the Secretary shall submit an interim
evaluation report to the Congress. Not later than the
expiration of the 8-year period beginning upon such
enactment, the Secretary shall submit a final evaluation
report to the Congress. There is authorized to be
appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out the evaluation under
this subparagraph.
``(H) Incentives for innovation and high performance.--The
Secretary may reserve up to 10 percent of the amounts made
available for administrative fees under this paragraph to
provide support to or reward family self-sufficiency programs
that are particularly innovative or highly successful in
achieving the goals of the program.''.
(c) Repeal.--Section 202 of the Departments of Veterans
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent
Agencies Appropriations Act, 1997 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note;
Public Law 104-204; 110 Stat. 2893) is hereby repealed.
SEC. 8. HOMEOWNERSHIP.
(a) Section 8 Homeownership Downpayment Program.--Section
8(y)(7) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437f(y)(7)) is amended by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B)
and inserting the following new subparagraphs:
``(A) In general.--Subject to the provisions of this
paragraph, in the case of a family on whose behalf rental
assistance under section 8(o) has been provided for a period
of not less than 12 months prior to the date of receipt of
downpayment assistance under this paragraph, a public housing
agency may, in lieu of providing monthly assistance payments
under this subsection on behalf of a family eligible for such
assistance and at the discretion of the agency, provide a
downpayment assistance grant in accordance with subparagraph
(B).
``(B) Grant requirements.--A downpayment assistance grant
under this paragraph--
``(i) shall be used by the family only as a contribution
toward the downpayment and reasonable and customary closing
costs required in connection with the purchase of a home;
``(ii) shall be in the form of a single one-time grant; and
``(iii) may not exceed $10,000.
``(C) No effect on obtaining outside sources for
downpayment assistance.--This Act may not be construed to
prohibit a public housing agency from providing downpayment
assistance to families from sources other than a grant
provided under this Act, or as determined by the public
housing agency.''.
(b) Use of Vouchers for Manufactured Housing.--Section
8(o)(12) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437f(o)(12) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking the period at the end
of the first sentence and all that follows through ``of'' in
the second sentence and inserting ``and rents''; and
[[Page H7740]]
(2) in subparagraph (B)--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``the rent'' and all that
follows and inserting the following: ``rent shall mean the
sum of the monthly payments made by a family assisted under
this paragraph to amortize the cost of purchasing the
manufactured home, including any required insurance and
property taxes, the monthly amount allowed for tenant-paid
utilities, and the monthly rent charged for the real property
on which the manufactured home is located, including monthly
management and maintenance charges.'';
(B) by striking clause (ii); and
(C) in clause (iii)--
(i) by inserting after the period at the end the following:
``If the amount of the monthly assistance payment for a
family exceeds the monthly rent charged for the real property
on which the manufactured home is located, including monthly
management and maintenance charges, a public housing agency
may pay the remainder to the family, lender or utility
company, or may choose to make a single payment to the family
for the entire monthly assistance amount.''; and
(ii) by redesignating such clause as clause (ii).
SEC. 9. PHA REPORTING OF RENT PAYMENTS TO CREDIT REPORTING
AGENCIES.
(a) In General.--Section 3 of the United States Housing Act
of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a), as amended by the preceding
provisions of this Act, is further amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(e) PHA Reporting of Rent Payments to Credit Reporting
Agencies.--
``(1) Authority.--To the extent that a family receiving
tenant-based housing choice vouchers under section 8 by a
public housing agency agrees in writing to reporting under
this subsection, the public housing agency may submit to
consumer reporting agencies described in section 603(p) of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a) information
regarding the past rent payment history of the family with
respect to the dwelling unit for which such assistance is
provided.
``(2) Format.--The Secretary, after consultation with
consumer reporting agencies referred in paragraph (1), shall
establish a system and format to be used by public housing
agencies for reporting of information under such paragraph
that provides such information in a format and manner that is
similar to other credit information submitted to such
consumer reporting agencies and is usable by such
agencies.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 10. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS.
Section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437f(o)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(21) Performance assessments.--
``(A) Establishment.--The Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish standards and procedures for assessing the
performance of public housing agencies in carrying out the
programs for tenant-based rental assistance under this
subsection and for homeownership assistance under subsection
(y).
``(B) Contents.--The standards and procedures under this
paragraph shall provide for assessment of the performance of
public housing agencies in the following areas:
``(i) Quality of dwelling units obtained using such
assistance.
``(ii) Extent of utilization of assistance amounts provided
to the agency and of authorized vouchers.
``(iii) Timeliness and accuracy of reporting by the agency
to the Secretary.
``(iv) Effectiveness in carrying out policies to achieve
deconcentration of poverty.
``(v) Reasonableness of rent burdens, consistent with
public housing agency responsibilities under section
8(o)(1)(E)(iii).
``(vi) Accurate rent calculations and subsidy payments.
``(vii) Effectiveness in carrying out family self-
sufficiency activities.
``(viii) Timeliness of actions related to landlord
participation.
``(ix) Such other areas as the Secretary considers
appropriate.
``(C) Periodic assessment.--Using the standards and
procedures established under this paragraph, the Secretary
shall conduct an assessment of the performance of each public
housing agency carrying out a program referred to in
subparagraph (A) and shall submit a report to the Congress
regarding the results of each such assessment.''.
SEC. 11. PHA PROJECT-BASED ASSISTANCE.
Section 8(o)(13) of the United States Housing Act of 1937
(42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)) is amended--
(1) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(B) Percentage limitation.--
``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), not more than 25
percent of the funding available for tenant-based assistance
under this section that is administered by the agency may be
attached to structures pursuant to this paragraph.
``(ii) Exception.--An agency may attach up to an additional
5 percent of the funding available for tenant-based
assistance under this section to structures pursuant to this
paragraph for dwelling units that house individuals and
families that meet the definition of homeless under section
103 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.
11302).'';
(2) by striking subparagraph (D) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(D) Income mixing requirement.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), not
more than the greater of 25 dwelling units or 25 percent of
the dwelling units in any project may be assisted under a
housing assistance payment contract for project-based
assistance pursuant to this paragraph. For purposes of this
subparagraph, the term `project' means a single building,
multiple contiguous buildings, or multiple buildings on
contiguous parcels of land.
``(ii) Exceptions.--
``(I) Certain housing.--The limitation under clause (i)
shall not apply in the case of assistance under a contract
for housing consisting of single family properties, or for
dwelling units that are specifically made available for
households comprised of elderly families, disabled families,
and families receiving supportive services. For purposes of
the preceding sentence, the term `single family properties'
means buildings with no more than four dwelling units.
``(II) Certain areas.--With respect to areas in which fewer
than 75 percent of families issued vouchers become
participants in the program, the public housing agency has
established the payment standard at 110 percent of the fair
market rent for all census tracts in the area for the
previous six months, and the public housing agency grants an
automatic extension of 90 days (or longer) to families with
vouchers who are attempting to find housing, clause (i) shall
be applied by substituting `50 percent' for `25 percent'.'';
(3) in the first sentence of subparagraph (F), by striking
``10 years'' and inserting ``15 years'';
(4) in subparagraph (G)--
(A) by inserting after the period at the end of the first
sentence the following: ``Such contract may, at the election
of the public housing agency and the owner of the structure,
specify that such contract shall be extended for renewal
terms of up to 15 years each, if the agency makes the
determination required by this subparagraph and the owner is
in compliance with the terms of the contract.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following: ``A public housing
agency may agree to enter into such a contract at the time it
enters into the initial agreement for a housing assistance
payment contract or at any time thereafter that is before the
expiration of the housing assistance payment contract.'';
(5) in subparagraph (H), by inserting before the period at
the end of the first sentence the following: ``, except that
in the case of a contract unit that has been allocated low-
income housing tax credits and for which the rent limitation
pursuant to such section 42 is less than the amount that
would otherwise be permitted under this subparagraph, the
rent for such unit may, in the sole discretion of a public
housing agency, be established at the higher section 8 rent,
subject only to paragraph (10)(A)'';
(6) in subparagraph (I)(i), by inserting before the
semicolon the following: ``, except that the contract may
provide that the maximum rent permitted for a dwelling unit
shall not be less than the initial rent for the dwelling unit
under the initial housing assistance payments contract
covering the unit'';
(7) in subparagraph (J)--
(A) by striking the fifth and sixth sentences and inserting
the following: ``A public housing agency may establish and
utilize procedures for maintaining site-based waiting lists
under which applicants may apply directly at, or otherwise
designate to the public housing agency, the project or
projects in which they seek to reside, except that all
applicants on the waiting list of an agency for assistance
under this subsection shall be permitted to place their names
on such separate list. All such procedures shall comply with
title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing
Act, and other applicable civil rights laws. The owner or
manager of a structure assisted under this paragraph shall
not admit any family to a dwelling unit assisted under a
contract pursuant to this paragraph other than a family
referred by the public housing agency from its waiting list,
or a family on a site-based waiting list that complies with
the requirements of this subparagraph. A public housing
agency shall fully disclose to each applicant each option in
the selection of a project in which to reside that is
available to the applicant.''; and
(B) by inserting after the third sentence the following new
sentence: ``Any family who resides in a dwelling unit
proposed to be assisted under this paragraph, or in a unit to
be replaced by a proposed unit to be assisted under this
paragraph shall be given an absolute preference for selection
for placement in the proposed unit, if the family is
otherwise eligible for assistance under this subsection.'';
and
(8) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
``(L) Use in cooperative housing and elevator buildings.--A
public housing agency may enter into a housing assistance
payments contract under this paragraph with respect to--
``(i) dwelling units in cooperative housing;
``(ii) notwithstanding subsection (c), dwelling units in a
high-rise elevator project, including such a project that is
occupied by families with children, without review and
approval of the contract by the Secretary.
``(M) Reviews.--
``(i) Subsidy layering.--A subsidy layering review in
accordance with section 102(d) of the Department of Housing
and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545(d))
shall not be required for assistance under this subparagraph
in the case of a housing assistance payments contract for an
existing structure, or if a subsidy layering review has been
conducted by the applicable State or local agency.
``(ii) Environmental review.--A public housing agency shall
not be required to undertake any environmental review before
entering into a housing assistance payments contract under
this paragraph for an existing structure, except to the
extent such a review is otherwise required by law or
regulation.
``(N) Leases and tenancy.--Assistance provided under this
paragraph shall be subject to the provisions of paragraph
(7), except that subparagraph (A) of such paragraph shall not
apply.''.
[[Page H7741]]
SEC. 12. RENT BURDENS.
(a) Reviews.--Section 8(o)(1) of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(1)) is amended by striking
subparagraph (E) and inserting the following new
subparagraph:
``(E) Reviews.--
``(i) Rent burdens.--The Secretary shall monitor rent
burdens and submit a report to the Congress annually on the
percentage of families assisted under this subsection,
occupying dwelling units of any size, that pay more than 30
percent of their adjusted incomes for rent and such
percentage that pay more than 40 percent of their adjusted
incomes for rent. Using information regularly reported by
public housing agencies, the Secretary shall provide public
housing agencies, on an annual basis, a report with the
information described in the first sentence of this clause,
and may require a public housing agency to modify a payment
standard that results in a significant percentage of families
assisted under this subsection, occupying dwelling units of
any size, paying more than 30 percent of their adjusted
incomes for rent.
``(ii) Concentration of poverty.--The Secretary shall
submit a report to the Congress annually on the degree to
which families assisted under this subsection in each
metropolitan area are clustered in lower rent, higher poverty
areas and how, and the extent to which, greater geographic
distribution of such assisted families could be achieved,
including by increasing payment standards for particular
communities within such metropolitan areas.
``(iii) Public housing agency responsibilities.--Each
public housing agency shall make publicly available the
information on rent burdens provided by the Secretary
pursuant to clause (i), and, for agencies located in
metropolitan areas, the information on concentration provided
by the Secretary pursuant to clause (ii). If the percentage
of families paying more than 30 percent or 40 percent of
income exceeds the national average for either of such
categories, as reported pursuant to clause (i), the public
housing agency shall adjust the payment standard to eliminate
excessive rent burdens within a reasonable time period or
explain its reasons for not making such adjustment. The
Secretary may not deny the request of a public housing agency
to set a payment standard up to 120 percent of the fair
market rent to remedy rent burdens in excess of the national
average or undue concentration of families assisted under
this subsection in lower rent, higher poverty sections of a
metropolitan area except on the basis that an agency has not
demonstrated that its request meets these criteria. If a
request of a public housing agency has not been denied or
approved with 45 days after the request is made, the request
shall be considered to have been approved.''.
(b) Public Housing Agency Plan.--Section 5A(d)(4) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437c-1(d)(4))
is amended by inserting before the period at the end the
following: ``, including the report with respect to the
agency furnished by the Secretary pursuant to section
8(o)(1)(E) concerning rent burdens and, if applicable,
geographic concentration of voucher holders, any changes in
rent or other policies the public housing agency is making to
address excessive rent burdens or concentration, and if the
public housing agency is not adjusting its payment standard,
its reasons for not doing so''.
(c) Rent Burdens for Persons With Disabilities.--
Subparagraph (D) of section 8(o)(1) is amended by inserting
before the period at the end the following: ``, except that a
public housing agency may establish a payment standard of not
more than 120 percent of the fair market rent where necessary
as a reasonable accommodation for a person with a disability,
without approval of the Secretary. A public housing agency
may seek approval of the Secretary to use a payment standard
greater than 120 percent of the fair market rent as a
reasonable accommodation for a person with a disability''.
SEC. 13. ESTABLISHMENT OF FAIR MARKET RENT.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 8(c) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(1)) is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``(A)'' after the paragraph designation;
(2) by striking the seventh, eighth, and ninth sentences;
and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(B)(i) The Secretary shall endeavor to define market
areas for purposes of this paragraph in a manner that results
in fair market rentals that are adequate to cover typical
rental costs of units suitable for occupancy by persons
assisted under this section in as wide a range of communities
as is feasible, including communities with low poverty rates.
``(ii) The Secretary at a minimum shall define a separate
market area for each--
``(I) metropolitan city, as such term is defined in section
102(a) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974
(42 U.S.C. 5302(a)), with more than 40,000 rental dwelling
units; and
``(II) urban county or portion of an urban county, as such
term is defined in such section 102(a), located outside the
boundaries of any metropolitan city specified in subclause
(I).
``(iii) The Secretary shall, at the request of one or more
public housing agencies, establish a separate market area for
part or all of the area under the jurisdiction of such
agencies, if--
``(I) the requested market area contains at least 20,000
rental dwelling units;
``(II) the areas contained in the requested market area are
geographically contiguous and share similar housing market
characteristics;
``(III) adequate data are available to establish a reliable
fair market rental for the requested market area, and for the
remainder of the market area in which it is currently
located; and
``(IV) establishing the requested market area would raise
or lower the fair market rental by 10 percent or more at the
time the requested market area is established.
For purposes of subclause (III), data for an area shall be
considered adequate if they are sufficient to establish from
time to time a reliable benchmark fair market rental based
primarily on data from that area, whether or not those data
need to be supplemented with data from a larger area for
purposes of annual updates.
``(iv) The Secretary shall not reduce the fair market
rental in a market area as a result of a change in the
percentile of the distribution of market rents used to
establish the fair market rental.''.
(b) Payment Standard.--Subparagraph (B) of section 8(o)(1)
of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437f(o)(1)(B)) is amended by inserting before the period at
the end the following: ``, except that no public housing
agency shall be required as a result of a reduction in the
fair market rental to reduce the payment standard applied to
a family continuing to reside in a unit for which the family
was receiving assistance under this section at the time the
fair market rental was reduced''.
SEC. 14. SCREENING OF APPLICANTS.
Subparagraph (B) of section 8(o)(6) of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (1437f(o)(6)(B)) is amended by inserting
after the period at the end of the second sentence the
following: ``A public housing agency's elective screening
shall be limited to criteria that are directly related to an
applicant's ability to fulfill the obligations of an assisted
lease and shall consider mitigating circumstances related to
such applicant. Any applicant or participant determined to be
ineligible for admission or continued participation to the
program shall be notified of the basis for such determination
and provided, within a reasonable time after the
determination, an opportunity for an informal hearing on such
determination at which mitigating circumstances, including
remedial conduct subsequent to the notice, shall be
considered.''.
SEC. 15. ENHANCED VOUCHERS.
Subparagraph (B) of section 8(t)(1) of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(t)(1)(B)) is amended by
inserting after ``eligibility event for the project,'' the
following: ``regardless of unit and family size standards
normally used by the administering agency (except that
tenants may be required to move to units of appropriate size
if available on the premises),''.
SEC. 16. HOUSING INNOVATION PROGRAM.
(a) Establishment of Program.--Title I of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 36. HOUSING INNOVATION PROGRAM.
``(a) Purpose.--The purpose of the program under this
section is to provide public housing agencies and the
Secretary the flexibility to design and evaluate innovative
approaches to providing housing assistance that--
``(1) increase housing opportunities for low-income
families, including preventing homelessness, rehabilitate or
replace housing at risk of physical deterioration or
obsolescence, and develop additional affordable housing;
``(2) leverage other Federal, State, and local funding
sources, including the low-income housing tax credit program,
to expand and preserve affordable housing opportunities,
including public housing;
``(3) provide financial incentives and other support
mechanisms to families to obtain employment and increase
earned income;
``(4) test alternative rent-setting policies to determine
whether rent determinations can be simplified and
administrative cost savings can be realized while protecting
extremely low- and very low-income families from increased
rent burdens;
``(5) are subject to rigorous evaluation to test the
effectiveness of such innovative approaches; and
``(6) are developed with the support of the local community
and with the substantial participation of affected residents.
``(b) Program Authority.--
``(1) Scope.--The Secretary shall carry out a housing
innovation program under this section under which the
Secretary may designate not more than 60 public housing
agencies to participate, at any one time, in the housing
innovation program, in accordance with subsections (c) and
(d), except that, in addition to such 60 agencies, the
Secretary may designate an additional 20 agencies to
participate in the program under the terms of subsection (h).
``(2) Duration.--The Secretary may carry out the housing
innovation program under this section only during the 10-year
period beginning on the date of the enactment of the Section
8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007.
``(c) Participation of Existing MTW Agencies.--
``(1) Existing mtw agencies.--Subject to the requirements
of paragraph (2), all existing MTW agencies shall be
designated to participate in the program.
``(2) Conditions of participation.--The Secretary shall
approve and transfer into the housing innovation program
under this section each existing MTW agency that the
Secretary determines is not in default under such agreement
and which the Secretary also determines is meeting the goals
and objectives of its moving to work plan. Each such agency
shall, within two years after the date of the enactment of
the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007, make changes to its
policies that were implemented before such date of enactment
in order to comply with the requirements of this section.
``(d) Additional Agencies.--
``(1) Proposals; selection process.--In addition to
agencies participating in the program pursuant to subsection
(c), the Secretary shall,
[[Page H7742]]
within 18 months after such date of enactment, select public
housing agencies to participate in the program pursuant to a
competitive process that meets the following requirements:
``(A) Any public housing agency may be selected to
participate in the program, except that not more than 5
agencies that are near-troubled under the public housing
assessment system and/or section 8 management assessment
program may be selected, and except that any agency for which
the Secretary has hired an alternative management entity for
such agency or has taken possession of all or any part of
such agency's public housing program shall not be eligible
for participation. Any near-troubled public housing agency
participating in the program shall remain subject to the
requirements of this Act governing tenant rent contributions,
eligibility, and continued participation, and may not adopt
policies described in subsection (e)(4) (relating to rents
and requirements for continued occupation and participation).
``(B) The process provides, to the extent possible based on
eligible agencies submitting applications and taking into
account existing MTW agencies participating pursuant to
subsection (c), for representation among agencies selected of
agencies having various characteristics, including both large
and small agencies, agencies serving urban, suburban, and
rural areas, and agencies in various geographical regions
throughout the United States, and which may include the
selection of agencies that only administer the voucher
program under section 8(o).
``(C) Any agency submitting a proposal under this paragraph
shall have provided notice to residents and the local
community, not later than 30 days before the first of the two
public meetings required under subparagraph (D).
``(D) The agency submitting a proposal shall hold two
public meetings to receive comments on the agency's proposed
application, on the implications of changes under the
proposal, and the possible impact on residents.
``(E) The process includes criteria for selection, as
follows:
``(i) The extent to which the proposal generally identifies
existing rules and regulations that impede achievement of the
goals and objectives of the proposal and an explanation of
why participation in the program is necessary to achieve such
goals and objectives.
``(ii) The extent of commitment and funding for carrying
out the proposal by local government agencies and nonprofit
organizations, including the provision of additional funding
and other services, and the extent of support for the
proposal by residents, resident advisory boards, and members
of the local community.
``(iii) The extent to which the agency has a successful
history of implementing strategies similar to those set forth
in the agency's proposal.
``(iv) Whether the proposal pursues a priority strategy as
specified in paragraph (2). In the case of any proposal
utilizing a such a priority strategy, the proposal shall be
evaluated based upon--
``(I) the extent to which the proposal is likely to achieve
the objectives of developing additional housing dwelling
units affordable to extremely low-, very low-, and low-income
families, and preserving, rehabilitating, or modernizing
existing public housing dwelling units; or
``(II) the extent to which the proposal is likely to
achieve the purposes of moving families toward economic self-
sufficiency and increasing employment rates and wages of
families without imposing a significant rent burden on the
lowest income families, as well as such of the additional
purposes as may be identified in the proposal, which may
include expanding housing choices utilizing coordinators for
the family self-sufficiency program under section 23, making
more effective use of program funds, and improving program
management.
``(v) Such other factors as the Secretary may provide, in
consultation with participating agencies, program
stakeholders, and any entity conducting evaluations pursuant
to subsection (f).
``(2) Priority strategies.--For purposes of paragraph
(1)(E)(iv), the following are priority strategies:
``(A) Development, rehabilitation, and financing.--A
strategy of development of additional affordable housing
dwelling units and/or a strategy for preservation and
physical rehabilitation and modernization of existing public
housing dwelling units. Such strategies may include
innovative financing proposals, leveraging of non-public
housing funds (including the low-income housing tax credit
program), and combining of funds for assistance under
sections 8 and 9. Each such proposal shall include detailed
information about the strategies expected to be employed, an
explanation of why participation in the program is necessary
to employ such strategies, and numerical goals regarding the
number of dwelling units to be developed, preserved, or
rehabilitated.
``(B) Rent reforms.--A strategy to implement rent reforms,
which shall be designed to help families increase their
earned income through rent and other work incentives, and may
also test the effectiveness of achieving administrative cost
savings without increased rent burdens for extremely low- and
very low-income families.
``(3) Contract amendment.--After selecting agencies under
this subsection, the Secretary shall promptly amend the
applicable annual contributions contracts of such agencies to
provide that--
``(A) subject to subparagraph (B), such agencies may
implement any policies and activities that are not
inconsistent with this section without specifying such
policies and activities in such amendment and without
negotiating or entering into any other agreements with the
Secretary specifying such policies and activities; and
``(B) the activities to be implemented by an agency under
the program in a given year shall be described in and subject
to the requirements of the annual plan under subsection
(e)(8). Upon the enactment of this section, any agency which
has participated in the Moving to Work demonstration may, at
its option, be subject to the provisions of this paragraph in
lieu of any other agreement required by the Secretary for
participation in the program.
``(4) Maintaining participation rate.--If, at any time
after the initial selection period under paragraph (1), the
number of public housing agencies participating in the
program under this section is fewer than 40, the Secretary
shall promptly solicit applications from and select public
housing agencies to participate in the program under the
terms and conditions for application and selection provided
in this section to increase the number of agencies
participating in the program to 40.
``(e) Program Requirements.--
``(1) Program funds.--
``(A) In general.--To carry out a housing innovation
program under this section, the participating agency may use
amounts provided to the agency from the Operating Fund under
section 9(e), amounts provided to the agency from the Capital
Fund under section 9(d), and amounts provided to the agency
for voucher assistance under section 8(o). Such program funds
may be used for any activities that are authorized by
sections 8(o) or 9, or for other activities that are not
inconsistent with this section, which shall include, without
limitation--
``(i) providing capital and operating assistance, and
financing for housing previously developed or operated
pursuant to a contract between the Secretary and such agency;
``(ii) the acquisition, new construction, rehabilitation,
financing, and provision of capital or operating assistance
for low-income housing (including housing other than public
housing) and related facilities, which may be for terms
exceeding the term of the program under this section in order
to secure other financing for such housing;
``(iii) costs of site acquisition and improvement,
providing utility services, demolition, planning, and
administration of activities under this paragraph;
``(iv) housing counseling for low-income families in
connection with rental or homeownership assistance provided
under the program;
``(v) safety, security, law enforcement, and anticrime
activities appropriate to protect and support families
assisted under the program;
``(vi) tenant-based rental assistance, which may include
the project-basing of such assistance; and
``(vii) appropriate and reasonable financial assistance
that is required to preserve low-income housing otherwise
assisted under programs administered by the Secretary or
under State or local low-income housing programs.
``(B) Combining funds.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, a participating agency may combine and use program
funds for any activities authorized under this section,
except that a participating agency may use funds provided for
assistance under section 8(o) for activities other than those
authorized under section 8(o) only if (i) in the calendar
year prior to its participation in the program, the agency
utilized not less than 95 percent of such funds allocated for
that calendar year for such authorized activities or 95
percent of its authorized vouchers, including vouchers ported
in to the agency and vouchers ported out; or (ii) after
approval to participate in the program, the agency achieves
such utilization for a 12-month period. This subparagraph
shall not apply to participating agencies approved by the
Secretary to combine funds from sections 8 and 9 of the Act
prior to enactment of this section.
``(2) Use of program funds.--In carrying out the housing
innovation program under this section, each participating
agency shall continue to assist--
``(A) not less than substantially the same number of
eligible low-income families under the program as it assisted
in the base year for the agency; and
``(B) a comparable mix of families by family size, subject
to adjustment to reflect changes in the agency's waiting
list, except that the Secretary may approve exceptions to
such requirements for up to 3 years based on modernization or
redevelopment activities proposed in an annual plan submitted
and approved in accordance with paragraph (8).
Determinations with respect to the number of families served
shall be adjusted based on any allocation of additional
vouchers under section 8(o) and to reflect any change in the
percentage of program funds that a participating agency
receives compared to the base year.
``(3) Retained provisions.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this section, families receiving assistance
under this section shall retain the same rights of judicial
review of agency action as they would otherwise have had if
the agency were not participating in the program, and each
participating agency shall comply with the following
provisions of this Act:
``(A) Subsections (a)(2)(A) and (b)(1) of section 16
(relating to targeting for new admissions in the public
housing and voucher programs).
``(B) Section 2(b) (relating to tenant representatives on
the public housing agency board of directors).
``(C) Section 3(b)(2) (relating to definitions for the
terms `low-income families' and `very low-income families').
``(D) Section 5(A)(e) (relating to the formation of and
consultation with a resident advisory board).
``(E) Sections 6(f)(1) and 8(o)(8)(B) (relating to
compliance of units assisted with housing quality standards
or other codes).
``(F) Sections 6(c)(3), 6(c)(4)(i), and 8(o)(6)(B)
(relating to rights of public housing applicants
[[Page H7743]]
and existing procedural rights for applicants under section
8(o)).
``(G) Section 6(k) (relating to grievance procedures for
public housing tenants) and comparable procedural rights for
families assisted under section 8(o).
``(H) Section 6(l) (relating to public housing lease
requirements), except that for units assisted both with
program funds and low-income housing tax credits, the initial
lease term may be less than 12 months if required to conform
lease terms with such tax credit requirements.
``(I) Section 7 (relating to designation of housing for
elderly and disabled households), except that a participating
agency may make such designations(at initial designation or
upon renewal) for a term of up to 5 years if the agency
includes in its annual plan under paragraph (8) an analysis
of the impact of such designations on affected households and
such designation is subject to the program evaluation. Any
participating agency with a designated housing plan that was
approved under the moving to work demonstration may continue
to operate under the terms of such plan for a term of 5 years
(with an option to renew on the same terms for an additional
5 years) if it includes in its annual plan an analysis of the
impact of such designations on affected households and is
subject to evaluation under subsection (f).
``(J) Subparagraphs (C) through (E) of section 8(o)(7)
(relating to lease requirements and eviction protections for
families assisted with tenant-based assistance).
``(K) Subject to paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection,
section 8(o)(13)(B) (relating to a percentage limitation on
project-based assistance), except that for purposes of this
subparagraph such section shall be applied by substituting
`50 percent' for `20 percent'.
``(L) Section 8(o)(13)(E) (relating to resident choice for
tenants of units with project-based vouchers), except with
respect to--
``(i) in the case of agencies participating in the moving
to work demonstration, any housing assistance payment
contract entered into within 2 years after the enactment of
this section;
``(ii) project-based vouchers that replace public housing
units;
``(iii) not more than 10 percent of the vouchers available
to the participating agency upon entering the housing
innovation program under this section; and
``(iv) any project-based voucher program that is subject to
evaluation under subsection (f).
``(M) Section 8(r) (relating to portability of voucher
assistance), except that a participating agency may receive
funding for portability obligations under section 8(dd) in
the same manner as other public housing agencies.
``(N) Subsections (a) and (b) of section 12 (relating to
payment of prevailing wages).
``(O) Section 18 (relating to demolition and disposition of
public housing).
``(4) Rents and requirements for continued occupancy or
participation.--
``(A) Before policy change.--Before adopting any policy
pursuant to participation in the housing innovation program
under this section that would make a material change to the
requirements of this Act regarding tenant rents or
contributions, or conditions of continued occupancy or
participation, a participating agency shall complete each of
the following actions:
``(i) The agency shall conduct an impact analysis of the
proposed policy on families the agency is assisting under the
program under this section and on applicants on the waiting
list, including analysis of the incidence and severity of
rent burdens greater than 30 percent of adjusted income on
households of various sizes and types and in various income
tiers, that would result, if any, without application of the
hardship provisions. The analysis with respect to applicants
on the waiting list may be limited to demographic data
provided by the applicable consolidated plan, information
provided by the Secretary, and other generally available
information. The proposed policy, including provisions for
addressing hardship cases and transition provisions that
mitigate the impact of any rent increases or changes in the
conditions of continued occupancy or participation, and data
from this analysis shall be made available for public
inspection for at least 60 days in advance of the public
meeting described in clause (ii).
``(ii) The agency shall hold a public meeting regarding the
proposed change, including the hardship provisions, which may
be combined with a public meeting on the draft annual plan
under paragraph (8) or the annual report under paragraph (9).
``(iii) The board of directors or other similar governing
body of the agency shall approve the change in public
session.
``(iv) The agency shall obtain approval from the Secretary
of the annual plan or plan amendment. The Secretary may
approve a plan or amendment containing a material change to
the requirements of this Act regarding tenant rents or
contributions, or conditions of continued occupancy or
participation, only if the agency agrees that such policy may
be included as part of the national evaluation.
``(B) After policy change.--After adopting a policy
described in subparagraph (A), a program agency shall
complete each of the following actions:
``(i) The agency shall provide adequate notice to
residents, which shall include a description of the changes
in the public housing lease or participation agreement that
may be required and of the hardship or transition protections
offered.
``(ii) In the case of any additional requirements for
continued occupancy or participation, the agency shall
execute a lease addendum or participation agreement
specifying the requirements applicable to both the resident
and the agency. A resident may bring a civil action to
enforce commitments of the agency made through the lease
addendum or participation agreement.
``(iii) The agency shall reassess rent, subsidy level, and
policies on program participation no less often than every
two years, which shall include preparing a revised impact
analysis, and make available to the public the results of
such reassessment and impact analysis. The requirement under
this clause may be met by sufficiently detailed interim
reports, if any, by the national evaluating entity.
``(iv) The agency shall include in the annual report under
paragraph (8) information sufficient to describe any hardship
requests, including the number and types of requests made,
granted, and denied, the use of transition rules, and adverse
impacts resulting from changes in rent or continued occupancy
policies, including actions taken by the agency to mitigate
such impacts and impacts on families no longer assisted under
the program.
``(C) Applicability to existing mtw agencies.--An existing
MTW agency that, before the date of the enactment of this
section, implemented material changes to the requirements of
this Act regarding tenant rents or contributions, or
conditions of continued occupancy or participation, as part
of the moving to work demonstration shall not be subject to
subparagraph (A) with regard to such previously implemented
changes, but shall comply with the requirements of
subparagraph (B)(ii) and provide the evaluation and impact
analysis required by subparagraph (B)(iii) by the end of the
second agency fiscal year ending after such date of
enactment.
``(5) Prohibition against decrease in program funds.--The
amount of program funds a participating agency receives shall
not be diminished by its participation in the housing
innovation program under this section.
``(6) Submission of information.--As part of the annual
report required under subsection (g)(2), each participating
agency shall submit information annually to the Secretary
regarding families assisted under the program of the agency
and comply with any other data submissions required by the
Secretary for purposes of evaluation of the program under
this section.
``(7) Public and resident participation.--Each
participating agency shall provide opportunities for resident
and public participation in the annual plan under paragraph
(8), as follows:
``(A) Notice to residents.--
``(i) Notice.--Each year, the agency shall provide notice
to the low-income families it serves under the programs
authorized by this section as to the impact of proposed
policy changes and program initiatives and of the schedule of
resident advisory board and public meetings for the annual
plan.
``(ii) Meeting.--The agency shall hold at least one meeting
with the resident advisory board (including representatives
of recipients of assistance under section 8) to review the
annual plan for each year.
``(B) Public meeting.--With respect to each annual plan,
the agency shall hold at least one annual public meeting to
obtain comments on the plan, which may be combined with a
meeting to review the annual report. In the case of any
agency that administers, in the aggregate, more than 15,000
public housing units and vouchers, the agency shall hold
additional meetings in locations that promote attendance by
residents and other stakeholders.
``(C) Public availability.--Before adoption of any annual
plan, and not less than 30 days before the public meeting
required under subparagraph (A)(ii) with respect to the plan,
the agency shall make the proposed annual plan available for
public inspection. The annual plan shall be made available
for public inspection not less than 30 days before approval
by the board of directors (or other similar governing body)
of the agency and shall remain publicly available.
``(D) Board approval.--Before submitting an annual plan or
annual report to the Secretary, the plan or report, as
applicable, shall be approved in a public meeting by the
board of directors or other governing body of the agency.
``(8) Annual plan.--
``(A) Requirement.--For each year that a participating
agency participates in the housing innovation program under
this section, the agency shall submit to the Secretary, in
lieu of all other planning requirements, an annual plan under
this paragraph.
``(B) Contents.--Each annual plan shall include the
following information:
``(i) A list and description of all program initiatives and
generally applicable policy changes, including references to
affected provisions of law or the implementing regulations
affected.
``(ii) A description and comparison of changes under the
housing innovation program of the agency from the plan for
such program for the preceding year.
``(iii) A description of property redevelopment or
portfolio repositioning strategies and proposed changes in
policies or uses of funds required to implement such
strategies.
``(iv) Documentation of public and resident participation
sufficient to comply with the requirements under paragraphs
(4) and (7), including a copy of any recommendations
submitted in writing by the resident advisory board of the
agency and members of the public, a summary of comments, and
a description of the manner in which the recommendations were
addressed.
``(v) Certifications by the agency that--
``(I) the annual plan will be carried out in conformity
with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair
Housing Act, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and
the rules, standards, and policies in the approved plan;
``(II) the agency will affirmatively further fair housing;
and
``(III) the agency has complied and will continue to comply
with its obligations under the national evaluation.
``(vi) A description of the agency's local asset management
strategy for public housing properties, which shall be in
lieu of any other asset
[[Page H7744]]
management, project based management or accounting, or other
system of allocating resources and costs to participating
agency assets or cost centers that the Secretary may
otherwise impose under this Act.
``(C) Changes.--If the agency proposes to make material
changes in policies or initiatives in the plan during the
year covered by the plan, the agency shall consult with the
resident advisory board for the agency established pursuant
to section 5A(e) and the public regarding such changes before
their adoption.
``(D) Approval process.--
``(i) Timing.--The Secretary shall review and approve or
disapprove each annual plan submitted to the Secretary within
45 days after such submission.
``(ii) Standards for disapproval.--The Secretary may
disapprove a plan only if--
``(I) the Secretary reasonably determines, based on
information contained in the annual plan or annual report,
that the agency is not in compliance with the requirements of
this section;
``(II) the annual plan or most recent annual report is not
consistent with other reliable information available to the
Secretary; or
``(III) the annual plan or annual report or the agency's
activities under the program are not otherwise in accordance
with applicable law.
``(iii) Failure to disapprove.--If a submitted plan is not
disapproved within 45 days after submission, the plan shall
be considered to be approved for purposes of this section.
The preceding sentence shall not preclude judicial review
regarding such compliance pursuant to chapter 7 of title 5,
United States Code, or an action regarding such compliance
under section 1979 of the Revised Statutes of the United
States (42 U.S.C. 1983).
``(f) Evaluation of Performance.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than the expiration of the
one-year period that begins upon selection under subsection
(d) of at least half of the number of agencies able to
participate in the program under this section, the Secretary
shall conduct detailed evaluations of all public housing
agencies participating in the program under this section--
``(A) to determine the level of success of each public
housing agency in achieving the purposes of the program under
subsection (a); and
``(B) to identify program models that can be replicated by
other agencies to achieve such success.
``(2) Reports.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall submit three reports
to the Congress, as provided in subparagraph (B), evaluating
the programs of all public housing agencies participating in
the program under this section and all agencies participating
in the moving to work demonstration. Each such report shall
include findings and recommendations for any appropriate
legislative action.
``(B) Timing.--The reports under this paragraph shall
include--
``(i) an initial report, which shall be submitted before
the expiration of the 3-year period beginning on the date of
the enactment of the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007;
``(ii) an interim report, which shall be submitted before
the expiration of the 5-year period beginning on such date of
enactment; and
``(iii) a final report, which shall be submitted before the
expiration of the 10-year period beginning on such date of
enactment.
``(3) Evaluating entity.--The Secretary may contract out
the responsibilities under this paragraphs (1) and (2) to an
independent entity that is qualified to perform such
responsibilities.
``(4) Performance measures.--The Secretary or the
evaluating entity, as applicable, shall establish performance
measures, which may include--
``(A) a baseline performance level against which program
activities may be evaluated; and
``(B) performance measures for--
``(i) increasing housing opportunities for extremely low-,
very low-, and low-income families, replacing or
rehabilitating housing at risk of physical deterioration or
obsolescence, and developing additional affordable housing;
``(ii) leveraging other Federal, State, and local funding
sources, including the low-income housing tax credit program,
to expand and preserve affordable housing opportunities,
including public housing;
``(iii) moving families to self-sufficiency and increasing
employment rates and wages of families without imposing a
significant rent burden on the families having the lowest
incomes;
``(iv) reducing administrative costs; and
``(v) any other performance measures that the Secretary or
evaluating entity, as applicable, may establish.
``(g) Recordkeeping, Reports, and Audits.--
``(1) Recordkeeping.--Each public housing agency
participating in the program under this section shall keep
such records as the Secretary may prescribe as reasonably
necessary to disclose the amounts and the disposition of
amounts under the program, to ensure compliance with the
requirements of this section, and to measure performance.
``(2) Reports.--In lieu of all other reporting
requirements, each such agency participating in the program
shall submit to the Secretary an annual report in a form and
at a time specified by the Secretary. Each annual report
shall include the following information:
``(A) A description, including an annual consolidated
financial report, of the sources and uses of funds of the
agency under the program, which shall account separately for
funds made available under section 8 and subsections (d) and
(e) of section 9, and shall compare the agency's actions
under the program with its annual plan for the year.
``(B) An annual audit that complies with the requirements
of Circular A-133 of the Office of Management and Budget,
including the OMB Compliance Supplement.
``(C) A description of each hardship exception requested
and granted or denied, and of the use of any transition
rules.
``(D) Documentation of public and resident participation
sufficient to comply with the requirements under paragraph
(7).
``(E) A comparison of income and the sizes and types of
families assisted by the agency under the program compared to
those assisted by the agency in the base year.
``(F) Every two years, an evaluation of rent policies,
subsidy level policies, and policies on program
participation.
``(G) A description of any ongoing local evaluations and
the results of any local evaluations completed during the
year.
``(3) Access to documents by secretary.--The Secretary
shall have access for the purpose of audit and examination to
any books, documents, papers, and records that are pertinent
to assistance in connection with, and the requirements of,
this section.
``(4) Access to documents by the comptroller general.--The
Comptroller General of the United States, or any of the duly
authorized representatives of the Comptroller General, shall
have access for the purpose of audit and examination to any
books, documents, papers, and records that are pertinent to
assistance in connection with, and the requirements of, this
section.
``(5) Reports regarding evaluations.--The Secretary shall
require each public housing agency participating in the
program under this section to submit to the Secretary, as
part of the agency's annual report under paragraph (2), such
information as the Secretary considers appropriate to permit
the Secretary to evaluate (pursuant to subsection (f)) the
performance and success of the agency in achieving the
purposes of the demonstration.
``(h) Additional Program Agencies.--In participating in the
program under the terms of this subsection, the public
housing agencies designated for such participation shall be
subject to the requirements of this section, and the
additional following requirements:
``(1) Applicability of certain existing provisions.--Such
agencies shall be subject to the provisions of--
``(A) subsections (a) and (b) of section 3; and
``(B) section 8(o), except for paragraph (11) and except
that such agencies shall not be required to comply with any
provision of such section 8(o) that pursuant to subsection
(e)(3) of this section does not apply to agencies that are
subject to such section (e)(3).
``(2) No time limits.--Such agencies may not impose time
limits on the term of housing assistance received by families
under the program.
``(3) No employment conditions.--Such agencies may not
condition the receipt of housing assistance by families under
the program on the employment status of one of more family
members.
``(4) One-for-one replacement.--
``(A) Conditions on demolition.--Such agencies may not
demolish or dispose of any dwelling unit of public housing
operated or administered by such agency (including any
uninhabitable unit and any unit previously approved for
demolition) except pursuant to a plan for replacement of such
units in accordance with, and approved by the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development pursuant to, subparagraph (B).
``(B) Plan requirements.--The Secretary may not approve a
plan that provides for demolition or disposition of any
dwelling unit of public housing referred to in subparagraph
(A) unless--
``(i) such plan provides for outreach to public housing
agency residents in accordance with paragraph (5);
``(ii) not later than 60 days before the date of the
approval of such plan, such agency has convened and conducted
a public hearing regarding the demolition or disposition
proposed in the plan;
``(iii) such plan provides that for each such dwelling unit
demolished or disposed of, such public housing agency will
provide an additional dwelling unit through--
``(I) the acquisition or development of additional public
housing dwelling units; or
``(II) the acquisition, development, or contracting
(including through project-based assistance) of additional
dwelling units that are subject to requirements regarding
eligibility for occupancy, tenant contribution toward rent,
and long-term affordability restrictions which are comparable
to public housing units;
``(iv) such plan provides for a right, and implementation
of such right, to occupancy of additional dwelling units
provided in accordance with clause (iii), for households who,
as of the time that dwelling units demolished or disposed of
were vacated to provide for such demolition or disposition,
were occupying such dwelling units;
``(v) such plan provides that the proposed demolition or
disposition and relocation will be carried out in a manner
that affirmatively furthers fair housing, as described in
subsection (e) of section 808 of the Civil Rights Act of
1968; and
``(vi) to the extent that such plan provides for the
provision of replacement or additional dwelling units, or
redevelopment, in phases over time, such plan provides that
the ratio of dwelling units described in subclauses (I) and
(II) of clause (iii) that are provided in any such single
phase to the total number of dwelling units provided in such
phase is not less than the ratio of the aggregate number of
such dwelling units provided under the plan to the total
number of dwelling units provided under the plan.
``(C) Inapplicable provisions.--Subparagraphs (B) and (D)
of section 8(o)(13) of the United States Housing Act of 1937
(42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)) shall not apply with respect to
vouchers used to comply with the requirements of subparagraph
(B)(iii) of this paragraph.
[[Page H7745]]
``(D) Monitoring.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall provide for the appropriate field offices
of the Department to monitor and supervise enforcement of
this paragraph and plans approved under this paragraph and to
consult, regarding such monitoring and enforcement, with
resident councils of, and residents of public housing
operated or administered by, the agency.
``(5) Comprehensive outreach plan.--No program funds of
such agencies may be use to demolish, dispose of, or
eliminate any public housing dwelling units except in
accordance with a comprehensive outreach plan for such
activities, developed by the agency in conjunction with the
residents of the public housing agency, as follows:
``(A) The plan shall be developed by the agency and a
resident task force, which may include members of the
Resident Council, but may not be limited to such members, and
which shall represent all segments of the population of
residents of the agency, including single parent-headed
households, the elderly, young employed and unemployed
adults, teenage youth, and disabled persons.
``(B) The votes and agreements regarding the plan shall
involve not less than 25 and not more than 35 persons.
``(C) The plan shall provide for and describe outreach
efforts to inform residents of the program under this
subsection, including a door-to-door information program,
monthly newsletters to each resident household, monthly
meetings dedicated solely to every aspect of the proposed
development, including redevelopment factors, which shall
include the one-for-one replacement requirement under
paragraph (5), resident rights to return, the requirements of
the program under this subsection, new resident support and
community services to be provided, opportunities for
participation in architectural design, and employment
opportunities for residents, which shall reserve at least 70
percent of the jobs in demolition activities and 50 percent
of the jobs in construction activities related to the
redevelopment project, including job training,
apprenticeships, union membership assistance.
``(D) The plan shall provide for regularly scheduled
monthly meeting updates and a system for filing complaints
about any aspect of the redevelopment process.
``(i) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the
following definitions shall apply:
``(1) Existing mtw agency.--The term `existing MTW agency'
means a public housing agency that as of the date of the
enactment of the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007 has an
existing agreement with the Secretary pursuant to the moving
to work demonstration.
``(2) Base year.--The term `base year' means, with respect
to a participating agency, the agency fiscal year most
recently completed prior to selection and approval for
participation in the housing innovation program under this
section.
``(3) Moving to work demonstration.--The term `moving to
work demonstration' means the moving to work demonstration
program under section 204 of the Departments of Veterans
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent
Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note).
``(4) Participating agencies.--The term `participating
agencies' means public housing agencies designated and
approved for participation, and participating, in the housing
innovation program under this section.
``(5) Program funds.--The term `program funds' means, with
respect to a participating agency, any amounts that the
agency is authorized, pursuant to subsection (e)(1), to use
to carry out the housing innovation program under this
section of the agency.
``(6) Residents.--The term `residents' means, with respect
to a public housing agency, tenants of public housing of the
agency and participants in the voucher or other housing
assistance programs of the agency funded under section 8(o),
or tenants of other units owned by the agency and assisted
under this section.
``(j) Authorization of Appropriations for Resident
Technical Assistance.--There is authorized to be appropriated
for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012 $10,000,000, for
providing capacity building and technical assistance to
enhance the capabilities of low-income families assisted
under the program under this section to participate in the
process for establishment of annual plans under this section
for participating agencies.
``(k) Authorization of Appropriations for Evaluations.--
There is authorized to be appropriated $15,000,000 to the
Department of Housing and Urban Development for the purpose
of conducting the evaluations required under subsection
(f)(1).''.
(b) GAO Report.--Not later than 48 months after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall submit a report to the Congress on the
extent to which the public housing agencies participating in
the housing innovation program under section 36 of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 are meeting the goals and purposes
of such program, as identified in subsection (a) of such
section 36.
SEC. 17. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM WAIVER AUTHORITY.
(a) Authority To Enter Into Agreements.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of law, the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development may enter into such agreements as may be
necessary with the Social Security Administration and the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to allow for the
participation, in any demonstration program described in
subsection (c), by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development and the use under such program of housing choice
vouchers under section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act
of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)).
(b) Waiver of Income Requirements.--The Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development may, to extent necessary to
allow rental assistance under section 8(o) of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 to be provided on behalf of
persons described in subsection (c) who participate in a
demonstration program described in such subsection, and to
allow such persons to be placed on a waiting list for such
assistance, partially or wholly disregard increases in earned
income for the purpose of rent calculations under section 3
for such persons.
(c) Demonstration Programs.--A demonstration program
described in this subsection is a demonstration program of a
State that provides for persons with significant disabilities
to be employed and continue to receive benefits under
programs of the Department of Health and Human Services and
the Social Security Administration, including the program of
supplemental security income benefits under title XVI of the
Social Security Act, disability insurance benefits under
title II of such Act, and the State program for medical
assistance (Medicaid) under title XIX of such Act.
SEC. 18. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated the amount necessary
for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012 to provide public
housing agencies with incremental tenant-based assistance
under section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937
(42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) sufficient to assist 20,000 incremental
dwelling units in each such fiscal year.
SEC. 19. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Act, this
Act and the amendments made by this Act, shall take effect on
January 1, 2008.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the committee amendment is in
order except the amendments printed in House Report 110-227. Each
amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report; by a
member designated in the report; shall be considered read; shall be
debatable for the time specified in the report, equally divided and
controlled by the proponent and an opponent of the amendment; shall not
be subject to amendment; and shall not be subject to a demand for
division of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Ms. Waters
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in House Report 110-227.
Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 1 offered by Ms. Waters:
Page 4, line 16, strike ``biennial inspections'' and insert
``inspections not less often than biennially''.
Page 6, strike lines 5 and 6 and insert the following:
(3) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (G);
(4) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new
subparagraphs:
``(E) Interim inspections.--Upon notification to the public
housing agency, by a family on whose behalf tenant-based
rental assistance is provided under this subsection or by a
government official, that the dwelling unit for which such
assistance is provided does not comply with the housing
quality standards under subparagraph (B), the agency shall
inspect the dwelling unit--
``(i) in the case of any condition that is life-
threatening, within 24 hours after receipt of such notice;
and
``(ii) in the case of any condition that is not life-
threatening, within 15 days after receipt of such notice.''.
Page 7, strike lines 1 through 3 and insert the following:
``(III) the failure to comply is not corrected--
``(aa) in the case of any such failure that is a result of
life-threatening conditions, within 24 hours after receipt of
such notice; and
``(bb) in the case of any such failure that is a result of
non-life threatening conditions, within 30 days after receipt
of such notice or such other reasonable period as the public
housing agency may establish.''.
Page 7, line 4, strike ``and release''.
Page 7, strike ``Subject'' in line 10 and all that follows
through line 14, and insert the following: ``Upon completion
of repairs by the public housing agency or the owner
sufficient so that the dwelling unit complies with such
housing quality standards, the agency shall recommence
payments under the housing assistance payments contract to
the owner of the dwelling unit.''.
Page 7, strike ``(or to'' in line 19 and all that follows
through line 24, and insert the following: ``, except that a
contract to make repairs may not be entered into with the
inspector for the dwelling unit referred to in clause
(i)(I).''.
Page 8, line 6, after the period insert the following:
``During the period that assistance is withheld pursuant to
this subparagraph, the tenant may terminate the tenancy by
notifying the owner.''.
Page 8, strike ``before'' in line 12 and all that follows
through line 16, and insert the following: ``within 60 days
after the effective date of the determination of
noncompliance
[[Page H7746]]
under clause (i), or such other reasonable period as the
public housing agency may establish, and the agency does not
use its authority under clause (iii), the agency shall
terminate the housing assistance payments contract for the
dwelling unit. The agency shall provide the family residing
in such a dwelling unit a period of 90 days, beginning upon
termination of the contract, to lease a new residence to
assist with the tenant-based rental assistance made available
under this section for the family. If the family is unable to
lease such a new residence during such period, the public
housing agency shall extend the period during which the
family may lease a new residence to be assisted with such
assistance or provide such family a preference for occupancy
in a dwelling unit of public housing owned or operated by the
agency that first becomes available for occupancy after the
expiration of such period. The agency shall provide
reasonable assistance to the family in finding a new
residence, including use of two months of any assistance
amounts withheld pursuant to clause (ii) for costs associated
with relocation of the family to a new residence.''.
Page 8, after line 16, insert the following:
``(vi) Limitation of liability of public housing
agencies.--A public housing agency that uses its authority
under clause (iii) shall not, if the agency accomplishes the
work through a contractor that is licensed, bonded, and
insured in amounts and with coverage as required by the
Secretary, be liable for any injury or damages that may
result to persons or to any property owned by the tenant or
owner.
``(vii) Tenant-caused damages.--If a public housing agency
determines that any damage to a dwelling unit that results in
a failure of the dwelling unit to comply with housing quality
standards under subparagraph (B), other than any damage
resulting from ordinary use, was caused by the tenant, any
member of the tenant's household, or any guest or other
person under the tenant's control, the agency may, in the
discretion of the agency, waive the applicability of this
subparagraph, except that this clause shall not exonerate a
tenant from any liability otherwise existing under applicable
law for damages to the premises caused by such tenant.''.
Page 8, line 17, strike ``(vi)'' and insert ``(viii)''.
Page 9, line 13, strike ``and''.
Page 9, after line 13, insert the following:
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting
``paragraphs (2) and (3)''; and
(ii) by striking ``paragraph (3)'' and inserting
``paragraph (4)'';
(C) in paragraph (2)(A)(i), by striking ``paragraph (3)''
and inserting ``paragraph (4)'';
(D) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(5) and (6), respectively;
(E) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph:
``(3) PHA authority to establish alternative rents.--
``(A) Rent flexibility for public housing and voucher
program.--Subject to the requirements under subparagraph (B),
a public housing agency may establish for public housing and
for families on whose behalf assistance is provided under the
program for tenant-based voucher assistance under section
8(o)--
``(i) a tenant rent structure in which--
``(I) the public housing agency establishes, based on the
rental value of the unit, as determined by the public housing
agency--
``(aa) a ceiling rent for each dwelling unit that it owns
and operates; and
``(bb) a ceiling on the amount of the tenant contribution
toward rent required of a family provided tenant-based
assistance; and
``(II) such ceiling rent and tenant contribution are
adjusted periodically on the basis of an inflation index or a
recalculation of the rental value of the unit (which may be
recalculated by unit or by building);
``(ii) an income-tiered tenant rent structure in which the
amount of rent a family shall pay is set and distributed on
the basis of broad tiers of income and such tiers and rents
are adjusted on the basis of an annual cost index except that
families entering public housing shall not be offered a rent
lower than the rent corresponding to their income tier; or
``(iii) a tenant rent structure in which the amount of rent
a family shall pay is based on a percentage of family income,
except that lower percentages may apply only with respect to
earned income; such a rent structure may provide for an
amount of rent based on a calculation of earned income that
provides for disregard of a higher percentage or higher
dollar amount, or both, than provided for in paragraph
(8)(B).
``(B) Limitation.--Notwithstanding the authority provided
under subparagraph (A), the amount paid for rent (including
the amount allowed for tenant-paid utilities) by any family
for a dwelling unit in public housing or for rental of a
dwelling unit for which tenant-based voucher assistance under
section 8(o) is provided may not exceed the amount determined
under subsection (a)(1) of this section or section 8(o),
respectively. The Secretary shall issue regulations and
establish procedures to ensure compliance with this
subparagraph.
``(C) Elderly families and disabled families.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, this
paragraph shall not apply to elderly families and disabled
families.''; and
Page 9, line 14, strike ``(B)'' and insert ``(F)''.
Page 9, line 16, strike ``(6)'' and insert ``(7)''.
Page 12, line 19, strike ``(7)'' and insert ``(8)''.
Page 13, line 3, strike ``(6)(A)'' and insert ``(7)(A)''.
Page 13, line 18, strike ``(6)(B)(ii)'' and insert
``(7)(B)(ii)''.
Page 15, line 6, strike ``(6)'' and insert ``(7)''.
Page 19, line 13, strike ``(6) and (7)'' and insert ``(7)
and (8)''.
Page 30, after line 11, insert the following:
``(xi) relocation and replacement of public housing units
that are demolished or disposed of pursuant to eminent
domain, pursuant to a homeownership program, or in connection
with a mixed finance development method under section 35 or
otherwise;''
Page 30, line 12, strike ``(xi)'' and insert ``(xii)''.
Page 30, line 15, strike ``(xii)'' and insert ``(xiii)''.
Page 30, line 24, strike ``or (x)'' and insert ``(x), or
(xi)''.
Page 31, line 16, before the semicolon insert ``and of any
incremental vouchers funded in previous years''.
Page 36, line 14, strike ``one twelfth'' and insert ``12.5
percent of''.
Page 39, lines 6 and 7, strike ``until superseded through
subsequent rulemaking,''.
Page 57, after line 18, insert the following:
``(N) Administrative fee.--The administrative fee
applicable to the administration of assistance under this
paragraph shall be determined in the same manner as
administrative fees applicable to other assistance
administered under other provisions of this subsection.''.
Page 57, line 19, strike ``(N)'' and insert ``(O)''.
Page 68, line 6, after ``any agency'' insert ``that is a
troubled agency under either such assessment program or''
Page 92, strike ``Not'' in line 5 and all that follows
through ``the'' in line 9 and insert ``The''.
Strike line 24 on page 97 and all that follows through line
4 on page 98, and insert the following:
``(B) section 8(o), except for paragraph (11) and except as
the requirements of section 8(o) are modified by subsection
(e)(3) of this section.''.
Page 100, line 2, before the semicolon insert the
following: ``, except that no household may be prevented from
occupying a replacement dwelling unit provided pursuant to
clause (iii) except to the extent specifically provided by
any other provision of Federal law (including subtitle F of
title V of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of
1998 (42 U.S.C. 13661 et seq.; relating to safety and
security in public and assisted housing, subtitle D of title
VI of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42
U.S.C. 13611 et seq.; relating to preferences for elderly and
disabled residents), and section 16(f) of this Act (42 U.S.C.
1437n(f)); relating to ineligibility of persons convicted of
methamphetamine offenses)''.
Page 101, line 22, strike ``, dispose of, or eliminate''
and insert ``or dispose of''.
Page 102, strike lines 12 through 14 and insert the
following:
``(b) The votes and agreements regarding the plan shall
involve--
``(i) in the case of any public housing agency that
administers 250 or fewer public housing dwelling units, not
less than 10 percent of affected residents; and
``(ii) in the case of any public housing agency that
administers more than 250 public housing dwelling units, not
less than 25 affected residents''.
Page 103, strike lines 4 through 6 and insert the
following: ``make available at least 30 percent of the total
hours worked at all such employment, and shall also make
available at least 25 percent of unskilled jobs in demolition
activities and 25 percent of unskilled jobs in construction
activities related to the redevelopment''.
Page 107, after line 2, insert the following new section:
SEC. 18. ACCESS TO HUD PROGRAMS FOR PERSONS WITH LIMITED
ENGLISH PROFICIENCY.
(a) HUD Responsibilities.--To allow the Department of
Housing and Urban Development to better serve persons with
limited proficiency in the English language by providing
technical assistance to recipients of Federal funds, the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall take the
following actions:
(1) Task force.--Within 90 days after the enactment of this
Act, convene a task force comprised of appropriate industry
groups, recipients of funds from the Department of Housing
and Urban Development (in this section referred to as the
``Department''), community-based organizations that serve
individuals with limited English proficiency, civil rights
groups, and stakeholders, which shall identify a list of
vital documents, including Department and certain property
and other documents, to be competently translated to improve
access to federally conducted and federally assisted programs
and activities for individuals with limited English
proficiency. The task force shall meet not less frequently
than twice per year.
(2) Translations.--Within 6 months after identification of
documents pursuant to paragraph (1), produce translations of
the documents identified in all necessary languages and make
such translations available as part of the library of forms
available on the website of the Department and as part of the
clearinghouse developed pursuant to paragraph (4).
[[Page H7747]]
(3) Plan.--Develop and carry out a plan that includes
providing resources of the Department to assist recipients of
Federal funds to improve access to programs and activities
for individuals with limited English proficiency, which plan
shall include the elements described in paragraph (4).
(4) Housing information resource center.--Develop and
maintain a housing information resource center to facilitate
the provision of language services by providers of housing
services to individuals with limited English proficiency.
Information provided by such center shall be made available
in printed form and through the Internet. The resources
provided by the center shall include the following:
(A) Translation of written materials.--The center may
provide, directly or through contract, vital documents from
competent translation services for providers of housing
services.
(B) Toll-free customer service telephone number.--The
center shall provide a 24-hour toll-free interpretation
service telephone line, by which recipients of funds of the
Department and individuals with limited English proficiency
may--
(i) obtain information about federally conducted or
federally assisted housing programs of the Department;
(ii) obtain assistance with applying for or accessing such
housing programs and understanding Federal notices written in
English; and
(iii) communicate with housing providers. and learn how to
access additional language services.
The toll-free telephone service provided pursuant to this
subparagraph shall supplement resources in the community
identified by the plan developed pursuant to paragraph (3).
(C) Document clearinghouse.--The center shall collect and
evaluate for accuracy or develop, and make available,
templates and documents that are necessary for consumers,
relevant industry representatives, and other stakeholders of
the Department, to access, make educated decisions, and
communicate effectively about their housing, including--
(i) administrative and property documents;
(ii) legally binding documents;
(iii) consumer education and outreach materials;
(iv) documents regarding rights and responsibilities of any
party; and
(v) remedies available to consumers.
(D) Study of language assistance programs.--The center
shall conduct a study that evaluates best-practices models
for all programs of the Department that promote language
assistance and strategies to improve language services for
individuals with limited English proficiency. Not later than
18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
center shall submit a report to the Committee on Financial
Services of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate, which
shall provide recommendations for implementation, specific to
programs of the Department, and information and templates
that could be made available to all recipients of grants from
the Department.
(E) Cultural and linguistic competence materials.--The
center shall provide information relating to culturally and
linguistically competent housing services for populations
with limited English proficiency.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out
subsection (a).
(c) Report.--Not later than the expiration of the 6-month
period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act,
and annually thereafter, the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall submit a report regarding its compliance
with the requirements under subsection (a) to the Committee
on Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the
Senate.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 534, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
Modification to Amendment No. 1 Offered by Ms. Waters
Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be modified by the form I have placed at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:
Modification to amendment No. 1 offered by Ms. Waters:
The amendment is modified as follows:
In the matter proposed to be inserted by the eighth
amendment instruction of the amendment (which begins ``Page
8, strike `before' in line 12''), strike ``The agency shall
provide the family'' and all that follows through
``relocation of the family to a new residence.''.
Strike the matter proposed to be inserted by the amendment
at page 8 of the bill, after line 16, and insert the
following:
``(vi) Relocation.--If the public housing agency terminates
the housing assistance payments contract for a dwelling unit,
the lease for any family residing in that unit shall
terminate and the family may remain in the unit subject to a
new lease as an unassisted family. The agency shall provide
the family residing in such a dwelling unit a period of 90
days, beginning upon termination of the contract, to lease a
new residence to assist with the tenant-based rental
assistance made available under this section for the family.
If the family is unable to lease such a new residence during
such period, the public housing agency shall extend the
period during which the family may lease a new residence to
be assisted with such assistance or provide such family a
preference for occupancy in a dwelling unit of public housing
owned or operated by the agency that first becomes available
for occupancy after the expiration of such period. The agency
shall provide reasonable assistance to the family in finding
a new residence, including use of two months of any
assistance amounts withheld pursuant to clause (ii) for costs
associated with relocation of the family to a new residence.
``(vii) Limitation of liability of public housing
agencies.--A public housing agency that uses its authority
under clause (iii) shall not, if the agency accomplishes the
work through a contractor that is licensed, bonded, and
insured in amounts and with coverage as required by the
Secretary, be liable for any injury or damages that may
result to persons or to any property owned by the tenant or
owner.
``(viii) Tenant-caused damages.--If a public housing agency
determines that any damage to a dwelling unit that results in
a failure of the dwelling unit to comply with housing quality
standards under subparagraph (B), other than any damage
resulting from ordinary use, was caused by the tenant, any
member of the tenant's household, or any guest or other
person under the tenant's control, the agency may, in the
discretion of the agency, waive the applicability of this
subparagraph, except that this clause shall not exonerate a
tenant from any liability otherwise existing under applicable
law for damages to the premises caused by such tenant.''.
Strike the matter proposed to be inserted by the amendment
at page 8 of the bill, line 17, and insert ``(ix)''.
Ms. WATERS (during the reading). Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is modified.
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from
California.
Ms. WATERS. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
I would like to thank the distinguished chairman of the Committee on
Financial Services, Mr. Barney Frank, and Ranking Member Judy Biggert
for their strong support of the manager's amendment to H.R. 1851.
The purpose of the amendment is to reform and improve the Section 8
Voucher Reform Act of 2007, regarding inspections, flexibility in rent-
setting, transitional funding for the Nation's Public Housing Agencies,
administrative fee calculations, limited English proficiency
requirements, and the Housing Innovation Program. It also makes
technical corrections to the bill.
The amendment provides more flexibility to make inspections by
requiring them less frequently than every 2 years. This change will
allow PHAs in areas with a deteriorating housing stock to conduct
additional inspections in order to make sure families are housed in
safe and decent units. In addition, the amendment fills the need for
inspections that can be conducted at the request of the tenant within a
specific amount of time.
My amendment solves a real catch-22 that often arises in the section
8 program. Many section 8 landlords are not large real estate concerns,
but mom-and-pop operations that are not getting rich. Where units
operated by a landlord fail inspection, right now there is a real
danger that the landlord will choose to leave the program rather than
make the repairs. This benefits nobody. And there is the catch-22. The
landlord wants to stay in the program; the tenant certainly wants to
stay in the unit if it can be repaired; but current law makes this
positive resolution difficult to achieve.
PHAs will have the option to make repairs on the landlord's behalf.
If the PHA or the landlord choose not to make the repair, the amendment
protects tenants who will have to move to a new unit through no fault
of their own. In the event a PHA chooses not to make a repair and the
landlord still declines to repair the unit, the amendment provides
important tenant protections.
There is rent flexibility. Sometimes the rigid section 8 rent
structure just
[[Page H7748]]
doesn't work. In order to find a rent mechanism that works, the
amendment gives PHAs flexibility in setting rents. While the
calculations may be different, the amendment preserves affordability
standards that limit the amount of rent a tenant pays to 30 percent of
his or her income. The 30 percent threshold is sacred, because we all
know that if the rent exceeds this amount, tenants lose the ability to
make ends meet.
When we move to a new funding formula, PHAs will need sufficient
reserves to allow them to make the change smoothly and with little
disruption for tenants. H.R. 1851 provides a 1-month reserve for the
first year of the formula. But to ensure that PHAs are able to serve
additional families in the formula's first year, the amendment
moderately increases this reserve from the 1-month level to the 1\1/2\-
month level. This ensures PHAs will have adequate funds to transition.
The amendment corrects the disparity between the calculation of the
administrative fees for project-based units owned by PHAs and other
units in the PHA's inventory. Units owned by PHAs would receive the
same fee as other units receiving project-based assistance in the PHA's
inventory, providing an incentive for PHAs to create housing
opportunities by project-basing its own units.
The amendment also addresses HUD's problematic implementation of
Limitation of English Proficiency requirements. The manager's amendment
seeks to remedy this problem. The amendment calls for HUD to convene a
task force of interested parties and stakeholders who will determine
the documents that need to be translated, and to make these
translations available in various languages within 6 months. HUD is
also required to maintain a housing information resource center,
including a 24-hour toll-free number and a document clearinghouse.
We also include Housing Innovation Program, that is HIP program,
formerly known as Moving to Work, and this amendment makes several
corrections to the Housing Innovation Program formerly called Moving to
Work. These changes clarify that troubled agencies are not eligible to
participate in the program, clarifies resident participation
requirements, specifies job opportunities to be made for residents, and
ensures that following demolition or replacement of public housing
units, that families cannot be screened out of public housing unless
they are otherwise ineligible under Federal law.
I ask support for the manager's amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the
time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Illinois
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mrs. BIGGERT. I would like to thank Chairwoman Waters for her
manager's amendment and, in particular, the 12.5 percent for the
transition in the public housing.
Madam Chair, I yield to my colleague, Mr. Miller of California, for
the balance of the time.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I want to thank you for including
my language on reform in the manager's amendment. This I believe goes a
long way to create innovation in helping people gain self-sufficiency.
The main reason I want to speak today is because many on my side have
a real problem with the requirement that language be translated into a
language that anybody who might come to a HUD assistance program might
require to speak, and your bill goes a long way.
I have consistently supported every effort to repeal President
Clinton's executive order which requires any recipient of Federal funds
to provide translations into any language an individual requesting
service may speak; but recently, HUD has issued a requirement that says
that any housing authority or PHA must provide this translation to
individuals who come before them.
This is the Federal Government creating a mandate and requiring the
private sector to pay the bill. And what you are doing I wholeheartedly
support. You are saying that if the Federal Government wants to require
a mandate, then they should pay the bill. It has been estimated that
one of these translations can cost a section 8 individual or group or
housing authority up to $10,000 for each language they want to
translate the documents into, and what you are doing is absolutely
correct. If we are not going to change the law, then let's not have an
unfunded mandate placed on the private sector that the private sector
has to pay for when HUD and the Federal Government wants to mandate it.
And what you are saying is: HUD, if you want to mandate it, you pick up
the bill. And I think that is very important that we do this, and I
want to stand up saying I wholeheartedly support it.
I do not support the mandate, period, that Clinton imposed, but we
are stuck with it. It is an executive order. And what you are saying is
the private sector should not be suffering the burden of an unfunded
mandate if the Federal Government wants to mandate it.
So I want to clarify for my side that what we are doing here is
saying we are relieving an unfunded mandate on the private sector and
placing the burden on the Federal Government, who should be
responsible. And if we want to change the law, let's change the law.
But until we change the law, the private sector should not suffer the
burden of financing something the Federal Government is imposing on
them.
I wholeheartedly support the manager's amendment, and I thank you for
working with me on rent reform and other things.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I yield to the gentleman from
Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The gentleman has given a very clear
statement of what is in here. This bill does not create the bilingual
mandate; it puts it where it should be.
The other thing I would say is this, and I understand there are some
who oppose it on principle. But from the court's standpoint, having HUD
do the translation of all these documents means that they don't have to
be done individually. So it also is cheaper for HUD to do. It is not
just that it is more appropriate for the Federal Government to do it,
but it is cheaper, because there will be some basic HUD documents so
this will avoid the unnecessary duplication of translations. And I
thank the gentleman for that very clear way he stated it.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Reclaiming my time, I think you are
right. It is cheaper for us to pay for shipping than it is for them to
pay for translations. Let's do it one time, ship the documents, and we
deal with the problem, unless we want to change the law.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The gentleman and I are of a similar
generation. It is my understanding from some of my younger staffers
that they don't ship documents these days; they have other ways of
getting them there. I couldn't send one, myself, and my friend couldn't
receive it. But, fortunately, it wouldn't be up to us.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Reclaiming my time, we dinosaurs
have to speak in the language we are accustomed to.
And with that, this dinosaur yields back the balance of his time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from California has 30 seconds
remaining.
Ms. WATERS. Madam Chairman, I ask for support for the manager's
amendment to H.R. 1851 and passage of the bill. Again, I want to thank
each of my colleagues who worked on this important amendment for their
strong support.
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), as modified.
The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Velazquez
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in House Report 110-227.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 offered by Ms. Velazquez:
[[Page H7749]]
Page 80, line 5, after ``8(o)(7)'' insert ``and section
8(o)(20)''.
Page 81, after line 10, insert the following:
``(N) Sections 8(ee) and 6(u) (relating to records,
certification and confidentiality regarding domestic
violence).''.
Page 81, line 11, strike ``(N)'' and insert ``(O)''.
Page 81, line 13, strike ``(O)'' and insert ``(P)''.
{time} 2015
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 534, the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, let me first commend Chairman Frank and Chairwoman
Waters for their leadership in moving this necessary reform forward.
They led the Financial Services Committee through a healthy but
complicated series of issues and produced a bill that truly improves
the section 8 program.
Section 8 is the Nation's largest low-income housing program. It
currently enables more than 2 million low-income families to fulfill
the basic needs of shelter. We should strive to help more people find
safe and decent housing. That is why this bill includes 100,000 new
vouchers over the next 5 years. It is critical that we support this
bipartisan work that transitions people out of poverty.
Keeping people safe is at the heart of my amendment, which may seem
minor, but provides important eviction and privacy protection for
victims of domestic violence who live in section 8 housing. Let us not
allow domestic violence victims to fall through the cracks.
It does this by ensuring that residents are not evicted simply
because they are victims of domestic violence. While it is hard to
believe, under current law, if a resident is visited by a former
spouse, a stalker or domestic abuser, and he breaks down the door, the
very noise and property damage caused by the dispute could be grounds
for her to be evicted. Being abused should not be cause for terminating
a lease. My amendment changes that by protecting section 8 tenants from
wrongful eviction.
It is fundamentally wrong to evict a resident because they have been
victimized. The individuals and their families deserve our respect and
understanding. This provision ensures that domestic violence victims
have a safe home for them and their families.
Second, my amendment protects the record of domestic violence
victims. If certain identifying characteristics are made public, even
to a prospective landlord, abusers could use the information to locate
their victims. This goes beyond just name and Social Security number.
The key is making sure that their information is protected so that
victims move forward without the fear of being found. Their safety must
be first and foremost. Let's give section 8 tenants basic protections
to ensure they can find and keep a safe home away from violence.
Madam Chairwoman, I support the improvements to the section 8 program
that H.R. 1851 makes and want to thank Chairman Frank and Chairwoman
Waters again for their diligence on this bill. I think it is important
that we remember that finding a home entails feeling safe, not just
securing shelter.
In 2005, we fought in unison to protect domestic violence victims
through VAWA; 415 Members of the 109th Congress supported these
provisions back then. Today I am asking you to close a potential
loophole for section 8 housing residents who are victims of domestic
violence. I urge a ``yes'' vote on my amendment and the underlying
bill.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. BIGGERT. I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition
to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Illinois
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Violence Against Women Act reauthorized and signed into law by
President Bush in 2005 ensured that victims of domestic violence would
not be evicted from public or section 8 housing for screaming for help,
for calling the police or simply for being the victim of a crime.
However, one provision of H.R. 1851 inadvertently removes these
protections from certain public housing authorities, leaving victims in
these housing authorities with inconsistent or no protection.
I think that the Housing Innovation Program provisions in SEVRA
exempt high-performing public housing authorities from certain Federal
regulations, giving them a measure of regulatory reform. Unfortunately,
some of the VAWA protections were among those that would no longer
apply to these high-performing housing authorities. This would create
confusion for public housing authorities and leave victims vulnerable
to eviction after an assault.
I support the amendment, and appreciate this being added to the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I thank the gentlelady for supporting my amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that
I be substituted for the gentlewoman from California as the manager for
the remainder of the bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Gary G. Miller of California
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in House Report 110-227.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Chair, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Gary G. Miller of
California:
Page 28, after line 11, insert the following new section:
SEC. 6. TIME LIMITATION ON ASSISTANCE.
Section 16 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437n), as amended by the preceding provisions of this
Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(g) Time Limitation on Section 8 Assistance.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in this subsection
and notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
assistance under section 8 may not be provided on behalf of
any family that includes a member who has previously been
provided such assistance for 84 months (whether or not
consecutive) or longer.
``(2) Exception for elderly and disabled families.--In
determining the number of months for which an individual has
been provided assistance under section 8, for purposes of
paragraph (1), a public housing agency shall disregard any
month during which such individual was a member of a disabled
or elderly family so assisted.
``(3) Authority for hardship exemptions.--A public housing
agency may exempt a family from the application of paragraph
(1) by reason of hardship, subject to the following
requirements:
``(A) The agency shall define the reasons for, and terms
under which, a hardship exemption may be granted, which may
include mental illness and disability that is not sufficient
to qualify the individual for benefits under the program of
supplemental security income benefits under title XVI of the
Social Security Act.
``(B) The agency shall establish a plan to provide
appropriate case management planning and services for the
families for which such an exemption is granted.
``(4) Limitation on exemptions.--Subject to paragraph (5),
the average monthly number of families with respect to which
an exemption is made under paragraph (3) by a public housing
agency shall not exceed 20 percent of the average monthly
number of families on behalf of whom assistance is provided
under section 8 during the fiscal year or the immediately
preceding fiscal year (but not both), as the agency may
elect.
``(5) Request for additional exemptions.--Upon the request
of a public housing agency, the Secretary may increase the
number of families with respect to which an exemption may be
made under paragraph (3) by the agency above the limitation
provided in paragraph (4).
``(6) Applicability.--In determining the number of months
for which an individual has been provided assistance under
section 8, for purposes of paragraph (1), a public housing
agency shall disregard any month that commenced before the
date of the enactment
[[Page H7750]]
of the Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007.''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 534, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer
an amendment with my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) to limit the
amount of time a section 8 recipient may receive housing assistance.
I believe this amendment offers a reasonable approach to a very
difficult issue. The intent of this amendment is not to be harsh or
uncaring. If you read the amendment, you will see that we provide
exemptions for the elderly, for the disabled and for hardship.
This amendment is an attempt to inject fairness into this program,
where we are faced with the fiscal reality that we do not have the
resources to provide unlimited housing assistance to all those who want
to participate in the program.
This amendment will help those who have been waiting a long time for
their turn for the helping hand.
When we started working on section 8 reform legislation a couple of
years ago, I asked my staff to review all the casework inquiries we had
received from constituents about the section 8 program. This review
revealed that section 8 recipients weren't contacting me to help them
with problems with their housing or HUD regulations; the constituents
who had contacted my office were complaining about the fact that they
had been on the section 8 waiting list for years and were just as in
need as those who are receiving assistance currently.
According to HUD, the average length of time families spend on the
waiting list for subsidized housing in the United States is more than 2
years. In cities like Los Angeles, the waiting list is approaching 10
years.
How can we justify a situation where one person is given unlimited
Federal housing assistance, while another who might have greater need
is on the waiting list and unable to participate in the program for
almost 10 years?
The answer is not to allow this program to continue to grow out of
control by providing more vouchers. Rather, we must reform the program
so that participants can transition into self-sufficiency within a
reasonable period of time.
The answer is to institute a reasonable time limit for assistance,
which would give more families the ability to benefit from our Nation's
temporary helping hand.
The amendment I offer today is based on the successful reform we made
to the welfare program in 1996. Under the amendment, the maximum amount
of time during which a family may receive section 8 assistance is 7
years. Time limits would not apply to elderly or disabled families.
In addition, there is a hardship exemption for families who need
extra time due to circumstances beyond their control.
While some might argue that we should increase the number of section
8 vouchers that are available so we can serve all those who are on the
waiting list, the practical reality is that we cannot already sustain
the growth in the current section 8 program. Our aim should be not to
expand the program more but instead reform it to allow it to provide
assistance to more people.
Even with the section 8 program growing out of control, it is not
helping all the people that it could. This amendment is one way to
ensure that our Federal limited resources may be used to help all those
who need help.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I rise to claim the time in
opposition. And unlike my distinguished friend, the gentlewoman from
Illinois, I'm really in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield myself 3 minutes.
First, Madam Chair, in the interest of conciliation that has marked
this debate, I would say to my friend from California, I would be
willing to accept this amendment that puts a time limit on people being
able to stay in section 8 if we could work out a time limit on their
being poor. I think it is entirely accurate that when you're no longer
poor, you should no longer be able to live in section 8. But what if we
can't?
I can understand people who think that there are adults who have not
been very responsible in their life choices, but some of the adults
come with children. The gentleman exempts the disabled and the elderly,
but his amendment does not exempt families with small children. So you
have a parent with children.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. The intent of this amendment is to
allow for hardship cases like that. A single mother who has young
children would be a hardship.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Would the gentleman point that out to me
in the amendment?
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. We tried to allow the Housing
Authority----
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. No. They have a certain number. They can
make certain exemptions up to 20 percent.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. On page 2, hardship exemption,
number 3. It allows the housing authority to create exemptions for
families in a hardship. And that would be one of the exemptions.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Yes, not exceeding more than 20 percent
of the families. It doesn't single out children. Well, maybe there will
be 30 or 40 percent, because in my experience, it may differ, you say
make an exception for a hardship. That's not the exception for people
in section 8; it's the rule. There aren't a lot of rich people living
in section 8 or middle income people.
The fact is that under the gentleman's amendment, if adopted, there
will be single parents with children of 7 or 8 or 10 years old, several
of them, and at the end of 5 years, they'll have to move. Those kids
didn't do anything to anybody.
And you know what we've learned from education and from homelessness,
7 years, the gentleman tells me. He does give them 7 years. It's very
biblical. But they'll still have to move after 7 years.
Churning poor people isn't useful. Making people move isn't useful.
We've adopted some rules here. The gentleman knows we agreed with him
that we should not charge them for more rent if they're making more
money. We don't want to have a disincentive. We've done other things to
improve it.
But here's a fundamental point. People in section 8 housing are there
because they meet strict income criteria. Under the gentleman's
amendment, someone who continues to be poor, who continues to meet the
income criteria, who has lived up to every rule, who has small
children, who has tried diligently to get a better job, but in many
parts of this country, by the way, we're talking about working people.
There are many people who can work full-time at twice the minimum wage
and not be able to afford rental housing in his district or in parts of
my district or in other districts, the gentlewoman from California's
district. And they'd be evicted. They'd be evicted from housing that
they were eligible for, for no reason other than the clock.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I yield the balance of time to the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 2\1/2\
minutes.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I would just note that I don't think we are doing those kids living
in section 8 housing any favors by encouraging a life or a lifestyle of
living in section 8 housing. I think we're doing them a great
disservice.
And I want to thank the gentleman from California for his efforts to
bring more accountability and responsibility to the section 8 program,
a program that, let's face it, is in need of fundamental reform.
Madam Chair, this is a very straightforward and commonsense
amendment, and again, I want to commend the gentleman for offering it.
It would simply place a time limit, one that I believe is generous, on
able-bodied individuals currently receiving housing assistance through
the section 8 program.
[[Page H7751]]
Under current law, there are no time limits. Those on section 8 can
remain on section 8 for as long as they qualify.
Is that fair to the taxpayers? No. Is it fair to the section 8
recipients who become trapped in a life of dependency or to their
children? I don't think so. Is it fair that the current lack of time
limits prevent those on the waiting list, who may have fallen on hard
times and are genuinely looking for a temporary helping hand, from
receiving help? I don't think so.
Madam Chair, I would submit that the current lack of time limits
isn't fair to anyone.
We've seen the positive effects that time limits and work
requirements can have on social programs. We need look no further back
in history than the 1996 Temporary Assistance For Needy Families, or
the welfare reform law, that reformed the old welfare system, a system
that had trapped so many into a life of dependency and poverty. And the
old welfare system bears a remarkable resemblance to the section 8
program. And I think that's just unacceptable.
We can do better in this country than section 8 housing and
condemning both adults and children to the conditions that they have to
live in, in my community in Cincinnati or communities all over the
country. Section 8 housing is not the type of lifestyle that I think we
want to condemn those people living in them or their children to.
{time} 2030
And I don't think the taxpayers ought to be required to pay for this
subsidized housing forever in some cases.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. CHABOT. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from
California.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I think, Mr. Frank, you know my
heart, and you and I have worked on a lot of stuff. I think Mr. Chabot
and I would be willing to accept a 50-percent exemption for single
mothers with multiple children who have a hardship, who are unable to
move in the sector. So we are willing to cooperate. We are not trying
to throw mothers with children out of the home.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chairman, I would say to my friend
from California, work on that in a future amendment and we will look at
it.
But I want to address the gentleman from Ohio. He says he wants to
help these people and save them. Boy, would they be in trouble if
somebody came to hurt them. He is going to help them by evicting them
when they remain economically eligible. And he says it is encouraging
dependence.
In fact, in many parts of this country, you can be making two and
three times the minimum wage and not be able to afford decent rental
housing, and that is who gets the section 8.
And then he says that section 8 housing is so terrible that we have
to keep people from having to live there. But does the gentleman think
that there are people who say, ``You know what? I can live in a nice
place or I can live in a lousy place. I think I'll choose a lousy place
until the gentleman from Ohio comes along and rescues me from it''?
People live in the best place available to them, and throwing them
out of the place they now live in when they have done nothing wrong
because you don't think it is good enough for them when there is no
alternative that is as good is hardly helping them.
The section 8 program is one that serves many people who work. It is
a sliding scale of subsidy, and to say that it encourages dependency
totally misunderstands the program. Many of these people are people who
are working and they work at low-wage jobs in areas with high rent. How
are you encouraging dependency by telling them and their children that
after 7 years they go out? What kind of an incentive is that?
So, Madam Chairman, this amendment takes people who have already been
in some economic difficulty and makes their lives harder. I hope that
it is rejected.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded
vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4
printed in House Report 110-227.
Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Markey:
Page 64, line 20, before ``Subparagraph'' insert ``(a)
Treatment of Unit and Family Size.--''.
Page 65, after line 2, insert the following:
(b) Eligibility of Certain Projects.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law--
(1) the property known as The Heritage Apartments (FHA No.
023-44804), in Malden, Massachusetts, shall be considered
eligible low-income housing for purposes of the eligibility
of residents of the property for enhanced voucher assistance
under section 8(t) of the United States Housing Act of 1937
(42 U.S.C. 1437f(t)), pursuant to paragraph (2)(A) of section
223(f) of the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident
Homeownership Act of 1990 (12 U.S.C. 4113(f)(2)(A));
(2) such residents shall receive enhanced rental housing
vouchers upon the prepayment of the mortgage loan for the
property under section 236 of the National Housing Act (12
U.S.C. 1715z-1); and
(3) the Secretary shall approve such prepayment and
subsequent transfer of the property without any further
condition, except that the property shall be restricted for
occupancy, until the original maturity date of the prepaid
mortgage loan, only by families with incomes not exceeding 80
percent of the adjusted median income for the area in which
the property is located, as published by the Secretary.
Amounts for the enhanced vouchers pursuant to this subsection
shall be provided under amounts appropriated for tenant-based
rental assistance otherwise authorized under section 8(t) of
the United States Housing Act of 1937.
Page 107, after line 2, insert the following new section:
SEC. 18. TRANSFER OF CERTAIN RENTAL ASSISTANCE CONTRACTS.
(a) Transfer.--Subject to subsection (c) and
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development shall, at the request of the
owner, transfer or authorize the transfer, of the contracts,
restrictions, and debt described in subsection (b)--
(1) on the housing that is owned or managed by Community
Properties of Ohio Management Services LLC or an affiliate of
Ohio Capital Corporation for Housing and located in Franklin
County, Ohio, to other properties located in Franklin County,
Ohio; and
(2) on the housing that is owned or managed by The Model
Group, Inc., and located in Hamilton County, Ohio, to other
properties located in Hamilton County, Ohio.
(b) Contracts, Restrictions, and Debt Covered.--The
contracts, restrictions, and debt described in this
subsection are as follows:
(1) All or a portion of a project-based rental assistance
housing assistance payments contract under section 8 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).
(2) Existing Federal use restrictions, including without
limitation use agreements, regulatory agreements, and
accommodation agreements.
(3) Any subordinate debt held by the Secretary or assigned
and any mortgages securing such debt, all related loan and
security documentation and obligations, and reserve and
escrow balances.
(c) Retention of Same Number of Units and Amount of
Assistance.--Any transfer pursuant to subsection (a) shall
result in--
(1) a total number of dwelling units (including units
retained by the owners and units transferred) covered by
assistance described in subsection (b)(1) after the transfer
remaining the same as such number assisted before the
transfer, with such increases or decreases in unit sizes as
may be contained in a plan approved by a local planning or
development commission or department; and
(2) no reduction in the total amount of the housing
assistance payments under contracts described in subsection
(b)(1).
(d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the
date of the enactment of this Act.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 534, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, I rise with an amendment that I am making
in conjunction with the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce). Our
[[Page H7752]]
language seeks to make some technical corrections to ensure that
affordable housing is preserved in three housing developments, two
located in Ohio and one in Massachusetts.
The low-income tenants of the Heritage Apartments in Malden,
Massachusetts, are facing possible displacement once an outstanding HUD
mortgage is fully paid in a few years. The development is also in need
of major renovations and upgrades that simply cannot be delayed.
Unfortunately, HUD is failing to ensure that the development remains
affordable and livable by placing burdensome regulations and
restrictions on prepayment of the outstanding mortgage and subsequent
transfer to a new owner who is willing to finance the renovations. My
amendment would allow income-eligible residents to qualify for enhanced
housing vouchers following the prepayment of the HUD mortgage and the
property transfer and directs HUD to approve such actions.
I will defer to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) to explain the
portion of our amendment which deals with maintaining affordability in
housing developments located in her congressional district in Ohio.
The Congressional Budget Office has determined that adoption of this
language would result in $1 million in net savings to current mandatory
spending over the next 5 years because HUD is currently paying mortgage
interest reduction payments for the development which would be
nullified upon adoption of the Markey-Pryce amendment.
The amendment is supported by the chairman of the committee and the
ranking member. It is also supported by the Institute of Real Estate
Management, National Apartment Association, and the National
Association of Home Builders. And I urge adoption of the amendment.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MARKEY. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chairman, I thank my friend and
colleague for yielding.
And I want to say, as I said to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Campbell), people are saying why are you making this exception. We are
making this exception because we think this ought to be the rule. And
we are dealing with this now because we have time problems in this area
and in the area of the gentlewoman from Ohio. But it is our intention
to pass legislation before the end of the year, I think on a bipartisan
basis, that will make this a rule for the whole country. So this is not
singling out any one area except for the fact that we face time
restraints, as the gentleman from California did and the gentleman from
Ohio did.
So I want to thank my friend for bringing this forward. And I want to
make it clear this is the first step of what we believe will be a
general policy of preserving affordable housing.
Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the
time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Illinois
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, the gentlewoman from Ohio is unable to
get here in the length of time needed, so I would just say that we
support the amendment.
Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the
Markey/Pryce amendment to H.R. 1851.
This amendment includes important language, which I authored, to
permit the transfer of project-based Section 8 rent assistance from
concentrated, blight-ridden areas in Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio to
less precarious, rehabilitated living conditions. The affected
neighborhoods all have high poverty rates, a high number of assisted
housing units, high crime rates, and dilapidated buildings.
This transfer would have no additional cost to the Federal
Government. The language preserves the exact same number of assisted
units and the same dollar amount of Federal assistance.
The benefits to the community and to the tenants are immeasurable.
Though struggling, each of these neighborhoods has seen an increasing
amount of public and private scrutiny and investment. Low income and
other residents alike would share in the benefits of a safer, more
stable, and more thriving neighborhood. This proposal would allow the
community to find more productive and beneficial uses for the
properties.
This proposal has widespread support from both communities. Tenants,
community advocates, government officials, and private developers
alike--all support the neighborhoods' improvement.
Madam Speaker, I would not be here today if for the past 6 years in
Columbus the community had not explored other possible solutions with
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, tenants, advocates,
the City of Columbus, the Ohio State University officials, contractors,
and other key stakeholders, but statutory restrictions constantly
impeded progress.
We find ourselves here, not as a first resort, but as a last.
I would like to thank Chairman Frank and Ranking Member Bachus for
their support, and my colleague from Massachusetts for working with me
to enact this important fix into law.
I thank my colleagues for consideration of this amendment and urge
your support.
Mr. BIGGERT. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Chabot
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5
printed in House Report 110-227.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Chabot:
Page 107, strike lines 3 through 9.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 534, the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
This is one of three amendments that I am offering this evening, two
of the three with a couple of my colleagues, one Mr. Miller from
California and Mr. Hensarling from Texas, that would encourage
fundamental reforms in the section 8 program.
When we committed ourselves to welfare reform, it was the
understanding that the program should no longer be a taxpayer-funded
handout but should instead offer people a way out of poverty, helping
them obtain job and education skills that are needed to become
ultimately self-sufficient. Ending welfare's cycle of dependency has
cut the welfare rolls in half, promoted individual responsibility, and
saved billions of tax dollars in the process. Sadly, current housing
programs closely resemble the failed welfare policies of the past. Like
the old welfare programs, the section 8 housing program, unfortunately,
discourages work and allows people to stay, in fact, encourages them to
stay on the program, oftentimes indefinitely. It is also too often
mismanaged by local governments or local housing authorities.
Unfortunately, this bill does not address those issues but instead
expands the program to 100,000 new section 8 vouchers at the cost of
approximately 2.4 billion taxpayer dollars over the next 5 years. That
is 100,000, approximately, more recipients that get a chunk of the rent
that is ultimately going to be picked up by their fellow taxpayers and
ultimately, in my view, doesn't do the people that become dependent
upon this good in the long term. That is 100,000 more recipients who
don't have to work to stay in the program, and that is 100,000
recipients that are being supported by the American taxpayers for as
long as they like since section 8 now imposes no time limits on the
beneficiaries.
I represent most of the city of Cincinnati and its western suburbs
and a few townships in Butler County, Ohio. Too many neighborhoods in
my district have had to witness crime, despair, and hopelessness that
are inherent in a government program that asks virtually nothing of its
recipients, that encourages dependency rather than responsibility and
waste, unfortunately, rather than work. Whether it is the
[[Page H7753]]
funding provided by the Federal Government or mismanagement of the
program by local governments and agencies, section 8 has failed those
who use it and those who pay for it: the American taxpayers.
My amendment is straightforward. It would simply stop throwing good
money after bad and seeks to prevent more Americans from falling victim
to a life of dependency on the government. My amendment would simply
prohibit the dollars this bill authorizes from being spent on the
100,000 new vouchers that this legislation would create.
It is also important to point out that the dependency that section 8
has created is so great that there are long waiting lists to get
vouchers. Why? Because many of those who gain access to the program
ultimately don't leave. They don't really have an incentive to. The
average stay is about 7 years.
Madam Chairman, if we simply put time limits and meaningful work
requirements in the program, as the amendments that I have offered with
Mr. Miller and Mr. Hensarling would do, there wouldn't be a need to
create more vouchers because people would be moving through the system,
moving toward independence and a better life, and that nondependence on
the government is what every American should want.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chairman, I rise to claim the time in
opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chairman, allow me to first thank the
chairperson of the Financial Services Committee, Chairperson Frank. He
has done an outstanding job with his leadership. I also thank the
Honorable Maxine Waters, the subcommittee chairperson, for her sound
stewardship; and, of course, Ranking Member Bachus for his
bipartisanship because it helped to synthesize this piece of
legislation. And I also thank the cosponsorship of Congresswoman
Biggert. She has been cogent with her cosponsorship.
Madam Chairman, let me simply say that this is bipartisan legislation
that we are talking about and the striking of the 100,000 vouchers over
5 years will put an end to what started as bipartisan legislation in
the committee. This was passed overwhelmingly in the committee, and it
was supported by the ranking member of the committee.
This is not, as was indicated, a handout. It is really a hand up for
the disabled. It is a hand up for the elderly. And it also benefits
low-income to extremely low-income persons, many of whom are working
and still not in a position to afford affordable housing. Many of them
need the kind of help that this bill is providing.
The truth is, and you shall know the truth, and it will set you free.
So at this moment, I am going to take the ax of truth, slam it into the
tree of circumstance, and let the chips fall wherever they may. The
truth is one in seven households in this country spends more than 50
percent of their income on housing. Three-quarters of a million people
are homeless on any given night in this country. Congress has not
provided new section 8 vouchers since 2002. The truth is we can pay for
one of these vouchers with 2 seconds of what we spend on the war in
Iraq. We can pay for all of these vouchers with what we spend on 2\1/2\
days in Iraq. The truth is the need exists for these vouchers. The
truth is it is time for Congress to act and to authorize these new
section 8 vouchers.
Madam Chairman, at this time I would like to yield 1 minute to my
outstanding colleague Congressman Chris Murphy.
Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Madam Chairman, I thank my friend for his
great work on this issue.
I think it is important to address the concept presented by our
friends on the other side of the aisle that the folks who are the
recipients of these vouchers are victims. Well, they might be victims,
but they are victims of an economy which says to far too many people
out in this world that if you play by the rules, if you do everything
we ask of you, if you go out and get a job, a full-time regular job,
that you are still going to be living in poverty, that you are still
going to need a little help to be able to survive in this world.
{time} 2045
In a high-cost-of-living State and a high-cost-of-housing State like
Connecticut, 5,000 vouchers does not do it for the working poor there.
We have people in our neck of the woods that are paying 60, 70, 80
percent of their income, hard-earned income on rent.
We are a part of the world that desperately needs more section 8
housing vouchers to help the working poor, the people who are doing
everything this society asks them to do. But because we live in an
economy where wages are stagnant and the cost of living continues to
rise, a program like this is a very valuable and needed helping hand.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time
is remaining?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining; the gentleman from Ohio also has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, I believe I would retain the
right to speak last and continue to reserve.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Chairman, I have a parliamentary
inquiry.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state his parliamentary
inquiry.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The gentleman is a member of the
committee defending the committee's product. I believe he has the right
to close; is that correct?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is correct. The gentleman from
Texas has the right to close.
Mr. CHABOT. That being the case, Madam Chair, I give myself such time
as I have remaining.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chair, I would just like to reiterate the fact that
I don't think we're doing either the children or the people that have
become dependent on section 8 housing any favors by allowing, number
one, the area that we covered in the last amendment, people to remain
on section 8 housing indefinitely. I think that the time limit that's
been proposed in the previous amendment is certainly a step in the
right direction. The amendment that we have following this goes to a
work requirement, which I think is also very reasonable in a program
such as this.
I think encouraging people to remain dependent upon the government in
the conditions that oftentimes we see in section 8 housing is doing no
favor for those families, and that's why I think this is an appropriate
amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1\1/
2\ minutes.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, it is beyond my comprehension to
conclude that because people are working and in need of housing
assistance, they should be evicted from the very assistance they are
paying for because they don't make enough money to move to a better
home.
I'm doing this not only for the people of my district, but I'm also
doing this for the people in my colleague's district as well, because
he has a deficit of 13,177 rental units for persons who are in need of
this type of affordable housing.
This is not housing for those who don't need it and who are not
qualified. The elderly need it. The persons who are with low-income and
very low-income need it, and those who are disabled. And for
edification purposes, when we talk about persons with extremely low
income, we are talking about persons who make at or below 30 percent of
the area median income. And many of these persons are using 50 percent
of what they earn on housing.
So, Madam Chair, I am appreciative of what the gentleman has offered,
but I'm going to ask persons to please vote against this amendment and
vote for the disabled, vote for the elderly, vote so that persons with
low income and extremely low income can have affordable housing.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page H7754]]
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio will be
postponed.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Hensarling
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6
printed in House Report 110-227.
Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Hensarling:
Page 107, after line 9, insert the following new section:
SEC. 19. WORK REQUIREMENT FOR THOSE RECEIVING ASSISTANCE FOR
7 YEARS OR MORE.
Section 16 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437n), as amended by the preceding provisions of this
Act, is further amendment by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(g) Work Requirement for Assisted Families Receiving
Section 8 Assistance for 7 Years or More.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in this subsection
and notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
assistance under section 8 may not be provided on behalf of
any family who has previously been provided such assistance
for 84 consecutive months or more, unless each member of the
family who is 18 years of age or older performs not fewer
than 20 hours of approved work activities (as such term is
defined in section 407(d) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 607(d))).
``(2) Exemption.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall provide an exemption from the applicability
of paragraph (1) for any individual family member who--
``(A) is 62 years of age or older;
``(B) is a blind or disabled individual, as defined under
section 216(i)(1) or 1614 of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 416(i)(1); 1382c), and who is unable to comply with
this section, or is a primary caretaker of such individual;
``(C) is engaged in a work activity (as such term is
defined in section 407(d) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 607(d)), as in effect on and after July 1, 1997));
``(D) meets the requirements for being exempted from having
to engage in a work activity under the State program funded
under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or under any other welfare program of the
State in which the public housing agency administering rental
assistance described in subsection (a) is located, including
a State-administered welfare-to-work program;
``(E) is in a family receiving assistance under a State
program funded under part A of title IV of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or under any other
welfare program of the State in which the public housing
agency administering such rental assistance is located,
including a State-administered welfare-to-work program, and
has not been found by the State or other administering entity
to be in noncompliance with such program; or
``(F) is a single custodial parent caring for a child who
has not attained 6 years of age, and the individual proves
that the individual has a demonstrated inability (as
determined by the State) to obtain needed child care, for one
or more of the following reasons:
``(i) Unavailability of appropriate child care within a
reasonable distance from the individual's home or work site.
``(ii) Unavailability or unsuitability of informal child
care by a relative or under other arrangements.
``(iii) Unavailability of appropriate and affordable formal
child care arrangements.
``(3) Administration.--A public housing agency providing
rental assistance described in paragraph (1) may administer
the work activities requirement under this subsection
directly, through a resident organization, or through a
contractor having experience in administering work activities
programs within the service area of the public housing
agency. The Secretary may establish qualifications for such
organizations and contractors.
``(4) Prospective applicability.--In determining the number
of months for which an assisted family has been provided
assistance under section 8, for purposes of paragraph (1), a
public housing agency shall disregard any month that
commenced before the date of the enactment of the Section 8
Voucher Reform Act of 2007.''.
Page 39, line 18, strike ``and''.
Page 39, after line 18, insert the following:
``(v) include an amount for the costs of administering the
work activities requirement under section 16(g); and''.
Page 39, line 19, strike ``(v)'' and insert ``(vi)''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 534, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise today to offer an amendment with my good friend, the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), who just offered the previous amendment, and I
certainly associate myself with his efforts on the previous amendment.
This amendment represents what many of us consider to be a very, very
important principle, and that fundamental important principle is if
you're an able-bodied adult under the age of 62 receiving means-tested
Federal assistance, you ought to be on the road to self-sufficiency.
That's what this amendment is all about, and that's what the principle
is. This, we believe, will further encourage people to make the
transition from dependency upon section 8 rental assistance to self-
sufficiency. Not only is that important to them, it's important to the
taxpayer who we're asking to pick up the tab. And this is, I believe,
over a $2 billion bill.
Now, specifically, our amendment would require people receiving
section 8 rental assistance for 7 consecutive years to perform a
certain amount of work-related activities, which includes work, looking
for work, job training, education and a host of other activities that
are reflected in the TANF statute, which we mirror. There are a number
of exemptions. It exempts those under age 18, over the age of 62,
blind, disabled, those already working, already exempt under TANF,
single parents of children under six who are unable to find appropriate
child care.
Over 10 years ago, the Nation embarked on a bold new experiment with
TANF, and we said that Federal assistance should be temporary and based
on work and self-sufficiency and responsibility and personal dignity.
That is a principle. Now many naysayers then said that it was mean.
They said it was unworkable. Some even implied it was racist. Well,
they were wrong then, and they are wrong now. Under TANF, the number of
families receiving cash welfare steadily declined from a peak of 5.1
million families in March of 1994 to 1.9 million families. Child
poverty has fallen dramatically. The employment of young single mothers
has doubled, and the employment of mothers who have never been married
is up by more than 50 percent.
Now, the lessons are clear. But we didn't finish the job 10 years
ago, and we should finish it. Again, this is a vote on a very simple
principle. If you're an able-bodied adult receiving means-tested
Federal assistance, should you be on the road to self-sufficiency? I
believe the answer is yes.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. We have just heard the gentleman from Texas lay
out a scenario that is ripe full of holes. This amendment is drastic.
It is costly. It is inefficient. It affects all families and
individuals currently using a voucher or living in section 8 project-
based housing. It's impossible to administer. Even HUD and the
administration itself has not even requested it. It imposes a new
unfunded mandate on private sector landlords owning Federally assisted
housing, forcing them to assume the role of a welfare agency.
The gentleman talks about a boom on the taxpayers. This imposes a
significant cost to taxpayers by raising the costs incurred by public
housing.
And I have in my hands a letter from just about every housing and
real estate and housing association in this country saying, in effect,
that we are not able to support the Hensarling amendment.
Most exemplary of the ridiculousness of this amendment is that he
asks for 20 hours of work, but doesn't say how, doesn't say when.
Twenty hours when? Twenty hours a week? Twenty hours a month? Twenty
hours a year? There is no way to administer it.
But Madam Chair, what is so hurtful to me about this amendment; yes,
it is mean-spirited. But not only is it mean-spirited, my friend, it
is, indeed, bigoted. It is, yes, a bigoted amendment. Let me tell you
why. It reflects a very
[[Page H7755]]
stereotypical negative view of certain economic racial groups of poor
people, poor families, because it singles them out for an ill-defined
work requirement that does not apply to other families and individuals
receiving Federal assistance.
This amendment needs to be dealt with for what it really is, and
quite honestly, it is an insult to the Congress of the United States.
And I submit it is even beneath the dignity of the Congress of the
United States to even entertain this amendment.
Madam Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Missouri
(Mr. Cleaver), and I reserve the balance of my time to close.
Mr. CLEAVER. Madam Chair, I would ask to enter into a colloquy with
the gentleman from Texas regarding his amendment on this bill. As
probably the only person who lived in section 8, I may not be opposed
to it; I would just like to get some questions, if I might.
If the gentleman would please help me on this. Are you proposing to
amend section 8 or TANF?
Mr. HENSARLING. Section 8, if the gentleman will yield.
Mr. CLEAVER. Thank you. Because all of the information that your
staff sent out contains information about TANF, and you just spoke
quite extensively about TANF.
Mr. HENSARLING. Will the gentleman yield for an explanation?
Mr. CLEAVER. I can't yield because I don't have enough time. But most
everything you've said was TANF.
The other two questions that I will ask very quickly is, if a person
lives in public housing or section 8, does it mean that they're on
welfare?
Mr. HENSARLING. I'm sorry. Would the gentleman repeat the question?
Mr. CLEAVER. If you are living in public housing or section 8, does
it also mean that you are on welfare? And if so, which law will HUD
enforce, the TANF regulation or the amended section 8 regulation which
you propose?
Mr. HENSARLING. If the gentleman will yield?
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I will yield to the gentleman to respond.
Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman from Georgia.
This particular amendment mirrors the TANF statute, and so there may
be confusion there.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Missouri's time has expired.
Mr. CLEAVER. Madam Chair, my questions weren't answered, but thank
you.
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. May I inquire as to the balance of my time?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia controls 1 minute.
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. I reserve the right to close, if the gentleman
from Texas has more to offer.
Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chair, may I inquire how much time is left on
my side?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman controls 2 additional minutes.
Mr. HENSARLING. In that case, Madam Chair, I would like to yield 1\1/
2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I thank the
gentleman from Texas for his efforts to bring more accountability to
the section 8 program. It's much needed and long overdue.
As welfare reform has shown us, the section 8 program should not
become a way of life. It should be a helping hand, a way out of
poverty. Ending the welfare cycle of dependency that has trapped so
many has cut the welfare rolls in half, promoted individual
responsibility and saved billions of tax dollars in the process.
One of the primary engines that continues to drive the civic welfare
reform is the requirement that those in the program must work, and
that's all that this amendment does. To be clear, the Hensarling-Chabot
amendment would simply require all able-bodied individuals who have
received section 8 for more than 7 consecutive years to work. I don't
see anything at all mean-spirited about that. I certainly don't see
anything bigoted about that to say that if somebody is receiving tax
dollars, they ought to be required to work, to do something in
consideration for the tax dollars that are being paid to help that
person live while they need that assistance.
So the amendment, again, as the gentleman indicates, exempts those
that are under 18 years of age, that are over 62 or blind or disabled,
and those already exempt under TANF, and single parents of children
under six. The amendment benefits the taxpayer and those in the section
8 program.
I would urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment. It requires
work, and I think that's a good thing.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas still controls a half
minute.
Mr. HENSARLING. I yield myself the balance of the time.
Again, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for coming down to support
this important amendment.
I continue to fail to see what is mean-spirited about asking people,
after 7 years, who get means-tested assistance, to be on the road to
self-sufficiency, something good for them, something good for the
taxpayer.
I must admit, I really regret, Madam Chairman, that the gentleman
from Georgia chose to characterize this as ``bigoted.'' Perhaps I could
have taken his words down. I sense when you run out of anything else to
say, you characterize someone else's motivations and you use the term
``bigoted.'' And that, I regret.
{time} 2100
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 1
minute.
Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Let me explain, if I may, Madam Chair, in
closing. This is very personal to me. I've grown up in this country. I
understand messages and I understand this message. This is a message
that is targeted to a group of people, no matter how small they may be,
who believe that certain people are categorized as wanting a handout,
or that they are lazy, or that they don't want to work. So then the cry
comes, before we can give them any help, make them work. Make them get
a job.
Madam Chairman, that is what this is about. In my humble opinion, 20
hours of work, not even defined, whether it is a day, whether it is a
month, whether it is a week, no requirements in it, is an unfunded
mandate.
On top of that, Madam Chairman, there are already included in this
bill a number of provisions to encourage work, to encourage self-
sufficiency, including reduced work disincentives.
So in closing, may I say, Madam Chairman, please vote against the
gentleman's amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. HENSARLING. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will
be postponed.
Announcement by the Acting Chairman
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were
postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Gary G. Miller of California.
Amendment No. 5 by Mr. Chabot of Ohio.
Amendment No. 6 by Mr. Hensarling of Texas.
The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Gary G. Miller of California
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California
(Mr. Gary G. Miller) on which further proceedings were postponed and on
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 151,
noes 267, not voting 18, as follows:
[[Page H7756]]
[Roll No. 625]
AYES--151
Aderholt
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Dent
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Lamborn
Latham
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Patrick
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Schmidt
Schwartz
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Sullivan
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Walberg
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOES--267
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Akin
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Blunt
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Camp (MI)
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Fortuno
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Rodriguez
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden (OR)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--18
Berkley
Conyers
Cubin
Culberson
Davis, Jo Ann
Faleomavaega
Hastert
Higgins
Jindal
McCrery
Miller, George
Paul
Radanovich
Shimkus
Slaughter
Stearns
Tancredo
Young (AK)
{time} 2127
Messrs. WATT of North Carolina, MEEK of Florida, CAMP of Michigan,
ENGLISH of Pennsylvania, ROGERS of Michigan, HOYER, KUHL of New York
and Mrs. MILLER of Michigan changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mrs. BONO changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Chabot
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Chabot) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 144,
noes 277, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 626]
AYES--144
Aderholt
Akin
Bachmann
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Dent
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Lamborn
Latham
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Murphy, Patrick
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Regula
Rehberg
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Schmidt
Schwartz
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Sullivan
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Upton
Walberg
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOES--277
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Burgess
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Fortuno
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
[[Page H7757]]
Kind
King (NY)
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Whitfield
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--15
Berkley
Burton (IN)
Conyers
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Faleomavaega
Hastert
Jindal
McCrery
Paul
Radanovich
Slaughter
Stearns
Tancredo
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Acting Chairman
The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised there are
2 minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 2135
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Hensarling
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Hensarling) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 197,
noes 222, not voting 17, as follows:
[Roll No. 627]
AYES--197
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fortuno
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Latham
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Putnam
Ramstad
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Schwartz
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOES--222
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--17
Berkley
Conyers
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Faleomavaega
Hastert
Jindal
McCrery
Paul
Pryce (OH)
Radanovich
Rohrabacher
Slaughter
Stearns
Tancredo
Wu
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Acting Chairman
The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised they have
2 minutes remaining to record their votes.
{time} 2142
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall Nos. 625, 626, and 627 I was
unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee amendment in
the nature of a substitute, as amended.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended,
was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
McNulty) having assumed the chair, Ms. Baldwin, Acting Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1851) to
reform the housing choice voucher program under
[[Page H7758]]
section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, pursuant to House
Resolution 534, she reported the bill back to the House with an
amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment
reported from the Committee of the Whole? If not, the question is on
the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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.
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mrs. Capito
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
Mrs. CAPITO. I am, Mr. Speaker, in its present form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mrs. Capito moves to recommit the bill H.R. 1851 to the
Committee on Financial Services with instructions that the
Committee report the same back forthwith with the following
amendment:
Page 107, after line 9, insert the following new section:
SEC. 19. ACCEPTABLE IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) In General.--Rental housing assistance under section
8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 may not be
provided on behalf of any individual or household unless the
individual provides, or, in the case of a household, all
adult members of the household provide, valid personal
identification in one of the following forms:
(1) Social security card with photo identification card or
real id act identification.--
(A) A social security card accompanied by a photo
identification card issued by the Federal Government or a
State Government; or
(B) A driver's license or identification card issued by a
State in the case of a State that is in compliance with title
II of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (title II of division B of
Public Law 109-13; 49 U.S.C. 30301 note).
(2) Passport.--A passport issued by the United States or a
foreign government.
(3) USCIS photo identification card.--A photo
identification card issued by the Secretary of Homeland
Security (acting through the Director of the United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services).
(b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall, by regulation, require that each public
housing agency or other entity administering rental housing
assistance described in subsection (a) take such actions as
the Secretary considers necessary to ensure compliance with
the requirements of subsection (a).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from West Virginia is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, the intent of this motion to recommit is
clear.
=========================== NOTE ===========================
July 12, 2007--On Page H7758 the following appeared: Mrs. CAPPS.
Mr. Speaker,
The online version should be corrected to read: Mrs. CAPITO. Mr.
Speaker,
========================= END NOTE =========================
Upon adoption of this motion to recommit, we will go right to the
adoption of the bill in its entirety to include the important language
that ensures illegal immigrants are not benefitting from rental
assistance provided by the section 8 program that is funded by the
dollars of hard-working Americans.
The section 8 program has provided much needed rental assistance to
low-income families who spend a high percentage of their income on
housing costs since its creation in the 1970s. Today, there are
approximately 2 million vouchers administered by the more than 2,500
public housing authorities in this country. The success of this program
is now dominating HUD's budget, but we are looking for clear reform to
ensure the viability of this program.
This motion to recommit helps strengthen the section 8 program by
ensuring that illegal immigrants cannot receive assistance from this
program. This measure will simply require all occupants of a housing
unit, supported by section 8, to establish proof of their legal
residency through the use of secure forms of identification.
There are four options here: driver's license or REAL ID card; a
foreign or U.S. passport; a citizens and immigration services photo ID
card; or a Social Security card in conjunction with the State or
Federal photo ID. Without this addition to this bill, illegal
immigrants could utilize current loopholes to secure section 8 housing
benefits.
We absolutely cannot reward this illegal behavior with incentives for
illegal immigrants to remain in the country in blatant violation of the
law. By providing housing, we are simply encouraging the continuation
of their illegal presence in our Nation. This is a form of back-door
amnesty.
There have been many stories across the country highlighting examples
of benefits being granted to illegal immigrants. I believe, in 2006, in
Denver, Colorado alone, there were an estimated 20,000 illegal
immigrants holding FHA ensured loans. Each of these cases provides
further incentives for illegal immigrants to remain in our Nation
violating the law.
Our Nation's immigration system is clearly broken. We must take this
opportunity to strengthen a successful Federal program to ensure this
benefit is only provided to legal residents.
The American people work too hard for their tax dollars to have them
spent on illegal immigrants. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this motion to
recommit.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the
motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, this bill has two parts.
One part is to reiterate what is already the law. It is already the
law that only people who are in the country legally may benefit from
this. The second part is how to enforce it, and what it does is to
continue an unfortunate tendency that goes counter to everything we
have tried to do about privacy, of making the Social Security card a
universal identifier, and there are real dangers in that.
Members who have been concerned with privacy know that an
unreasonable and unrestricted use of the Social Security card is a
problem. Indeed, we have talked about legislation, bipartisan, to
restrict the requirement that you give your Social Security number. But
here is what this bill says. It does not change the law. It's already
illegal for people who are not here legally to get these benefits.
The gentleman mentioned 26,000 FHA loans in Colorado, zero section
8s. I haven't heard the evidence. I would be glad to listen to it. I
will invite people, if there is evidence that this is a problem with
section 8, let's listen to it. But here's what you impose on the
housing authorities. There is now a requirement that people show that
they are here legally. But now in this legislation, if it's adopted,
would narrow that.
So here is what you would have to take to get someone who wanted to
get into section 8:
They could show you their passport. The number of really poor people
carrying passports is less than you might imagine. Although, I don't
know what they might imagine, so I take that back.
Or a USCIS photo identification card. Well, if you are a citizen born
in the United States, you don't have one.
Or a driver's license. You may not have a driver's license.
So if you are an 82 year-old who doesn't travel a lot to foreign
countries and you are an American citizen, what are you going to show
them? Your Social Security card. What this does is put more legal
emphasis behind that.
I would say to Members, Members can vote as they wish. But the next
time people complain to you about privacy problems and about Social
Security numbers floating around being misused, if you voted for this,
say, yes, I helped, because that's what this does.
The only thing this adds to American law is a requirement that most
people trying to get section 8s will have to show their Social Security
card, because a lot of them won't have driver's licenses, and they
won't have passports. If they are American citizens, they won't have
that card. The most common form of identification required will be the
Social Security card.
I have been working, the people in the Energy and Commerce Committee,
the people in the Ways and Means Committee, we have all been working to
restrict the idea that the Social Security card is an ID card. I
thought that was fairly generally accepted, that we don't want the
Social Security card to be the ID card.
What's the Federal Government saying here? Because, yes, you can say,
[[Page H7759]]
well, who wants to steal the identification of a poor person? You know,
being up against a section 8, no big deal. But once the Federal
Government, the minority has been consistently arguing, once we have
stated the Social Security card is the most universally accepted, the
Social Security card is considered to be the best form of
identification, then what's the argument against every business in
America doing it? How do you stop this from becoming that universal
identifier?
Members can cover themselves by voting for something that's already
in the law. It's time to cover yourself anyway; it's kind of late.
But understand what Members will be doing. They will be furthering
the practice of using the Social Security card as an identifier. They
will be weakening our efforts to undercut.
Members may be unhappy to understand the implications of what they
are doing. But I do not think it is wise for this House to continue a
pattern of saying that the Social Security card will not just be a
means of checking for Social Security but will become the universal
identifier, that people will have to show it. Because if we, the
Federal Government, say you have to show it, then how do you tell the
hotel that they can't say it? How do you tell anybody else that they
can't require the production of Social Security cards?
The logical consequence of this will be a serious impediment to our
efforts to protect privacy and to deal with identity theft. The
unrestricted use of the Social Security card is a serious problem
there, and this makes it worse.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.
Without objection, the previous question is ordered on motion to
recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
=========================== NOTE ===========================
July 12, 2007--On Page H7759 the following appeared: Mrs. CAPPS.
Mr. Speaker,
The online version should be corrected to read: Mrs. CAPITO. Mr.
Speaker,
========================= END NOTE =========================
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on
the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 233,
noes 186, not voting 12, as follows:
[Roll No. 628]
AYES--233
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Bachmann
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carney
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chandler
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Cramer
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Dent
Donnelly
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Ellsworth
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Harman
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kanjorski
Keller
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Melancon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Moore (KS)
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Space
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Udall (CO)
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (FL)
NOES--186
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Castor
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hare
Hastings (FL)
Higgins
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--12
Berkley
Conyers
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Hastert
Jindal
McCrery
Paul
Radanovich
Slaughter
Tancredo
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised that
less than 2 minutes remain in the vote.
{time} 2212
Mr. UDALL of Colorado, Mr. WILSON of Ohio, Mr. LINCOLN DAVIS of
Tennessee, Mr. HOLDEN, and Mr. MOORE of Kansas changed their vote from
``no'' to ``aye.''
So the motion to recommit was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the instructions
of the House on the motion to recommit, I report H.R. 1851 back to the
House with an amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment:
Page 107, after line 9, insert the following new section:
SEC. 19. ACCEPTABLE IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) In General.--Rental housing assistance under section
8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 may not be
provided on behalf of any individual or household unless the
individual provides, or, in the case of a household, all
adult members of the household provide, valid personal
identification in one of the following forms:
(1) Social security card with photo identification card or
real id act identification.--
(A) A social security card accompanied by a photo
identification card issued by the Federal Government or a
State Government; or
(B) A driver's license or identification card issued by a
State in the case of a State that is in compliance with title
II of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (title II of division B of
Public Law 109-13; 49 U.S.C. 30301 note).
(2) Passport.--A passport issued by the United States or a
foreign government.
[[Page H7760]]
(3) USCIS photo identification card.--A photo
identification card issued by the Secretary of Homeland
Security (acting through the Director of the United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services).
(b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall, by regulation, require that each public
housing agency or other entity administering rental housing
assistance described in subsection (a) take such actions as
the Secretary considers necessary to ensure compliance with
the requirements of subsection (a).
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed
in the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas
and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 333,
nays 83, not voting 15, as follows:
[Roll No. 629]
YEAS--333
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Barrow
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Bonner
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Butterfield
Camp (MI)
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gillmor
Gonzalez
Gordon
Granger
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hayes
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (FL)
NAYS--83
Akin
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bono
Brady (TX)
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Chabot
Coble
Conaway
Culberson
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Feeney
Flake
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Hastings (WA)
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Keller
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Mack
Manzullo
McHenry
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Murphy, Patrick
Musgrave
Neugebauer
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Putnam
Rohrabacher
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Schwartz
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Stearns
Sullivan
Thornberry
Walberg
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wicker
Wilson (SC)
NOT VOTING--15
Berkley
Conyers
Cubin
Davis, Jo Ann
Hastert
Hooley
Jindal
McCrery
Paul
Radanovich
Sanchez, Linda T.
Shuster
Slaughter
Tancredo
Young (AK)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised that
there are 2 minutes remaining to vote on passage of the bill.
{time} 2221
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________