[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 104 (Thursday, July 12, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1245-E1246]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 26, 2012

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5972) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and 
     Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other 
     purposes:

  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Chair, I regretfully rise in opposition to the 
FY13 Transportation Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Bill. 
I would like to extend my appreciation to Chairman Latham and Ranking 
Member Olver for their hard work on this bill. They were forced to make 
difficult decisions due to the low allocation that the Ryan Budget 
provided. Regrettably, this violation of the Budget Control Act, which 
was agreed to last year, led to devastating cuts to the Housing and 
Urban Development housing assistance program.
  At a time when so many Americans have lost their homes or are 
struggling to keep them, this bill falls far short of meeting our 
nation's housing needs.
  This is especially true for those who have fallen on hard times and 
those who are the poorest and most vulnerable among us.
  By systematically underfunding HUD's three major rental assistance 
programs: Housing Choice vouchers, Public Housing and Section 8 
Project-based Rental Assistance this bill increases the chances of 
greater homelessness in our country especially for those already living 
in unstable housing conditions.
  My home state is a perfect example of how the deep cuts to housing 
assistance in this bill will negatively impact those with the greatest 
housing needs.
  California has an estimated shortage of 1.6 million affordable rental 
units and an average wait of 37 months for HUD-assisted housing.
  Further reducing funding for affordable housing will only increase 
the number of extremely low income households who are living

[[Page E1246]]

in unstable housing situations, paying the majority of their incomes 
towards rent and who remain at risk of becoming homeless.
  Nationally it puts at risk the approximately 4.5 million low income 
families who depend on HUD programs for their housing needs, more than 
half of which include seniors and persons with disabilities.
  The FY13 THUD bill underfunds Housing Choice vouchers by as much as 
$440 million, which translates into 55,000 vouchers for low income 
families in FY13. That's 55,000 families with an average annual income 
of $12,568 that will lose access to affordable housing.
  Project-Based Rental Assistance is also underfunded and the 
legislation would only extend year-long contracts to certain property 
owners, leaving investors, owners and tenants uncertain about the 
future of the program. The consequence of this uncertainty could be 
fewer owners renewing their contracts and a reduction in the number of 
Section 8 units available to low-income families.
  The bill continues to woefully underfund public housing. Capital 
funding for public housing has been shortchanged for the past decade, 
and without an increase, 1.1 million low income households will 
continue to be exposed to deteriorating living conditions and potential 
safety hazards.
  This legislation also weakens federal efforts to assist those already 
homeless by underfunding Homeless Assistance Grants by more than $200 
million. This means fewer permanent housing units, which have been 
shown to prevent homelessness and are less costly than the alternative 
of providing emergency shelter and services. For example, the Economic 
Roundtable found that individuals who are homeless in Los Angeles 
utilize an average of $34,000 a year in county services (not including 
costs to the city, state or federal government) and that once 
permanently housed that number drops to $14,000 (including housing 
capital, federal rental assistance and services).
  Now is the time to protect low income families by prioritizing 
funding for affordable housing during these tough economic times. 
Unfortunately this bill falls short in that regard and puts far too 
many families in jeopardy of finding themselves without a safe and 
affordable home to call their own.
  I regret that in good conscience I cannot support this bill.

                          ____________________