[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 19 (Tuesday, February 2, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H451-H470]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HOUSING OPPORTUNITY THROUGH MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2015
General Leave
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and submit extraneous materials on the bill, H.R. 3700, to provide
housing opportunities in the United States through modernization of
various housing programs, and for other purposes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Carter of Georgia). Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 594 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. 3700.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Costello) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1437
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. 3700) to provide housing opportunities in the United States
through modernization of various housing programs, and for other
purposes, with Mr. Costello of Pennsylvania in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) and the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Maxine Waters) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 3700, the
Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, offered by my friend,
Chairman Luetkemeyer of Missouri.
I want to thank him for his leadership on this bill that he has
worked on for many, many months. It represents a true bipartisan
approach to housing reform.
I also want to thank his fellow Missourian, the ranking member of the
Housing Subcommittee, again, another gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Cleaver), for his input into this legislation and for his leadership on
his side of the aisle as well.
H.R. 3700 passed the Financial Services Committee with broad
bipartisan
[[Page H452]]
support back in December. Again, it is designed to help promote greater
efficiency in our existing housing assistance programs.
In many different ways, Mr. Chairman, it modernizes a lot of outdated
rules and regulations which, in some cases, have not even been updated
in a generation. And so, in that respect, it takes the resources that
we have and targets it to those who need it the most.
So you will find provisions here dealing with Section 8 rental
assistance, public housing, rural housing, homeless assistance, and FHA
mortgage insurance for condominiums. It is a very broad bill, and,
again, it enjoys bipartisan support.
Let me talk a little bit about what H.R. 3700 doesn't do or what it
is not. Few have been more critical about the poor focus of our HUD
programs than I have been because, regardless of whatever their good
intentions may be, the undeniable truth is current Federal housing
policy remains fractured, remains costly, remains inefficient, and
oftentimes does not help those who truly need it.
In 2012, the GAO found that 20 different Federal Government entities
administer over 160 different programs, tax expenditures, and other
tools that support home ownership and rental housing.
The Department of HUD has received approximately more than $1.6
trillion in real dollars since it was born 50 years ago and today
spends over $45 billion annually on at least 85 active programs, again,
many of which have not been modernized or updated in a generation.
And the results of all this?
Well, all too often housing affordability remains a very real
challenge for many Americans. Too many neighborhoods still suffer from
blight and neglect with substandard housing options for low-income
families.
Most tellingly, the national poverty rate has remained essentially
unchanged in the 50 years since HUD was first created. Mr. Chairman, we
can do better.
Now, we all know that the best housing program is a job, a career
path, one with a future. We know that the best housing program is
economic opportunity for all, boundless economic opportunity for all.
But there are still some that need assistance.
So that is not what this debate is about today. Today the debate is:
What can we do on a bipartisan basis? Where can we come to agreement on
current existing programs to try to make them work better for the poor
and for our low-income people who need assistance through the HUD
programs? What is it we can do to help move more people out of poverty
to lives of self-sufficiency? How do we reform HUD's complex
bureaucratic web of programs? How do we spread economic opportunity to
all?
Those should be what our goals are.
H.R. 3700 addresses the question by finding many ways within HUD's
bureaucracy to streamline the inspection protocol for rental assistance
units, to simplify tenant income review so local housing officials can
focus on housing, not data collection, and to target assistance, again,
to households with the greatest need.
For the first time, H.R. 3700 will state that any occupant of a
public housing unit that exceeds the area median income for 2
consecutive years either gives up their government subsidy or moves out
of the unit. That provides more resources for those who deserve it.
H.R. 3700 also addresses the problem of over-income occupants. It
creates for the first time a financial asset test for public housing
residents. Currently, there is only a one-time income test.
Again, these are just two ways, Mr. Chairman, that we ensure that the
resources that are devoted to these housing programs are targeted to
those who are most in need.
I could go on and on about the benefits of the bill. But let me just
say that, with any great project, there are those who are always saying
we could do more. And, yes, we could do more, and we are working faster
to implement even more reforms.
But today represents a start of a process, not the end of a process,
a very ambitious project to transform how we deliver government housing
assistance in America and help people graduate from Federal assistance
to lives of self-sufficiency and financial independence.
Again, I congratulate the gentleman from Missouri, the chairman of
our Housing and Insurance Subcommittee, for his great leadership.
I commend the ranking member of that committee as well for working on
a bipartisan basis.
I hope all Members will support H.R. 3700. It is a bipartisan first
step in fixing a broken housing system that we have.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chair, I yield myself as much
time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, we are here today to discuss H.R. 3700, but I would
like to start by saying how pleased I am that we are focusing on
housing.
This is the first major housing bill that the Financial Services
Committee has considered in the past several Congresses, and I hope
that we can spend a lot more time focusing on the dire housing needs of
low-income families in America as we move forward.
{time} 1445
Today, only one in four households in this country who are eligible
to receive housing assistance actually receive it, and there is a
severe deficit of over 7 million rental units that are both affordable
and available to extremely low-income Americans.
Furthermore, according to HUD's most recent point-in-time count,
there are nearly 600,000 Americans who are homeless in this country--a
staggering number I find simply unconscionable. These statistics
demonstrate that we must come together to make reforms to Federal
housing programs, but also to commit new resources to tackle the
extreme lack of affordable housing in this country.
I spend a lot of time visiting and talking with housing and homeless
services providers. Recently, I visited the Downtown Women's Center in
Los Angeles and N Street Village here in D.C. These homeless service
providers are helping women and families get off the streets and into
safe, decent, affordable, and supportive housing. Organizations such as
these are not just applying compassion, they are applying evidence-
based approaches to addressing homelessness in the most effective ways.
H.R. 3700 is a step in the right direction because it directly
responds to concerns that I have heard over and over again from these
housing and homeless service providers about how Federal housing
programs can better support their efforts.
This bill would make several incremental changes across a number of
Federal housing programs that will allow us to better serve low-income
families in need of housing assistance while also relieving certain
administrative burdens. These changes would affect public housing,
section 8 Tenant and Project-Based Rental Assistance, the Federal
Housing Administration, the Rural Housing Service, and HUD's
homelessness programs, among others.
Many of the provisions are commonsense reforms that are long overdue.
For example, this bill includes the text of my bill, the Project-Based
Voucher Improvement Act of 2015, which would increase flexibility for
public housing authorities to develop new units of housing to serve
vulnerable populations, including those who are homeless in this
country. It would also help to create housing opportunities in areas
where vouchers are difficult to use.
Several national and local tenant advocacy organizations and
affordable housing industry groups have expressed support for my bill.
In addition, a number of other provisions in H.R. 3700 were included in
previous section 8 reform bills that I have introduced. I am pleased
that my Republican colleagues have expressed their support for these
provisions that I have long advocated.
At the markup of this bill, I raised a serious concern that I had
with one of the provisions in H.R. 3700 because it would effectively
raise rents for low-income families with children who are living in
certain HUD-assisted housing. I voted against the bill in committee.
Although I voted against the bill at the committee markup for this
reason, I am very pleased to say that I have worked, and my staff has
worked, with my Republican colleagues so that we could find some common
ground, and
[[Page H453]]
they have indicated that they will support my amendment that I have
offered to address this issue.
I am encouraged that my Republican colleagues shared in my concerns
and that we were able to reach a meaningful compromise on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, that is why I am now urging my colleagues to vote
``yes'' on H.R. 3700. It is high time we came together to pass a
bipartisan housing bill.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer), the chairman of the Housing and Insurance
Subcommittee of the Financial Services Committee. He happens to be the
author of the bill.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman
Hensarling, Ranking Member Waters, and especially my good friend from
Missouri, the ranking member, Mr. Cleaver. We have had a labor of love
with this bill, and it took two guys from the Show Me State to show
them how to do it. We are excited about that, and I want to give a
special shout-out to him.
Mr. Chairman, when I took the gavel of the Financial Services
Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance, I told my colleagues I wanted to
work with them across party lines to make meaningful changes that
benefit all Americans. H.R. 3700 represents a major step forward, one
to reform a system that is in many instances outdated, duplicative, and
burdensome.
As a body, we should be committed to creating a more efficient
government and greater opportunity for the American people and American
businesses. H.R. 3700 helps us meet those commitments.
This legislation promotes greater efficiency in housing assistance
programs and modernizes outdated rules and regulations, which in some
cases have not been updated in more than a generation. H.R. 3700
streamlines the inspection protocol for rental assistance units,
simplifies the income recertification policies for assisted households,
clarifies homeless assistance program requirements, delegates rural
housing loan approval authority, and provides targeted flexibility
between public housing operating and capital funds.
H.R. 3700 also gives State and local housing agencies and private
owners enhanced flexibility in meeting key program objectives such as
reducing homelessness, improving access to higher-opportunity
neighborhoods, and addressing repair needs of public housing.
The bill also, for the first time in over 30 years of public housing
policy, provides a thoughtful limitation on public housing tenancy for
over-income families. Importantly, this legislation also pays special
attention to our homeless veterans and children aging out of foster
care, two vulnerable communities that need our support today.
H.R. 3700 does all of this and still manages to save the taxpayers
money. CBO estimates that the underlying bill saves $311 million over 5
years.
I will be the first to point out that H.R. 3700 will not necessarily
change the world. It won't overhaul HUD or the Rural Housing Service,
end homelessness overnight, or meet the overwhelming need for
affordable housing. But it is a significant step in the long journey to
reforming a broken system.
The majority of the provisions in this bill were agreed to years ago
by Members of Congress, housing advocates, and industry groups. H.R.
3700 is a set of solutions on which all parties, in Congress, industry,
and advocacy, have agreed and can agree.
Mr. Chairman, this legislation presents a bipartisan effort that has
been drafted and debated over the past 6 months. I want to thank again
Chairman Hensarling for his support and Ranking Member Waters for her
work on the bill, which passed the Financial Services Committee in
December by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 44-10.
I also want to recognize my good friend, the ranking member, Mr.
Cleaver from Missouri. Without his tireless efforts, this bill would be
very difficult to have accomplished anything with.
Housing policy isn't easy. It is emotional. It touches lives. It sets
the stage for future generations. Because it is so important, it isn't
always easy to find policies on which we all agree. With H.R. 3700, we
have an opportunity to show the Nation that we are committed to working
together, and with a diverse group of stakeholders, for the American
people.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I
urge the Senate to consider it without delay so we can break a status
quo that benefits too few at the cost of too many.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver). He is the leading Democratic
sponsor of this bill, a member of the Financial Services Committee, and
the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.
Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Chairman, I came to Congress, and because of my own
experiences, I only had one ambition other than being a Member of
Congress, and it was to take leadership in the Subcommittee on Housing
and Insurance because, experientially, I thought I had experiences that
might help. And secondly, having served as mayor, we dealt a lot with
housing in Missouri's largest city. I had this opportunity. And I want
to thank Ms. Waters for the opportunity to be the lead Democrat on the
Housing and Insurance Subcommittee.
I think it was fortunate, maybe even fortuitous, that two Missourians
ended up working together, and we were able to, I think, do some things
that probably might not have been done otherwise because I think we
both have a spirit of working together, and it ended up in a good
product. But that wouldn't have taken place without the chairman and
the ranking member.
I lived in 404-B Bailey public housing in Wichita Falls, Texas. I
went by on Christmas, and I just parked there for a long time and
looked at the kids running around playing, thinking I used to do that
on that same little piece of dirt that we called a yard. I wondered
about the kids who were in that unit. Will they eventually have the
opportunities that I was blessed to have? Or would they suffer the fate
of many others with whom I grew up?
I thought in part we might be able to do some things here that will
help the little boy I saw running around playing in front of the unit I
once lived in with my mother, father, and three sisters. I think we
have done this. These are probably the most sweeping changes in HUD
regulations in a quarter of a century, perhaps ever; and what we have
done is we have remodeled, or refashioned, or recast, or redesigned
many of the programs impacting HUD.
I do not disagree with Chairman Hensarling that we do have a great
deal of redundancy in programs that we run with HUD and USDA. I do
think at some point there is a need for us to get things molded a
little bit better, but that is not going to take place I don't think
any time soon.
I support H.R. 3700 because I had the opportunity to understand what
these changes mean. I also need to say before I go any further that I
don't believe that compromise means capitulation. In fact, I don't
think democracy can work without comity and compromise. I think they
are inseparable parts of democracy. So there are parts of this bill
that I am not as thrilled with, as other parts, but that is what
happens in a democracy.
Again, I cherish the opportunity to work with people who are willing
to move and shake and move and shake and shake and move to get
something to the floor.
The bill will streamline the inspection and income review process for
families living in section 8 units. We are making, in this legislation,
some very badly needed changes to the project-based voucher program by
allowing a public housing authority, PHA, to project-base up to 20
percent of its authorized voucher allocation, rather than 20 percent of
the voucher funding that we give. And then we give PHAs more
flexibility with their funds by allowing them to transfer up to 20
percent of their capital funds to the operating fund.
Mr. Chairman, what this allows is for people who are on the ground,
working with people, understanding where they need to have funds, the
opportunity to move those funds around without violating any of the HUD
regulations.
It helps our foster children by expanding eligibility for the Family
Unification Program from the current
[[Page H454]]
limit of 21 years of age to 24 years of age, and it increases the
length of stay from 18 months to a maximum of 36 months. It also--and I
think this is important--expands the eligibility of individuals who
will leave foster care within 90 days.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer), who is the chair of the Subcommittee on
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Luetkemeyer
and Ranking Member Cleaver for their work on this very important piece
of legislation.
I have been in the housing business probably for over 40-some-odd
years. I have been involved in every aspect of it, from low-income
housing, to rental housing, to new housing, to resale housing. One of
the things that I have recognized over the years is what an important
part housing is to the fabric of our country, how important housing is
to families, and how people enter into the housing market in different
ways. Certainly there are folks that go into market-based rental
housing, and then there are folks that aren't quite ready to do that.
Maybe they are getting started or have had a difficulty in their life,
so lower-income housing provides an opportunity for them.
I think the goal of the housing programs over the years is to provide
low-income housing as a stepping stone and not a permanent residence.
One of the things I like about H.R. 3700 is that it encourages that
process. It has been brought up in a number of these programs, and over
the years sometimes a good idea spreads around. We have spent a lot of
time probably creating new housing programs and probably spent a lot of
time increasing the funding for housing programs, but in many cases
maybe we didn't stop and do the review and make sure that the programs
that we had put in place were efficient in delivering the services that
needed to be delivered and helping those families accomplish the goal
of moving through the housing cycle.
{time} 1500
So one of the things that I like about this bill is that these
families that have--in fact, the goal has been to increase their
livelihood, and they have gotten better jobs and their income has
increased. It is time, then, for those folks to move on. Because what
we know is--and those statistics have been, I think, brought out
today--we have got a number of people in the waiting line to get into
some of this housing to better their lives. It is not fair that people
whose incomes have far surpassed incomes that it takes to qualify to
live in them should continue to do that.
So affluent families must pay market rental rates or they have got to
leave the public housing arena. Higher asset families must leave public
housing. That is a normal cause. That is not cruel. That is just the
way that these programs were designed to work.
The other thing, though, is we have a responsibility not only to the
families and individuals around our country, but we have a
responsibility to the United States of America. One of the things that
I think is important about this piece of legislation is it doesn't
really mess with mandatory spending but is, according to CBO, going to
save $300 million over 5 years.
What that points out--and this is done really without cutting any of
the programs, but just cutting some efficiencies in those programs to
make sure that those programs are being administered appropriately--is,
if there are some regulatory things that are keeping people from
operating some of these public housing facilities in a way that
maximizes the benefit, then we give them some flexibility to do that by
reducing some duplicative regulatory processes and, more importantly,
empowering the local entities and the local operators of this public
housing to be more innovative and creative.
As I have had an opportunity to visit some of our public housing
facilities in my district, the 19th Congressional District, and sit
down with a lot of those administrators, what they tell me is: Randy,
if we could have more flexibility, we know how to deliver this service
much more efficiently than we have today. But in many cases, the
Federal regulation is inhibiting their ability to be able to implement
some of those things.
I want to commend the two gentlemen from Missouri for their
outstanding work. Yes, we could probably do more, but the good thing is
we got started. I think we are off to a good start, so I encourage my
colleagues to support H.R. 3700.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to
the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), the ranking member of the
Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee of the Committee on Financial
Services.
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I thank Ranking Member Waters for yielding.
I rise in support of H.R. 3700, as amended by Ranking Member Waters.
This is what you call regular order, folks. This bill came out of
committee with a significant flaw that would have had a very negative
impact on families and children and the ability of low-income people to
deduct childcare expenses. If it were not fixed, it would have
effectively raised rent on thousands of low-income families with
children.
I just want to commend my colleagues, Ms. Waters and Mr. Cleaver--Ms.
Waters in particular--for really catching this flaw. But I also want to
commend the Republicans who, instead of just taking their position as
being in the majority and saying ``we don't have to listen to you,''
continued to engage with us to fix this. Literally, the math did not
work out.
I can tell you as once a single parent and as a grandmother, I know
about the budget-busting cost of child care. I also know how central
housing policy and access to child care is critical to positive social
outcomes for children.
So often we demand that poor people, and especially women, pull
themselves up by their bootstraps. We have programs that are designed
to help them. But then what we do is we put program features in place
that really cancel out the benefits of these programs.
But this bill, H.R. 3700, as amended by the ranking member,
eliminates the unintended consequences for poor people who are raising
children. Ranking Member Waters and subcommittee Ranking Member Cleaver
have both been powerful advocates for affordable housing on the
Financial Services Committee. I am so pleased to join them in fighting
for these changes.
H.R. 3700 is supported by the National Association of Realtors, the
National Alliance to End Homelessness, and the Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities, among the over two dozen groups supporting it.
I urge adoption of the legislation, as amended by Ms. Waters.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce), the vice chairman of the Financial
Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee.
Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
About 5 years ago, I was in Roswell, New Mexico, at a meeting with
veteran constituents. We were talking about policies and things like
that. After about an hour, suddenly one gentleman overlooked in the
whole group blurted out, ``I am living in a rat hole.'' It just caught
us all by surprise. We dismantled the discussion there, and we went
immediately to look at his house. Over the next 2 years, that community
gathered money and businesses came together. They tore down the man's
house and rebuilt it.
The problem is that not everyone out there can get access to
communities and local businesses to help them through the problems, so
we have the housing programs which are set up. Unfortunately, they are
mired in bureaucratic red tape. We soak up the dollars that should be
helping people with administrative burdens that make no sense, with
duplicative requirements to go through the processes.
I commend both sides of the aisle, Mr. Luetkemeyer and Ms. Maxine
Waters of California, for pushing this reform because it will allow us
to direct the money to where it should be going.
Many times we think that we disagree with each other about policies.
The truth is there is not significant disagreement that we should be
helping those at the lowest income levels to raise themselves up. It is
through their
[[Page H455]]
progression towards prosperity and towards just making ends meet that
we get rid of some of the deepest problems in our social cost of the
government. It is not that we disagree; it is that sometimes we get
trapped and that that program doesn't work very well so we want to cut
funds.
I really think that this is a very important step today where we are
trying to modernize the systems that are delivering help to those that
need it the most in the belief that the human spirit will actually take
those steps to make their own way out once we help them stabilize.
Again, just thanks for the work on both sides of the aisle.
I urge support of H.R. 3700.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to
the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell), a member of the Financial
Services Committee.
Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R.
3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, as amended by
Ranking Member Waters.
While not a perfect bill, H.R. 3700 has been made considerably better
by the amendment offered by Ranking Member Waters. There are other
amendments that I would love to see, including my own, but I must tell
you that this bill does represent true bipartisanship. It is a major
bipartisan step towards helping preserve our scarce housing resources
while expanding housing opportunities and homeownership opportunities.
More specifically, this legislation makes critical changes that would
help improve and expand the Section 502 Guaranteed Rural Housing Loan
Program. This program helps provide low- and moderate-income households
with homeownership opportunities in rural areas, like the Seventh
Congressional District of Alabama, which I am so proud to represent.
The sad reality is that too often, rural America faces severe
barriers and obstacles to obtaining quality and affordable housing.
This is largely due to the limited access to affordable mortgage
credit.
The Section 502 Guaranteed Rural Housing Loan Program is designed to
target rural residents who have a steady low or moderate income yet are
unable to obtain adequate housing through conventional financing.
Essentially, this program encourages private lenders to extend credit
to responsible and creditworthy borrowers in rural America.
H.R. 3700 would help the Department of Agriculture improve and expand
the Section 502 Guaranteed Rural Housing Loan Program by delegating
loan approval authority to certain participating lenders. This is
similar to the authority that the Secretary of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development currently has for Federal Housing
Administration's programs, and this legislative proposal was included
in the President's FY 2016 budget.
This is a commonsense and pragmatic measure that will help improve
the efficiency of an important rural housing program so that it can
reach even more rural families. It is critically important that we
continue to provide the necessary tools and incentives to help ensure
all Americans are able to realize their dream of homeownership.
I want to commend my colleague from Missouri. I especially want to
commend my colleague Congressman Cleaver for his tireless leadership on
this effort. I want to thank the chairman and ranking member for their
efforts.
I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 3700.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger).
Mr. PITTENGER. I thank Chairman Luetkemeyer for his leadership on
this bill, and I appreciate deeply the support and leadership of
Congressman Cleaver.
Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of H.R. 3700, the Housing
Opportunity Through Modernization Act, which contains provisions that
expand housing opportunities while protecting American taxpayers.
This bipartisan legislation provides commonsense efforts for
streamlining and reducing regulatory burdens for organizations working
with HUD.
This bill looks to correct many wrongs within our housing system
while also simplifying certification processes and providing permanent
authority for direct endorsement for approved lenders to approve rural
housing service loans.
Mr. Chairman, condominiums are often the first step on the housing
ladder for first-time homeowners. They also can be the most affordable
and desirable option for single people, young families, and those
looking to downsize. Unfortunately, current FHA regulations prevent
buyers from purchasing condos. H.R. 3700 eases restrictions, allowing
more opportunity for homeownership.
This bill reins in duplicative and overly burdensome regulations,
which not only create a slower process, but also increase government
workload all without affecting any changes to direct spending.
Mr. Chairman, housing assistance should be solely for those who need
it most of all, and this bill takes aim at ensuring this. For the first
time in 80 years, this legislation provides limitations on public
housing tenancy for over-income families.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), a member of the
Appropriations Committee and someone who has been focused on dealing
with poverty.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank our ranking member, Congresswoman
Waters, for leading and also for her tremendous leadership on the
Financial Services Committee as our ranking member. She has been
phenomenal in terms of making sure that our legislation is bipartisan.
Also, I remember serving on the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance
for many, many years with Congresswoman Waters, and she constantly
worked to make sure that people had access to affordable, accessible,
clean, and safe housing. She has not wavered on that agenda. So I thank
her very much.
The need for affordable housing has never been greater. That is why I
am very happy to be here today to support the Housing Opportunity
Through Modernization Act of 2015. This bill would make critical
improvements to our Nation's public and assisted housing programs, and
takes steps to ensure that low-income communities have access to safe
and affordable housing.
Now, let me just tell you, in my district in Oakland, California,
rents have risen faster than anywhere else in the Nation. In fact, if
the average Oakland renter had to move tomorrow, they would be spending
a staggering 70 percent of their income on housing--70 percent of their
income. That is outrageous. My constituents, like many constituents
around the country, can't afford this, so this is a crisis.
{time} 1515
This bill takes steps to address this issue by protecting voucher
holders from losing their subsidies when fair market rents drop, which
is something that recently had a major impact on my community.
Thankfully, with the help of Congresswoman Waters and our Secretary of
HUD, we were able to navigate the agency's redtape to find a solution
so the tenants could keep their assistance and stay in their homes.
I support this bill and the critical amendments offered by
Congresswoman Waters and Congressmen Price and Aderholt.
It is also important that we update the formula that is used to
distribute funds under the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS
to reflect the changing nature of the HIV/AIDS epidemic and to ensure
those communities in greatest need receive critical HOPWA funds. This
is one issue that Congresswoman Waters has been working on for many,
many years to make sure these funds are targeted to the people and to
the communities who need it the most.
The bill allows for homeownership for those whose American Dream of
such has been shattered. Thank goodness, in this bill, we now have
provisions that will allow that dream to be fulfilled.
I thank Congressman Cleaver as well as our majority and minority
members for this bill.
From just a very parochial point of view, in my district, I have to
say how badly needed this bill is, as
[[Page H456]]
gentrification is a big issue. My constituents constantly ask me what
the Federal Government can do, and this is a major step in that
direction.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr).
Mr. BARR. I thank the chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3700, which is a
modest but important first step to improving Federal housing policy
through several commonsense reforms.
For the first time in HUD's 50-year history, there will now be a
flexible formula directing over-income families to pay greater shares
of their subsidized rents or to move out of public housing. Incomes and
assets will be reevaluated to target assistance to those who are truly
in need.
There are wait lists across the country for scarce public housing
resources and Section 8 vouchers. I have listened to homeless advocates
and to my constituents at the Lexington Housing Authority in Kentucky
about the waiting lists that exist in my own district. A 2015 HUD audit
found that 25,000 families had incomes too high to qualify for
assistance; yet the families remained in taxpayer subsidized housing.
Some of those families actually derived income from renting other
residential properties that they, themselves, owned. One family
highlighted in the report had a combined income of $498,000.
Policy failures such as these not only waste taxpayer dollars, but,
more importantly, they hurt those in need who might otherwise have
roofs over their heads. I hope this bipartisan initiative is a down
payment on the further reform of Federal housing programs.
Several of my colleagues and I are developing an empowerment agenda
to holistically reform Federal assistance programs from housing to
nutrition to workforce development. We start with the recognition that
the Federal Government now runs more than 80 different antipoverty
programs at an annual cost of nearly $1 trillion; yet, after 50 years
of this strategy, the poverty rate has barely budged from where it was
in 1965. The goal is to assist Americans to achieve their God-given
potential and to restore the American Dream to where the condition of
one's birth does not determine the outcome of one's life.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle and with members of this subcommittee in leveraging the
empowerment agenda to craft additional reforms to Federal housing
policies, which will improve outcomes by recognizing that poor
Americans are not liabilities to be managed by some remote bureaucracy
in Washington but who are untapped assets who can achieve the American
Dream.
I congratulate Chairman Luetkemeyer and Ranking Member Cleaver for
their work on this bill.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3700, and I invite my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join in additional efforts to
reform HUD and to more effectively combat poverty.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to
the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier).
Mr. DeSAULNIER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, with this bill, we have an opportunity to address an
inequity with how the Department of Housing and Urban Development
treats condominiums, particularly in senior communities.
Across the country and in my district in the Bay Area, condo
communities have been missing out on access to mortgages due to an
unnecessarily restrictive rule. The rule's intent is good, but, in
practice, it unduly harms seniors, families, and communities.
One community in my district in the East Bay of the Bay Area,
Rossmoor, is home to thousands of seniors, many of whom need access to
HUD-backed mortgages to enhance their financial security. I am pleased
that this bill is a step in the right direction to allow these
residents and residents in other condo communities around the country
to benefit from the same mortgage rules that are available to other
homeowners.
I appreciate the hard work done by the chairman and ranking member of
the subcommittee on this important issue, and I look forward to working
with them to continue to protect these deserving communities.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Rothfus), one of our
young and up-and-coming members of the Financial Services Committee.
Mr. ROTHFUS. I thank the chairman.
Mr. Chairman, for decades, the Federal Government has spent over $1.6
trillion in an attempt to accomplish the laudable goal of ensuring that
all Americans have access to affordable, decent housing.
I have visited many affordable housing sites during my time in
Congress to listen to the concerns of residents, managers, and
community leaders. In fact, just 2 weeks ago, I visited a public
housing facility that is managed by the Housing Authority of Beaver
County. These meetings and visits have underscored the importance of
our housing assistance programs. If administered correctly, these
efforts can be truly transformative for hardworking Americans. I have
met many Pennsylvanians who have improved their lives and who have
brightened their families' futures thanks, in part, to targeted Federal
housing assistance provided to them in their time of need.
However, there are also cases in which outdated rules, waste, fraud,
abuse, and general inefficiency have made it difficult to direct
resources to those who need them the most. There are also instances in
which housing assistance programs have failed to help people lift
themselves out of poverty. Members of both parties recognize this
reality and have worked together to identify areas for improvement.
H.R. 3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, is a
bipartisan, commonsense bill that addresses many of these issues.
Among other things, this legislation makes it easier for tenants,
owners, and investors to navigate rental assistance programs by
reducing duplicative and inefficient regulations that make it harder to
rent or to operate affordable housing. The Housing Opportunity Through
Modernization Act also incorporates safeguards to prevent well-off
families from using scarce public housing units. We can all agree that
housing assistance programs should be reserved for those who need help
the most. This legislation also provides flexibility to public housing
agencies in using Federal funds to meet local needs more effectively.
I am a proud cosponsor of this legislation, and I encourage my
colleagues to support this bipartisan effort to improve Federal housing
assistance. We owe it to the many Americans who rely on these programs
to enact this legislation's reforms.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
This bill contains several provisions which I wholeheartedly support
and would like to see passed into law.
For example, this bill includes a few provisions that were taken
straight from bills that I have authored, including the text of my
Project-Based Voucher Improvement Act of 2015, which would increase the
flexibility for public housing authorities to develop new units of
housing to serve vulnerable populations, including those who are
homeless in this country. It would also help to create housing
opportunities in areas where vouchers are difficult to use.
I introduced the Project-Based Voucher Improvement Act to address the
severe lack of affordable housing, which is contributing to the
epidemic of homelessness across the country. The Section 8 project-
based voucher program is a valuable tool to help preserve and create
more affordable housing, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable
populations. Essentially, it helps housing providers leverage outside
financing in order to create and maintain affordable housing in their
communities.
My bill would help us maximize the effectiveness of this critical
program by facilitating the ability of PHAs to enter into agreements
with private and nonprofit owners and to partner with social service
agencies to provide supportive housing. This will, ultimately, help
provide stable housing for our most vulnerable populations.
Gaining access to affordable housing is becoming harder and harder
for far too many families. We are in the midst
[[Page H457]]
of a homeless crisis in my district and in many districts around the
country, and we need more affordable housing to help get vulnerable
populations off the streets. By making this Section 8 project-based
voucher program easier to use, we could help to overcome this
challenge.
I hope that the information that has been shared by some of my
colleagues has not been lost. I certainly hope that we all heard what
Congresswoman Barbara Lee said about residents who are paying 70
percent of their income for housing, and it has become commonplace
around this country for our citizens to be paying 50 percent of their
income for housing. This is totally unacceptable.
I am very pleased that we are focusing on housing. I am very pleased
as there are certain aspects of this bill that, I think, will be very
beneficial to our residents and to our constituents throughout the
country. I am hopeful that we will continue on this track and that this
won't be the last housing effort that we make that comes out of the
Financial Services Committee. I am very pleased to be a part of it.
I am proud of all of the work that has gone into this legislation. I
am very pleased that we were able to work out any differences that we
may have had. I am very proud of Mr. Cleaver and of Mr. Luetkemeyer, as
they are two gentlemen from Missouri, for getting together to do this
bill. It might have helped a little bit that I am from Missouri also. I
think this bill is something we can all be proud of.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams), one of our junior members of the
committee but one of the senior Members with life experience who can
bring a lot of good discussion to this debate we are having this
afternoon.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I thank the chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of H.R. 3700, the Housing
Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015.
Introduced by my good friend Chairman Luetkemeyer and my friend
Congressman Cleaver, this bipartisan piece of legislation is the first
step in many to help reform and modernize our outdated Federal housing
system.
Mr. Chairman, for too long, government red tape has made many of
these housing programs inefficient and ineffective, hurting the very
people they aim to support. If signed into law, H.R. 3700 would seek to
change that, all the while saving taxpayer-invested money.
First, as mentioned, the CBO projects this bill to be a cost saver.
With the Federal deficit reaching almost $19 trillion, the savings in
discretionary spending are a direct result of allowing local housing
officials and agencies to better manage their programs. Like most
Federal programs, inefficient regulations exist that often balloon
overall costs.
Additionally, as previously mentioned, for the first time in 80 years
of public housing policy, this legislation restricts the use of already
scarce public housing units to those who actually need them by
establishing an earnings cap. Eliminating Federal subsidies for over-
income families has always been key to this discussion. While most wait
lists for public housing stretch into the tens of thousands, families
who should not receive subsidies, in fact, often do. Plain and simple,
public housing should be reserved for those who are most in need.
Finally, H.R. 3700 ensures that our veterans have fair access to HUD
housing and homeless assistance programs. With nearly 50,000 homeless
vets nationwide, we can and need to do more in this area.
Mr. Chairman, as a member of the House Committee on Financial
Services and of the House Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance, I
thank Chairman Luetkemeyer for his leadership on this issue over the
last year, as addressing housing reform is something that is not
without controversy.
I urge my colleagues to support this measure.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time
and am prepared to close.
I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1530
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
I would like to close by again thanking my colleagues, Mr. Cleaver
and Mr. Luetkemeyer, for their leadership in putting together a
bipartisan affordable housing bill that addresses so many complicated
issues in a responsible way and brings together so many different
stakeholders in support of this bill.
There is a very long list of organizations that support this bill
that includes tenant advocacy groups, public housing authority industry
groups, real estate industry groups, rural housing groups, as well as
community development organizations.
To name just a few, the supporters of this bill include the National
Low Income Housing Coalition, the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, the National Housing Trust, CSH, the Council of Large
Public Housing Authorities, the National Association of Realtors, the
Local Initiatives Support Corporation, Enterprise Community Partners,
and many more.
The enthusiastic support from such a broad and diverse coalition of
organizations is indicative of the hard-fought compromises that are
included in this bill. In fact, I do not know of a single organization
that is opposing this bill.
H.R. 3700 is made up of commonsense reforms that will make much-
needed improvements to our housing programs to make them work better
for both public housing agencies and the tenants they serve.
If this bill is enacted into law, it will make the first major
reforms to HUD's primary rental assistance programs since 1998, and
that is an achievement that we can all be proud of.
So there is a lot at stake here. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes''
on this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, can you tell me how much time I have
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Marchant). The gentleman from Missouri has 7\1/
2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chair, I apologize to the ranking member. I do
have one additional speaker. If the gentlewoman is out of time, I am
more than willing to allow the gentlewoman to have some of our time to
be able to rebut in case there is something that is an issue.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 5\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta).
Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to speak in support of H.R.
3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, sponsored by
Representatives Luetkemeyer and Cleaver.
This extremely bipartisan bill makes a number of critical reforms to
our Federal housing programs. These programs will streamline processes
and create much-needed efficiencies for government and, most
importantly, our consumers.
I am happy to see the bill moving so quickly because it will solve a
number of problems low-income Americans continue to face in acquiring
safe and affordable housing.
This legislation would make commonsense changes to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development in order to lighten administrative
burdens for housing agencies and owners to assist low-income
individuals and families to live in greater dignity.
It is very encouraging to see the bipartisan work that has been done
on this bill. I commend both Chairman Luetkemeyer and Ranking Member
Cleaver of the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee. I thank Chairman
Luetkemeyer for allowing me to speak on this bill.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3700.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
I will just take these last few minutes that I have to say to those
people who live in public housing that this is an important support
effort of government to provide public housing for those who cannot
afford market-rate housing.
I have represented over the years many public housing projects in
California. While I do not represent them
[[Page H458]]
all anymore, I still pay attention to public housing because I
understand and know how very important it is to the lives of families
and to the children who depend on having safe housing and affordable
housing for them.
I would simply like to say that oftentimes people who live in public
housing have been demonized. There are folks who think, oh, they could
do better if they wanted to. There are people who say that they don't
want to remove themselves from public housing.
I would like to have people know that many of the folks that I have
known who live in public housing work every day for minimum wages. Many
of them are trying very hard to be independent. Many of them would like
to have job training. Many of them would like to have more support for
childcare efforts. Many of them are working to get their GEDs. Many of
them have returned to school.
For the people who live in public housing, they don't need to feel
that somehow they are getting something they don't deserve.
I am proud of this government, and I am proud of this country that
will provide a safety net for the least of these and safe public
housing to those who cannot afford market-rate housing.
I want our Congress to continue to see how we can do a better job
even of providing safe and secure housing for those who cannot afford
it.
I want us to be able to provide additional support to those who live
in public housing, for those who are saying to us: Help me with job
training. Help me to ensure that my children can get the kind of
support living in public housing that will give them access to a good
education. Help us to have better health care so we can be better able
to go out and take jobs to support our families. Help us to aspire to
move upward and out, even. Help us to understand what is available to
us out there. When we seek out help for our problems, don't look at us
as if we are people who are not investing in ourselves, who are not
relying on our own abilities. Simply see us as Americans who would like
to do better. See us as Americans who unfortunately find ourselves in
situations where we can't do better for now, but we are looking for the
opportunity to do better and to have more and to enjoy everything that
this country has to offer.
So as we support this legislation today--and I support it--I am
optimistic about the fact that this is going to make a lot of lives
better, but I am also optimistic that this is really a beginning for
how we can begin to not only give support, but involve tenants in how
they can help to make decisions about the units that they are living in
and how they can serve on the boards that oversee them, how they can be
a part of government, helping us to understand how we can do a better
job with the authority that they have given us.
So I am very proud. I am very pleased. I thank Mr. Cleaver and Mr.
Luetkemeyer. I thank Mr. Cleaver for telling his story about public
housing. I want him to know that there are any number of Members in the
Congress of the United States who have lived in public housing or their
families, such as my family has lived in public housing.
I want him to know I have watched public housing that has been very
helpful. I have watched public housing that has provided safe, decent,
and secure opportunities for the people who live there. But I have also
watched public housing when it didn't work.
The Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis, Missouri, was an example of what didn't
work. I was in that city when it was torn down. The space that it
occupied is still vacant in that city. It should be a space where we
had additional public housing that would support the families who so
desperately need it.
So I don't take this bill lightly. I don't think about this as just
another piece of legislation that we happen to get passed here in
Congress, even with bipartisan support.
I think of this as an important step and a statement, a statement
that says both sides of the aisle understand housing, both sides of the
aisle would like to continue to do the best job that they can do to
provide safe and secure housing, and that we are not going to stand by
and watch homelessness continue to grow.
It was mentioned several times throughout this debate--maybe here
today and when we were in committee--that, in Los Angeles County,
homelessness has increased by 20 percent. People are sleeping on the
sidewalks all the way up to city hall. We cannot abide that. We cannot
stand by and watch that happen.
While I am pointing to Los Angeles County, there are many areas all
across this Nation where homelessness is shameful and unconscionable. I
am very pleased and proud that we are sending a signal here today that
we won't stand for it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to close with a few remarks here. It won't take very long.
I think you can see that this is a very important and, also, very
emotional issue for many, many people and it is extremely important for
those folks who are in and around and utilize public housing.
In putting this bill together, we tried to listen to all the
different parties as well as both sides of the aisle and address all
the concerns that everybody had. We have a few amendments to go here,
but I think we are going to work through those pretty quickly.
I think you can see from the support that we have seen on both sides
of the aisle today, from the discussions we have had that we have come
to an agreement on what is in the provisions of this bill.
You have here a whole list of 30 different letters of support from
different groups from around the country that represent all the
different groups, from leased housing to housing authorities, to
investment individuals, to Realtors, to you name it.
We have yet to receive a single letter against this proposal. So I
think you can see that we managed to find the right balance with the
bill, to find the middle ground where we can all agree that we can
accept the provisions that we have.
In the bill, we have done things with flexibility that people within
the different housing authorities have asked for who manage these
things to be able to do things more efficiently, more effectively.
We got rid of duplicative rules. We built the condos up so they could
now be part of the program. We have cut the costs not by cutting
programs, but by cutting out the waste and the duplicative rules and
have given flexibility to those groups that need it to be able to do
the job.
Is this an end-all, be-all? No. We have a lot more to do. We
recognize that. This is a good first step. We believe that we need to
be empowering people and enabling people to be able to do better and
help themselves. We believe that, when it comes to housing, it is not
just a place to live, but people need to have a place to have a life.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chair, I have a question for the bill's managers
regarding the project-based voucher provisions. The bill generally
limits a public housing agency's use of voucher funds for project-based
vouchers to 20 percent of the authorized voucher units for the agency,
but contains an exception among others providing that units of project-
based assistance that are attached to units previously receiving
another type of long-term subsidy provided by HUD will not count
against this limitation.
We have an exciting initiative in Boston that would replace our 75-
year-old Charlestown public housing development with a substantially
larger, new construction mixed-income community on the same site. The
public housing units are to be fully replaced with project-based
vouchers. This will require a large commitment of project-based
vouchers by the Boston Housing Authority, which would reduce the BHA's
flexibility to commit project-based vouchers elsewhere as needed if the
Charlestown commitment is not covered by the exception. Is it the
intention of the bill's managers that the commitment of project-based
vouchers to replace the former public housing units in a newly
constructed development such as this would fall within the bill's
exception for units attached to units previously receiving another type
of long-term HUD subsidy?
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chair, Congressman Capuano has asked whether it
is the intention of the bill's managers that the commitment of project-
based vouchers to replace the former public housing units in a newly
constructed development such as one he described in Boston would fall
within the bill's exception for units attached to units previously
[[Page H459]]
receiving another type of long-term HUD subsidy. The answer is yes. It
is the managers' intention that the replacement units for the current
public housing units would be covered by the bill's exception for units
previously receiving long-term HUD assistance, and thus that commitment
of project-based vouchers to such units would not count against the 20
percent limitation.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on Financial Services, printed in the bill, it shall be
in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment
under the 5-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute
consisting of the text of Rules Committee print 114-42. That amendment
in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
H.R. 3700
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Housing
Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.
TITLE I--SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND PUBLIC HOUSING
Sec. 101. Inspection of dwelling units.
Sec. 102. Income reviews.
Sec. 103. Limitation on public housing tenancy for over-income
families.
Sec. 104. Limitation on eligibility for assistance based on assets.
Sec. 105. Units owned by public housing agencies.
Sec. 106. PHA project-based assistance.
Sec. 107. Establishment of fair market rent.
Sec. 108. Collection of utility data.
Sec. 109. Public housing Capital and Operating Funds.
Sec. 110. Family unification program for children aging out of foster
care.
TITLE II--RURAL HOUSING
Sec. 201. Delegation of guaranteed rural housing loan approval.
TITLE III--FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR CONDOMINIUMS
Sec. 301. Modification of FHA requirements for mortgage insurance for
condominiums.
TITLE IV--HOUSING REFORMS FOR THE HOMELESS AND FOR VETERANS
Sec. 401. Definition of geographic area for Continuum of Care Program.
Sec. 402. Inclusion of public housing agencies and local redevelopment
authorities in emergency solutions grants.
Sec. 403. Special assistant for Veterans Affairs in the Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
Sec. 404. Annual supplemental report on veterans homelessness.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS
Sec. 501. Inclusion of Disaster Housing Assistance Program in certain
fraud and abuse prevention measures.
Sec. 502. Energy efficiency requirements under Self-Help Homeownership
Opportunity program.
Sec. 503. Data exchange standardization for improved interoperability.
TITLE I--SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND PUBLIC HOUSING
SEC. 101. 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, as such conditions are established by
the Secretary. A public housing agency 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, withhold any assistance payments for the
unit if any deficiency resulting in noncompliance with the
housing quality standards has not been corrected by such
time. The public housing agency shall recommence assistance
payments when such deficiency has been corrected, and may use
any payments withheld to make assistance payments relating to
the period during which payments were withheld.
``(iii) Use of alternative inspection method for interim
period.--In the case of any property that within the previous
24 months has met the requirements of an inspection that
qualifies as an alternative inspection method pursuant to
subparagraph (E), 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). This
clause may not be construed to exempt any dwelling unit from
compliance with the requirements of subparagraph (D).'';
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (G) as subparagraph (H);
and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (F) the following new
subparagraph:
``(G) 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
subparagraphs (D) and (F), 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--
``(aa) in the case of any such failure that is a result of
life-threatening conditions, within 24 hours after such
notice has been provided; and
``(bb) in the case of any such failure that is a result of
non-life-threatening conditions, within 30 days after such
notice has been provided or such other reasonable longer
period as the public housing agency may establish.
``(ii) Withholding of assistance amounts during
correction.--The public housing agency may withhold
assistance amounts under this subsection with respect to a
dwelling unit for which a notice pursuant to clause (i)(II),
of failure to comply with housing quality standards under
subparagraph (B) as determined pursuant to an inspection
conducted under subparagraph (D) or (F), has been provided.
If the unit is brought into compliance with such housing
quality standards during the periods referred to in clause
(i)(III), the public housing agency shall recommence
assistance payments and may use any amounts withheld during
the correction period to make assistance payments relating to
the period during which payments were withheld.
``(iii) Abatement of assistance amounts.--The public
housing agency shall abate all of the assistance amounts
under this subsection with respect to a dwelling unit that is
determined, pursuant to clause (i) of this subparagraph, to
be in noncompliance with housing quality standards under
subparagraph (B). 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.
``(iv) Notification.--If a public housing agency providing
assistance under this subsection abates rental assistance
payments pursuant to clause (iii) with respect to a dwelling
unit, the agency shall, upon commencement of such abatement--
``(I) notify the tenant and the owner of the dwelling unit
that--
``(aa) such abatement has commenced; and
``(bb) if the dwelling unit is not brought into compliance
with housing quality standards within 60 days after the
effective date of the determination of noncompliance under
clause (i) or such reasonable longer period as the agency may
establish, the tenant will have to move; and
``(II) issue the tenant the necessary forms to allow the
tenant to move to another dwelling unit and transfer the
rental assistance to that unit.
``(v) Protection of tenants.--An owner of a dwelling unit
may not terminate the tenancy of any tenant because of the
withholding or abatement of assistance pursuant to this
subparagraph. During the period that assistance is abated
pursuant to this subparagraph, the tenant may terminate the
tenancy by notifying the owner.
``(vi) Termination of lease or assistance payments
contract.--If assistance amounts under this section for a
dwelling unit are abated pursuant to clause (iii) and the
owner does not correct the noncompliance within 60 days after
the effective date of the determination of noncompliance
under clause (i), or such other reasonable longer period as
the public housing agency may establish, the agency shall
terminate the housing assistance payments contract for the
dwelling unit.
``(vii) Relocation.--
``(I) Lease of new unit.--The agency shall provide the
family residing in such a dwelling unit a period of 90 days
or such longer period as the public housing agency determines
is reasonably necessary to lease a new unit, beginning upon
termination of the contract, to lease a new residence with
tenant-based rental assistance under this section.
``(II) Availability of public housing units.--If the family
is unable to lease such a new residence during such period,
the public housing agency shall, at the option of the family,
provide such family a preference for occupancy in a dwelling
unit of public housing that is owned or operated by the
agency that first becomes available for occupancy after the
expiration of such period.
[[Page H460]]
``(III) Assistance in finding unit.--The public housing
agency may provide assistance to the family in finding a new
residence, including use of up to two months of any
assistance amounts withheld or abated pursuant to clause (ii)
or (iii), respectively, for costs directly associated with
relocation of the family to a new residence, which shall
include security deposits as necessary and may include
reimbursements for reasonable moving expenses incurred by the
household, as established by the Secretary. The agency may
require that a family receiving assistance for a security
deposit shall remit, to the extent of such assistance, the
amount of any security deposit refunds made by the owner of
the dwelling unit for which the lease was terminated.
``(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 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.
``(ix) 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) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall issue notice or regulations to implement
subsection (a) of this section and such subsection shall take
effect upon such issuance.
SEC. 102. INCOME REVIEWS.
(a) Income Reviews for Public Housing and Section 8
Programs.--Section 3 of the United States Housing Act of 1937
(42 U.S.C. 1437a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the second sentence of paragraph (1), by striking
``at least annually'' and inserting ``pursuant to paragraph
(6)''; 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 paragraph
(1) with respect to fixed-income families;
``(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 10 percent (or such lower amount as the Secretary may, by
notice, establish, or permit the public housing agency or
owner to 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 10 percent or more in
annual adjusted income, or such other amount as the Secretary
may by notice establish, 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) 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 (42 U.S.C. 3544).
``(7) Calculation of income.--
``(A) Use of current year income.--In determining family
income for initial occupancy or provision of housing
assistance pursuant to clause (i) of paragraph (6)(A) or
pursuant to reviews pursuant to clause (iii) or (iv) of such
paragraph, a public housing agency or owner shall use the
income of the family as estimated by the agency or owner for
the upcoming year.
``(B) Use of prior year income.--In determining family
income for annual reviews pursuant to paragraph (6)(A)(ii), a
public housing agency or owner shall, except as otherwise
provided in this paragraph and paragraph (1), 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).
``(C) Other income.--In determining the income for any
family based on the prior year's income, with respect to
prior year calculations 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.
``(D) 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 prior
to the application of any deductions 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 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
supplemental nutrition assistance program (as such term is
defined in section 3 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2012))). 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 means-tested Federal
programs that the Secretary determines to have comparable
reliability. Exchanges of such information shall be subject
to the same limitations and tenant protections provided under
section 904 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance
Act Amendments of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 3544) with respect to
information obtained under the requirements of section 303(i)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 503(i)).
``(E) 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 minimis
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) Certification Regarding Hardship Exception to Minimum
Monthly Rent.--Not later than the expiration of the 6-month
period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall submit
to the Congress a certification that the hardship and tenant
protection provisions in clause (i) of section 3(a)(3)(B) of
the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437a(a)(3)(B)(i)) are being enforced at such time and that
the Secretary will continue to provide due consideration to
the hardship circumstances of persons assisted under relevant
programs of this Act.
(c) Income; Adjusted Income.--Section 3(b) of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)) is amended by
striking paragraphs (4) and (5) and inserting the following
new paragraphs:
``(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, except to the extent
that net family assets exceed $50,000, except that such
amount (as it may have been previously adjusted) shall be
adjusted for inflation annually by the Secretary in
accordance with an inflationary index selected by the
Secretary;
``(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));
``(iii) deferred disability benefits from the Department of
Veterans Affairs that are received in a lump sum amount or in
prospective monthly amounts;
``(iv) any expenses related to aid and attendance under
section 1521 of title 38, United States Code, to veterans who
are in need of regular aid and attendance; and
``(v) exclusions from income as established by the
Secretary by regulation or notice, or any amount required by
Federal law to be excluded from consideration as income.
``(C) Earned income of students.--Such term does not
include--
``(i) earned income, up to an amount as the Secretary may
by regulation establish, of any dependent earned during any
period that such dependent is attending school or vocational
training on a full-time basis; or
``(ii) any grant-in-aid or scholarship amounts related to
such attendance used--
``(I) for the cost of tuition or books; or
``(II) in such amounts as the Secretary may allow, for the
cost of room and board.
``(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) Recordkeeping.--The Secretary may not require a
public housing agency or owner to maintain records of any
amounts excluded from income pursuant to this subparagraph.
``(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.--$525 in the case of
any family that is an elderly family or a disabled family.
``(B) Dependents.--In the case of any family, $525 for each
member who--
``(i) is less than 18 years of age or attending school or
vocational training on a full-time basis; or
``(ii) is a person who is 18 years of age or older, resides
in the household, and is certified as disabled and unable to
work by the public housing agency of jurisdiction.
``(C) Child care.--The amount, if any, that exceeds 5
percent of annual family income that is used to pay for
unreimbursed child care expenses, which shall include child
care for preschool-age children, for before- and after-care
for children in school, and for other child care necessary to
enable a member of the family to be employed or further his
or her education.
``(D) 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
[[Page H461]]
``(ii) any unreimbursed reasonable attendant care and
auxiliary apparatus expenses for each handicapped member of
the family, if determined necessary by the public housing
agency or owner to enable any member of such family to be
employed.
The Secretary shall, by regulation, provide hardship
exemptions to the requirements of this subparagraph and
subparagraph (C) for impacted families who demonstrate an
inability to pay calculated rents because of financial
hardship. Such regulations shall include a requirement to
notify tenants regarding any changes to the determination of
adjusted income pursuant to such subparagraphs based on the
determination of the family's claim of financial hardship
exemptions required by the preceding sentence. Such
regulations shall be promulgated in consultation with tenant
organizations, industry participants, and the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, with an adequate comment period
provided for interested parties.
``(E) 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 materially increase
Federal expenditures.
The Secretary shall annually calculate the amounts of the
deductions under subparagraphs (A) and (B), as such amounts
may have been previously calculated, by applying an
inflationary factor as the Secretary shall, by regulation,
establish, except that the actual deduction determined for
each year shall be established by rounding such amount to the
next lowest multiple of $25.''.
(d) Housing Choice Voucher Program.--Section 8(o) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(D), 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 use a payment standard that is greater than 120 percent
of the fair market rent as a reasonable accommodation for a
person with a disability, but only with the approval of the
Secretary. In connection with the use of any increased
payment standard established or approved pursuant to either
of the preceding two sentences as a reasonable accommodation
for a person with a disability, the Secretary may not
establish additional requirements regarding the amount of
adjusted income paid by such person for rent''; and
(2) in paragraph (5)--
(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``Annual review''
and inserting ``Reviews'';
(B) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) by striking ``the provisions of'' and inserting
``paragraphs (1), (6), and (7) of section 3(a) and to''; and
(ii) by striking ``and shall be conducted'' and all that
follows through the end of the subparagraph and inserting a
period; and
(C) in subparagraph (B), by striking the second sentence.
(e) 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''.
(f) 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.
(g) Impact on Public Housing Revenues.--
(1) Adjustments to operating formula.--If the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development determines that the application
of subsections (a) through (e) of this section results in a
material and disproportionate reduction in the rental income
of certain public housing agencies during the first year in
which such subsections are implemented, the Secretary may
make appropriate adjustments in the formula income for such
year of those agencies experiencing such a reduction.
(2) HUD reports on revenue and cost impact.--In each of the
first two years after the first year in which subsections (a)
through (e) are implemented, the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development shall submit a report to Congress
identifying and calculating the impact of changes made by
such subsections and section 104 of this Act on the revenues
and costs of operating public housing units, the voucher
program for rental assistance under section 8 of the United
States Housing Act of 1937, and the program under such
section 8 for project-based rental assistance. If such report
identifies a material reduction in the net income of public
housing agencies nationwide or a material increase in the
costs of funding the voucher program or the project-based
assistance program, the Secretary shall include in such
report recommendations for legislative changes to reduce or
eliminate such a reduction.
(h) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall issue notice or regulations to implement
this section and this section shall take effect after such
issuance, except that this section may only take effect upon
the commencement of a calendar year.
SEC. 103. LIMITATION ON PUBLIC HOUSING TENANCY FOR OVER-
INCOME FAMILIES.
Subsection (a) of section 16 of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437n(a)) is amended by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Limitations on tenancy for over-income families.--
``(A) Limitations.--Except as provided in subparagraph (D),
in the case of any family residing in a dwelling unit of
public housing whose income for the most recent two
consecutive years, as determined pursuant to income reviews
conducted pursuant to section 3(a)(6), has exceeded the
applicable income limitation under subparagraph (C), the
public housing agency shall--
``(i) notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
charge such family as monthly rent for the unit occupied by
such family an amount equal to the greater of--
``(I) the applicable fair market rental established under
section 8(c) for a dwelling unit in the same market area of
the same size; or
``(II) the amount of the monthly subsidy provided under
this Act for the dwelling unit, which shall include any
amounts from the Operating Fund and Capital Fund under
section 9 used for the unit, as determined by the agency in
accordance with regulations that the Secretary shall issue to
carry out this subclause; or
``(ii) terminate the tenancy of such family in public
housing not later than 6 months after the income
determination described in subparagraph (A).
``(B) Notice.--In the case of any family residing in a
dwelling unit of public housing whose income for a year has
exceeded the applicable income limitation under subparagraph
(C), upon the conclusion of such year the public housing
agency shall provide written notice to such family of the
requirements under subparagraph (A).
``(C) Income limitation.--The income limitation under this
subparagraph shall be 120 percent of the median income for
the area, as determined by the Secretary with adjustments for
smaller and larger families, except that the Secretary may
establish income limitations higher or lower than 120 percent
of such median income on the basis of the Secretary's
findings that such variations are necessary because of
prevailing levels of construction costs, or unusually high or
low family incomes, vacancy rates, or rental costs.
``(D) Exception.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a
family occupying a dwelling unit in public housing pursuant
to paragraph (5) of section 3(a) (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)(5)).
``(E) Reports on over-income families and waiting lists.--
The Secretary shall require that each public housing agency
shall--
``(i) submit a report annually, in a format required by the
Secretary, that specifies--
``(I) the number of families residing, as of the end of the
year for which the report is submitted, in public housing
administered by the agency who had incomes exceeding the
applicable income limitation under subparagraph (C); and
``(II) the number of families, as of the end of such year,
on the waiting lists for admission to public housing projects
of the agency; and
``(ii) make the information reported pursuant to clause (i)
publicly available.''.
SEC. 104. LIMITATION ON ELIGIBILITY FOR ASSISTANCE BASED ON
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, a legal
right to reside in, and the effective legal authority to
sell, real property that is suitable for occupancy by the
family 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 subsection (y) or (o)(12) of section 8 of
this Act;
``(ii) any person that is a victim of domestic violence; or
``(iii) any family that is offering such property for sale.
``(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 in property for which the family is
receiving assistance under subsection (y) or (o)(12) of
section 8, 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 Secretary may
establish or the public housing agency may determine;
``(ii) the value of any retirement account;
``(iii) real property for which the family does not have
the effective legal authority necessary to sell such
property;
``(iv) 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;
``(v) 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; and
``(vi) such other exclusions as the Secretary may
establish.
``(C) Trust funds.--In cases in which 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
[[Page H462]]
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.
``(3) Self-certification.--
``(A) Net family assets.--A public housing agency or owner
may determine the net assets of a family, for purposes of
this section, based on a certification by the family that the
net assets of such family do not exceed $50,000, as such
amount is adjusted annually by applying an inflationary
factor as the Secretary considers appropriate.
``(B) No current real property ownership.--A public housing
agency or owner may determine compliance with paragraph
(1)(B) based on a certification by the family that such
family does not have any current ownership interest in any
real property at the time the agency or owner reviews the
family's income.
``(C) Standardized forms.--The Secretary may develop
standardized forms for the certifications referred to in
subparagraphs (A) and (B).
``(4) 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).
``(5) Enforcement.--When recertifying the income of a
family residing in a dwelling unit assisted under this Act, a
public housing agency or owner may choose not to enforce the
limitation under paragraph (1) or may establish exceptions to
such limitation based on eligibility criteria, but only
pursuant to a policy that is set forth in the public housing
agency plan under section 5A for the agency or under a policy
adopted by the owner. Eligibility criteria for establishing
exceptions may provide for separate treatment based on family
type and may be based on different factors, such as age,
disability, income, the ability of the family to find
suitable alternative housing, and whether supportive services
are being provided.
``(6) 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.''.
SEC. 105. UNITS OWNED BY PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCIES.
Paragraph (11) of section 8(o) of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(11)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(11) Leasing of units owned by pha.--If''
and inserting the following:
``(11) Leasing of units owned by pha.--
``(A) Inspections and rent determinations.--If''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(B) Units owned by pha.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `owned by a public housing agency' means, with
respect to a dwelling unit, that the dwelling unit is in a
project that is owned by such agency, by an entity wholly
controlled by such agency, or by a limited liability company
or limited partnership in which such agency (or an entity
wholly controlled by such agency) holds a controlling
interest in the managing member or general partner. A
dwelling unit shall not be deemed to be owned by a public
housing agency for purposes of this subsection because the
agency holds a fee interest as ground lessor in the property
on which the unit is situated, holds a security interest
under a mortgage or deed of trust on the unit, or holds a
non-controlling interest in an entity which owns the unit or
in the managing member or general partner of an entity which
owns the unit.''.
SEC. 106. PHA PROJECT-BASED ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (13) of section 8(o) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``structure'' each place such term appears
and inserting ``project'';
(2) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(B) Percentage limitation.--
``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), a public housing
agency may use for project-based assistance under this
paragraph not more than 20 percent of the authorized units
for the agency.
``(ii) Exception.--A public housing agency may use up to an
additional 10 percent of the authorized units for the agency
for project-based assistance under this paragraph, to provide
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), that house
families with veterans, that provide supportive housing to
persons with disabilities or elderly persons, or that are
located in areas where vouchers under this subsection are
difficult to use, as specified in subparagraph (D)(ii)(II).
Any units of project-based assistance that are attached to
units previously subject to federally required rent
restrictions or receiving another type of long-term housing
subsidy provided by the Secretary shall not count toward the
percentage limitation under clause (i) of this subparagraph.
The Secretary may, by regulation, establish additional
categories for the exception under this clause.'';
(3) 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 families.--The limitation under clause (i)
shall not apply to dwelling units assisted under a contract
that are exclusively made available to elderly families or to
households eligible for supportive services that are made
available to the assisted residents of the project, according
to standards for such services the Secretary may establish.
``(II) Certain areas.--With respect to areas in which
tenant-based vouchers for assistance under this subsection
are difficult to use, as determined by the Secretary, and
with respect to census tracts with a poverty rate of 20
percent or less, clause (i) shall be applied by substituting
`40 percent' for `25 percent', and the Secretary may, by
regulation, establish additional conditions.
``(III) Certain contracts.--The limitation under clause (i)
shall not apply with respect to contracts or renewal of
contracts under which a greater percentage of the dwelling
units in a project were assisted under a housing assistance
payment contract for project-based assistance pursuant to
this paragraph on the date of the enactment of the Housing
Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015.
``(IV) Certain properties.--Any units of project-based
assistance under this paragraph that are attached to units
previously subject to federally required rent restrictions or
receiving other project-based assistance provided by the
Secretary shall not count toward the percentage limitation
imposed by this subparagraph (D).
``(iii) Additional monitoring and oversight requirements.--
The Secretary may establish additional requirements for
monitoring and oversight of projects in which more than 40
percent of the dwelling units are assisted under a housing
assistance payment contract for project-based assistance
pursuant to this paragraph.'';
(4) by striking subparagraph (F) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(F) Contract term.--
``(i) Term.--A housing assistance payment contract pursuant
to this paragraph between a public housing agency and the
owner of a project may have a term of up to 20 years, subject
to--
``(I) the availability of sufficient appropriated funds for
the purpose of renewing expiring contracts for assistance
payments, as provided in appropriation Acts and in the
agency's annual contributions contract with the Secretary,
provided that in the event of insufficient appropriated
funds, payments due under contracts under this paragraph
shall take priority if other cost-saving measures that do not
require the termination of an existing contract are available
to the agency; and
``(II) compliance with the inspection requirements under
paragraph (8), except that the agency shall not be required
to make biennial inspections of each assisted unit in the
development.
``(ii) Addition of eligible units.--Subject to the
limitations of subparagraphs (B) and (D), the agency and the
owner may add eligible units within the same project to a
housing assistance payments contract at any time during the
term thereof without being subject to any additional
competitive selection procedures.
``(iii) Housing under construction or recently
constructed.--An agency may enter into a housing assistance
payments contract with an owner for any unit that does not
qualify as existing housing and is under construction or
recently has been constructed whether or not the agency has
executed an agreement to enter into a contract with the
owner, provided that the owner demonstrates compliance with
applicable requirements prior to execution of the housing
assistance payments contract. This clause shall not subject a
housing assistance payments contract for existing housing
under this paragraph to such requirements or otherwise limit
the extent to which a unit may be assisted as existing
housing.
``(iv) Additional conditions.--The contract may specify
additional conditions, including with respect to
continuation, termination, or expiration, and shall specify
that upon termination or expiration of the contract without
extension, each assisted family may elect to use its
assistance under this subsection to remain in the same
project if its unit complies with the inspection requirements
under paragraph (8), the rent for the unit is reasonable as
required by paragraph (10)(A), and the family pays its
required share of the rent and the amount, if any, by which
the unit rent (including the amount allowed for tenant-based
utilities) exceeds the applicable payment standard.'';
(5) in subparagraph (G), by striking ``15 years'' and
inserting ``20 years'';
(6) by striking subparagraph (I) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(I) Rent adjustments.--A housing assistance payments
contract pursuant to this paragraph entered into after the
date of the enactment of the Housing Opportunity Through
Modernization Act of 2015 shall provide for annual rent
adjustments upon the request of the owner, except that--
``(i) by agreement of the parties, a contract may allow a
public housing agency to adjust the rent for covered units
using an operating cost adjustment factor established by the
Secretary pursuant to section 524(c) of the Multifamily
Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (which
shall not result in a negative adjustment), in which case the
contract may require an additional adjustment, if requested,
up to the reasonable rent periodically during the
[[Page H463]]
term of the contract, and shall require such an adjustment,
if requested, upon extension pursuant to subparagraph (G);
``(ii) the adjusted rent shall not exceed the maximum rent
permitted under subparagraph (H);
``(iii) 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 units; and
``(iv) the provisions of subsection (c)(2)(C) shall not
apply.'';
(7) in subparagraph (J)--
(A) in the first sentence--
(i) by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''; and
(ii) by inserting before the period the following: ``or may
permit owners to select applicants from site-based waiting
lists as specified in this subparagraph'';
(B) by striking the third sentence and inserting the
following: ``The agency or owner may establish preferences or
criteria for selection for a unit assisted under this
paragraph that are consistent with the public housing agency
plan for the agency approved under section 5A and that give
preference to families who qualify for voluntary services,
including disability-specific services, offered in
conjunction with assisted units.''; and
(C) by striking the fifth and sixth sentences and inserting
the following: ``A public housing agency may establish and
utilize procedures for owner-maintained site-based waiting
lists, under which applicants may apply at, or otherwise
designate to the public housing agency, the project or
projects in which they seek to reside, except that all
eligible applicants on the waiting list of an agency for
assistance under this subsection shall be permitted to place
their names on such separate list, subject to policies and
procedures established by the Secretary. All such procedures
shall comply with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
the Fair Housing Act, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, and other applicable civil rights laws. The owner or
manager of a project 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 disclose to each applicant all other options in the
selection of a project in which to reside that are provided
by the public housing agency and are available to the
applicant.'';
(8) in subparagraph (M)(ii), by inserting before the period
at the end the following: ``relating to funding other than
housing assistance payments''; and
(9) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
``(N) Structure owned by agency.--A public housing agency
engaged in an initiative to improve, develop, or replace a
public housing property or site may attach assistance to an
existing, newly constructed, or rehabilitated structure in
which the agency has an ownership interest or which the
agency has control of without following a competitive
process, provided that the agency has notified the public of
its intent through its public housing agency plan and subject
to the limitations and requirements of this paragraph.
``(O) Special purpose vouchers.--A public housing agency
that administers vouchers authorized under subsection (o)(19)
or (x) of this section may provide such assistance in
accordance with the limitations and requirements of this
paragraph, without additional requirements for approval by
the Secretary.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall issue notice or regulations to implement
subsection (a) of this section and such subsection shall take
effect upon such issuance.
SEC. 107. 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 fourth, seventh, eighth, and ninth
sentences; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Fair market rentals for an area shall be published
not less than annually by the Secretary on the site of the
Department on the World Wide Web and in any other manner
specified by the Secretary. Notice that such fair market
rentals are being published shall be published in the Federal
Register, and such fair market rentals shall become effective
no earlier than 30 days after the date of such publication.
The Secretary shall establish a procedure for public housing
agencies and other interested parties to comment on such fair
market rentals and to request, within a time specified by the
Secretary, reevaluation of the fair market rentals in a
jurisdiction before such rentals become effective. The
Secretary shall cause to be published for comment in the
Federal Register notices of proposed material changes in the
methodology for estimating fair market rentals and notices
specifying the final decisions regarding such proposed
substantial methodological changes and responses to public
comments.''.
(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. The Secretary shall allow
public housing agencies to request exception payment
standards within fair market rental areas subject to criteria
and procedures established by the Secretary''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect upon the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 108. COLLECTION OF UTILITY DATA.
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:
``(20) Collection of utility data.--
``(A) Publication.--The Secretary shall, to the extent that
data can be collected cost effectively, regularly publish
such data regarding utility consumption and costs in local
areas as the Secretary determines will be useful for the
establishment of allowances for tenant-paid utilities for
families assisted under this subsection.
``(B) Use of data.--The Secretary shall provide such data
in a manner that--
``(i) avoids unnecessary administrative burdens for public
housing agencies and owners; and
``(ii) protects families in various unit sizes and building
types, and using various utilities, from high rent and
utility cost burdens relative to income.''.
SEC. 109. PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL AND OPERATING FUNDS.
(a) Capital Fund Replacement Reserves.--Section 9 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (j), by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(7) Treatment of replacement reserve.--The requirements
of this subsection shall not apply to funds held in
replacement reserves established pursuant to subsection
(n).''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(n) Establishment of Replacement Reserves.--
``(1) In general.--Public housing agencies shall be
permitted to establish a replacement reserve to fund any of
the capital activities listed in subsection (d)(1).
``(2) Source and amount of funds for replacement reserve.--
At any time, a public housing agency may deposit funds from
such agency's Capital Fund into a replacement reserve,
subject to the following:
``(A) At the discretion of the Secretary, public housing
agencies may transfer and hold in a replacement reserve funds
originating from additional sources.
``(B) No minimum transfer of funds to a replacement reserve
shall be required.
``(C) At any time, a public housing agency may not hold in
a replacement reserve more than the amount the public housing
authority has determined necessary to satisfy the anticipated
capital needs of properties in its portfolio assisted under
this section, as outlined in its Capital Fund 5-Year Action
Plan, or a comparable plan, as determined by the Secretary.
``(D) The Secretary may establish, by regulation, a maximum
replacement reserve level or levels that are below amounts
determined under subparagraph (C), which may be based upon
the size of the portfolio assisted under this section or
other factors.
``(3) Transfer of operating funds.--In first establishing a
replacement reserve, the Secretary may allow public housing
agencies to transfer more than 20 percent of its operating
funds into its replacement reserve.
``(4) Expenditure.--Funds in a replacement reserve may be
used for purposes authorized by subsection (d)(1) and
contained in its Capital Fund 5-Year Action Plan.
``(5) Management and report.--The Secretary shall establish
appropriate accounting and reporting requirements to ensure
that public housing agencies are spending funds on eligible
projects and that funds in the replacement reserve are
connected to capital needs.''.
(b) Flexibility of Operating Fund Amounts.--Paragraph (1)
of section 9(g) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437g(g)(1)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(1)'' and all that follows through ``--
Of'' and inserting the following:
``(1) Flexibility in use of funds.--
``(A) Flexibility for capital fund amounts.--Of''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(B) Flexibility for operating fund amounts.--Of any
amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2016 or any fiscal year
thereafter that are allocated for fiscal year 2016 or any
fiscal year thereafter from the Operating Fund for any public
housing agency, the agency may use not more than 20 percent
for activities that are eligible under subsection (d) for
assistance with amounts from the Capital Fund, but only if
the public housing plan under section 5A for the agency
provides for such use.''.
SEC. 110. FAMILY UNIFICATION PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN AGING OUT
OF FOSTER CARE.
Section 8(x) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437f(x)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)(B)--
(A) by striking ``18 months'' and inserting ``36 months'';
(B) by striking ``21 years of age'' and inserting ``24
years of age''; and
(C) by inserting after ``have left foster care'' the
following: ``, or will leave foster care within 90 days, in
accordance with a transition plan described in section
475(5)(H) of the Social Security Act, and is homeless or is
at risk of becoming homeless'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new
paragraph:
``(4) Coordination between public housing agencies and
public child welfare agencies.--The Secretary shall, not
later than the
[[Page H464]]
expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the
enactment of the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization
Act of 2015 and after consultation with other appropriate
Federal agencies, issue guidance to improve coordination
between public housing agencies and public child welfare
agencies in carrying out the program under this subsection,
which shall provide guidance on--
``(A) identifying eligible recipients for assistance under
this subsection;
``(B) coordinating with other local youth and family
providers in the community and participating in the Continuum
of Care program established under subtitle C of title IV of
the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11381
et seq.);
``(C) implementing housing strategies to assist eligible
families and youth;
``(D) aligning system goals to improve outcomes for
families and youth and reducing lapses in housing for
families and youth; and
``(E) identifying resources that are available to eligible
families and youth to provide supportive services available
through parts B and E of title IV of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 621 et seq.; 670 et seq.) or that the head of
household of a family or youth may be entitled to receive
under section 477 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
677).''.
TITLE II--RURAL HOUSING
SEC. 201. DELEGATION OF GUARANTEED RURAL HOUSING LOAN
APPROVAL.
Subsection (h) of section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949
(42 U.S.C. 1472(h)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(18) Delegation of approval.--The Secretary may delegate,
in part or in full, the Secretary's authority to approve and
execute binding Rural Housing Service loan guarantees
pursuant to this subsection to certain preferred lenders, in
accordance with standards established by the Secretary.''.
TITLE III--FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR CONDOMINIUMS
SEC. 301. MODIFICATION OF FHA REQUIREMENTS FOR MORTGAGE
INSURANCE FOR CONDOMINIUMS.
Section 203 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1709) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(y) Requirements for Mortgages for Condominiums.--
``(1) Project recertification requirements.--
Notwithstanding any other law, regulation, or guideline of
the Secretary, including chapter 2.4 of the Condominium
Project Approval and Processing Guide of the FHA, the
Secretary shall streamline the project certification
requirements that are applicable to the insurance under this
section for mortgages for condominium projects so that
recertifications are substantially less burdensome than
certifications. The Secretary shall consider lengthening the
time between certifications for approved properties, and
allowing updating of information rather than resubmission.
``(2) Commercial space requirements.--Notwithstanding any
other law, regulation, or guideline of the Secretary,
including chapter 2.1.3 of the Condominium Project Approval
and Processing Guide of the FHA, in providing for exceptions
to the requirement for the insurance of a mortgage on a
condominium property under this section regarding the
percentage of the floor space of a condominium property that
may be used for nonresidential or commercial purposes, the
Secretary shall provide that--
``(A) any request for such an exception and the
determination of the disposition of such request may be made,
at the option of the requester, under the direct endorsement
lender review and approval process or under the HUD review
and approval process through the applicable field office of
the Department; and
``(B) in determining whether to allow such an exception for
a condominium property, factors relating to the economy for
the locality in which such project is located or specific to
project, including the total number of family units in the
project, shall be considered.
Not later than the expiration of the 90-day period beginning
on the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary
shall issue regulations to implement this paragraph, which
shall include any standards, training requirements, and
remedies and penalties that the Secretary considers
appropriate.
``(3) Transfer fees.--Notwithstanding any other law,
regulation, or guideline of the Secretary, including chapter
1.8.8 of the Condominium Project Approval and Processing
Guide of the FHA and section 203.41 of the Secretary's
regulations (24 C.F.R. 203.41), existing standards of the
Federal Housing Finance Agency relating to encumbrances under
private transfer fee covenants shall apply to the insurance
of mortgages by the Secretary under this section to the same
extent and in the same manner that such standards apply to
the purchasing, investing in, and otherwise dealing in
mortgages by the Federal National Mortgage Association and
the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. If the provisions
of part 1228 of the Director of the Federal Housing Finance
Agency's regulations (12 C.F.R. part 1228) are amended or
otherwise changed after the date of the enactment of this
paragraph, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
shall adopt any such amendments or changes for purposes of
this paragraph, unless the Secretary causes to be published
in the Federal Register a notice explaining why the Secretary
will disregard such amendments or changes within 90 days
after the effective date of such amendments or changes.
``(4) Owner-occupancy requirement.--
``(A) Establishment of percentage requirement.--Not later
than the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the
date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall,
by rule, notice, or mortgagee letter, issue guidance
regarding the percentage of units that must be occupied by
the owners as a principal residence or a secondary residence
(as such terms are defined by the Secretary), or must have
been sold to owners who intend to meet such occupancy
requirements, including justifications for the percentage
requirements, in order for a condominium project to be
acceptable to the Secretary for insurance under this section
of a mortgage within such condominium property.
``(B) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to issue the
guidance required under subparagraph (A) before the
expiration of the 90-day period specified in such clause, the
following provisions shall apply:
``(i) 35 percent requirement.--In order for a condominium
project to be acceptable to the Secretary for insurance under
this section, at least 35 percent of all family units
(including units not covered by FHA-insured mortgages) must
be occupied by the owners as a principal residence or a
secondary residence (as such terms are defined by the
Secretary), or must have been sold to owners who intend to
meet such occupancy requirement.
``(ii) Other considerations.--The Secretary may increase
the percentage applicable pursuant to clause (i) to a
condominium project on a project-by-project or regional
basis, and in determining such percentage for a project shall
consider factors relating to the economy for the locality in
which such project is located or specific to project,
including the total number of family units in the project.''.
TITLE IV--HOUSING REFORMS FOR THE HOMELESS AND FOR VETERANS
SEC. 401. DEFINITION OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA FOR CONTINUUM OF CARE
PROGRAM.
(a) Definition.--Subtitle C of the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act is amended--
(1) by redesignating sections 432 and 433 (42 U.S.C. 11387,
11388) as sections 433 and 434, respectively; and
(2) by inserting after section 431 (42 U.S.C. 11386e) the
following new section:
``SEC. 432. GEOGRAPHIC AREAS.
``(a) Requirement to Define.--For purposes of this
subtitle, the term `geographic area' shall have such meaning
as the Secretary shall by notice provide.
``(b) Issuance of Notice.--Not later than the expiration of
the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of
the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015,
the Secretary shall issue a notice setting forth the
definition required by subsection (a).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
101(b) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 11301 note) is amended by striking the items relating
to sections 432 and 433 and inserting the following new
items:
``Sec. 432. Geographic areas.
``Sec. 433. Regulations.
``Sec. 434. Reports to Congress.''.
SEC. 402. INCLUSION OF PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCIES AND LOCAL
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES IN EMERGENCY
SOLUTIONS GRANTS.
Section 414(c) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance
Act (42 U.S.C. 11373(c)) is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``, Public
Housing Agencies, and Local Redevelopment Authorities'' after
``Organizations''; and
(2) in the first sentence, by inserting before the period
at the end the following: ``, to public housing agencies (as
defined under section 3(b)(6) of the United States Housing
Act of 1937), or to local redevelopment authorities (as
defined under State law)''.
SEC. 403. SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR VETERANS AFFAIRS IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
(a) Transfer of Position to Office of the Secretary.--
Section 4 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
Act (42 U.S.C. 3533) is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(h) Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs.--
``(1) Position.--There shall be in the Office of the
Secretary a Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs, who shall
report directly to the Secretary.
``(2) Appointment.--The Special Assistant for Veterans
Affairs shall be appointed based solely on merit and shall be
covered under the provisions of title 5, United States Code,
governing appointments in the competitive service.
``(3) Responsibilities.--The Special Assistant for Veterans
Affairs shall be responsible for--
``(A) ensuring veterans have fair access to housing and
homeless assistance under each program of the Department
providing either such assistance;
``(B) coordinating all programs and activities of the
Department relating to veterans;
``(C) serving as a liaison for the Department with the
Department of Veterans Affairs, including establishing and
maintaining relationships with the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs;
``(D) serving as a liaison for the Department, and
establishing and maintaining relationships with the United
States Interagency Council on Homelessness and officials of
State, local, regional, and nongovernmental organizations
concerned with veterans;
``(E) providing information and advice regarding--
``(i) sponsoring housing projects for veterans assisted
under programs administered by the Department; or
``(ii) assisting veterans in obtaining housing or homeless
assistance under programs administered by the Department;
``(F) coordinating with the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development and the Secretary
[[Page H465]]
of Veterans Affairs in carrying out section 404 of the
Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015; and
``(G) carrying out such other duties as may be assigned to
the Special Assistant by the Secretary or by law.''.
(b) Transfer of Position in Office of Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Special Needs.--On the date that the initial
Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs is appointed pursuant
to section 4(h)(2) of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development Act, as added by subsection (a) of this section,
the position of Special Assistant for Veterans Programs in
the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special
Needs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
shall be terminated.
SEC. 404. ANNUAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON VETERANS
HOMELESSNESS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in
coordination with the United States Interagency Council on
Homelessness, shall submit annually to the Committees of the
Congress specified in subsection (b), together with the
annual reports required by such Secretaries under section
203(c)(1) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 11313(c)(1)), a supplemental report that includes the
following information with respect to the preceding year:
(1) The same information, for such preceding year, that was
included with respect to 2010 in the report by the Secretary
of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs entitled ``Veterans Homelessness: A
Supplemental Report to the 2010 Annual Homeless Assessment
Report to Congress''.
(2) Information regarding the activities of the Department
of Housing and Urban Development relating to veterans during
such preceding year, as follows:
(A) The number of veterans provided assistance under the
housing choice voucher program for Veterans Affairs supported
housing under section 8(o)(19) of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(19)), the socioeconomic
characteristics of such homeless veterans, and the number,
types, and locations of entities contracted under such
section to administer the vouchers.
(B) A summary description of the special considerations
made for veterans under public housing agency plans submitted
pursuant to section 5A of the United States Housing Act of
1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437c-1) and under comprehensive housing
affordability strategies submitted pursuant to section 105 of
the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42
U.S.C. 12705).
(C) A description of the activities of the Special
Assistant for Veterans Affairs of the Department of Housing
and Urban Development.
(D) A description of the efforts of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development and the other members of the
United States Interagency Council on Homelessness to
coordinate the delivery of housing and services to veterans.
(E) The cost to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development of administering the programs and activities
relating to veterans.
(F) Any other information that the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
consider relevant in assessing the programs and activities of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development relating to
veterans.
(b) Committees.--The Committees of the Congress specified
in this subsection are as follows:
(1) The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of
the Senate.
(2) The Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate.
(3) The Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
(4) The Committee on Financial Services of the House of
Representatives.
(5) The Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the House of
Representatives.
(6) The Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 501. INCLUSION OF DISASTER HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN
CERTAIN FRAUD AND ABUSE PREVENTION MEASURES.
The Disaster Housing Assistance Program administered by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be
considered a ``program of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development'' under section 904 of the Stewart B. McKinney
Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 3544)
for the purpose of income verifications.
SEC. 502. ENERGY EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS UNDER SELF-HELP
HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM.
Section 11 of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act
of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 12805 note) is amended by inserting after
subsection (f) the following new subsection:
``(g) Energy Efficiency Requirements.--The Secretary may
not require any dwelling developed using amounts from a grant
made under this section to meet any energy efficiency
standards other than the standards applicable at such time
pursuant to section 109 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12709) to housing specified
in subsection (a) of such section.''.
SEC. 503. DATA EXCHANGE STANDARDIZATION FOR IMPROVED
INTEROPERABILITY.
(a) Data Exchange Standardization.--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. 37. DATA EXCHANGE STANDARDS FOR IMPROVED
INTEROPERABILITY.
``(a) Designation.--The Secretary shall, in consultation
with an interagency work group established by the Office of
Management and Budget, and considering State government
perspectives, designate data exchange standards to govern,
under this Act--
``(1) necessary categories of information that State
agencies operating related programs are required under
applicable law to electronically exchange with another State
agency; and
``(2) Federal reporting and data exchange required under
applicable law.
``(b) Requirements.--The data exchange standards required
by subsection (a) shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
``(1) incorporate a widely accepted, nonproprietary,
searchable, computer-readable format, such as the eXtensible
Markup Language;
``(2) contain interoperable standards developed and
maintained by intergovernmental partnerships, such as the
National Information Exchange Model;
``(3) incorporate interoperable standards developed and
maintained by Federal entities with authority over
contracting and financial assistance;
``(4) be consistent with and implement applicable
accounting principles;
``(5) be implemented in a manner that is cost- effective
and improves program efficiency and effectiveness; and
``(6) be capable of being continually upgraded as
necessary.
``(c) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section
requires a change to existing data exchange standards for
Federal reporting found to be effective and efficient.''.
(b) Applicability.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall issue a proposed rule to carry out the
amendments made by subsection (a).
(2) Requirements.--The rule shall--
(A) identify federally required data exchanges;
(B) include specification and timing of exchanges to be
standardized;
(C) address the factors used in determining whether and
when to standardize data exchanges;
(D) specify State implementation options; and
(E) describe future milestones.
The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a
substitute shall be in order except those printed in House Report 114-
411. Each such 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, shall not be
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division
of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Buchanan
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 16, line 2, after ``develop'' insert ``electronic''.
Page 16, line 4, strike ``income'' and insert ``benefit''.
Page 16, after line 14, insert the following:
``(E) Electronic income verification.--The Secretary shall
develop a mechanism for disclosing information to a public
housing agency for the purpose of verifying the employment
and income of individuals and families in accordance with
section 453(j)(7)(E) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
653(j)(7)(E)), and shall ensure public housing agencies have
access to information contained in the `Do Not Pay' system
established by section 5 of the Improper Payments Elimination
and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-248; 126
Stat. 2392).''.
Page 16, line 15, strike ``(E)'' and insert ``(F)''.
Page 34, line 14, strike the closing quotation marks and
the last period.
Page 34, after line 14, insert the following:
``(7) Verifying income.--
``(A) Beginning in fiscal year 2018, the Secretary shall
require public housing agencies to require each applicant
for, or recipient of, benefits under this Act to provide
authorization by the applicant or recipient (or by any other
person whose income or resources are material to the
determination of the eligibility of the applicant or
recipient for such benefits) for the public housing agency to
obtain (subject to the cost reimbursement requirements of
section 1115(a) of the Right to Financial Privacy Act) from
any financial institution (within the meaning of section
1101(1) of such Act) any financial record (within the meaning
of section 1101(2) of such Act) held by the institution with
respect to the applicant or recipient (or any such other
person) whenever the public housing agency determines the
record is needed in connection with a determination with
respect to such eligibility or the amount of such benefits.
``(B) Notwithstanding section 1104(a)(1) of the Right to
Financial Privacy Act, an authorization provided by an
applicant or recipient (or any other person whose income or
resources are material to the determination of the
eligibility of the applicant or recipient) pursuant to
subparagraph (A) of this paragraph shall remain effective
until the earliest of--
[[Page H466]]
``(i) the rendering of a final adverse decision on the
applicant's application for eligibility for benefits under
this Act;
``(ii) the cessation of the recipient's eligibility for
benefits under this Act; or
``(iii) the express revocation by the applicant or
recipient (or such other person referred to in subparagraph
(A)) of the authorization, in a written notification to the
Secretary.
``(C)(i) An authorization obtained by the public housing
agency pursuant to this paragraph shall be considered to meet
the requirements of the Right to Financial Privacy Act for
purposes of section 1103(a) of such Act, and need not be
furnished to the financial institution, notwithstanding
section 1104(a) of such Act.
``(ii) The certification requirements of section 1103(b) of
the Right to Financial Privacy Act shall not apply to
requests by the public housing agency pursuant to an
authorization provided under this clause.
``(iii) A request by the public housing agency pursuant to
an authorization provided under this clause is deemed to meet
the requirements of section 1104(a)(3) of the Right to
Financial Privacy Act and the flush language of section 1102
of such Act.
``(iv) The public housing agency shall inform any person
who provides authorization pursuant to this paragraph of the
duration and scope of the authorization.
``(D) If an applicant for, or recipient of, benefits under
this Act (or any such other person referred to in
subparagraph (A)) refuses to provide, or revokes, any
authorization made by the applicant or recipient for the
public housing agency to obtain from any financial
institution any financial record, the public housing agency
may, on that basis, determine that the applicant or recipient
is ineligible for benefits under this title.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Buchanan) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I would like to first thank the subcommittee chair of Financial
Services, Mr. Luetkemeyer, for his leadership on such important issues.
As chairman of the Human Resources Subcommittee of Ways and Means, I
have the distinct privilege of overseeing a number of means-tested
programs aimed at providing low-income individuals and families an
opportunity to move up the economic ladder.
There are a lot of lessons we have learned, and we should be using
them to better serve recipients and taxpayers.
In June of last year, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development's Office of Inspector General found that the Federal
Government paid public housing benefits to families with excessive
income and assets when those benefits should have gone to low-income
families in real need.
This amendment builds on reforms made by the underlying bill. This
amendment reduces that burden on families by using systems they are
most likely already interacting with for other means-tested programs.
It also improves accuracy for housing authorities and landlords,
providing them with more timely and reliable information.
{time} 1545
Ultimately, it ensures that those with assets well above the
eligibility limits will not be using benefits directed to those
Americans who need the most help.
I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment and support
the underlying bill.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in
opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition
to this amendment. I have concerns that there are a lot of unanswered
questions regarding the new income verification system that is being
proposed in this amendment, and I think it needs to be addressed.
First, it appears that there would be a cost associated with this
amendment. Housing authorities would have to spend some of their
operating fund dollars to comply with the new requirements in this
amendment, and that takes away from other important things that they
must prioritize.
It is important to note that the public housing operating fund and
administrative fees are severely underfunded, so public housing
authorities are already struggling to make ends meet. H.R. 3700 is
intended to ease administrative burdens, but this amendment seems to be
increasing burdens without any additional funding. In other words, it
is an unfunded mandate.
Secondly, it is unclear whether all housing authorities have the
electronic infrastructure in place to securely maintain and protect
residents' personal financial data, which could include bank account
information, in a manner that is inconsistent with what current
financial regulators have. If housing authorities need to upgrade their
systems, that would also cost money that is not provided for in this
amendment.
Third, it is not clear how this amendment would work for residents
who are unbanked. This amendment virtually ignores millions of
Americans that are unbanked.
Fourth, this amendment seems to be addressing a problem that doesn't
exist because I have not seen any evidence that residents are currently
not providing accurate information when applying for housing
assistance.
Lastly, H.R. 3700 already includes a provision to address over-income
households in public housing to help ensure that taxpayers are not
subsidizing these households. For every piece of legislation that we
pass, it should be carefully considered, which is why we should not
adopt this hasty amendment that has not been thoroughly studied by
congressional staff or our housing groups, the administration, and
carefully negotiated by both parties.
Mr. Chairman and Members, let me just say this: We have a good bill
here. We have gone a long way in dealing with whatever concerns either
side may have. We have a compromise piece of legislation. We have a
consensus piece of legislation. Let's not mess it up. We don't need
this amendment. I would ask for a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer).
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to speak in support
of the amendment.
I believe the amendment reduces the burden on families for using
solutions that already are likely to be in place with regards to
interacting through other means testing programs. I think it improves
the efficiency for public housing authorities and landlords, providing
more accurate and timely eligibility information. It minimizes the risk
of waste, fraud, and abuse of tax dollars and ensures limited resources
are better targeted to families in need by requiring public housing
agencies to access data used by other means tested programs or by
assets.
This amendment further strengthens the response to the 2015 inspector
general's audit, which revealed individuals with substantial assets
were receiving rental subsidies. This amendment builds on the progress
made by the Committee on Financial Services to better target housing
assistance to the needs of low-income individuals and families.
The current system in determining eligibility for rental subsidies is
burdensome to program recipients to report income that can vary as much
as every week and time consuming for public housing agencies and
landlords to collect and verify this information, unfair to taxpayers
who expect tax dollars to be targeted to families most in need.
I think you can see what I believe is an asset here from the
standpoint it is going to streamline the system. It is going to save
money. I think it makes it easier for the people to access, it is going
to make it easier for the individuals who are working with those folks
to be able to do a better job of getting and accumulating the
information as quickly as possible to better ferret out the ones who
need the help and ones who don't, and therefore do a good job of
managing our taxpayer dollars.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman and Members, I
basically made an appeal to my Republican colleagues to reject this
amendment. I basically talked about the fact that we
[[Page H467]]
have gone a long way toward reconciling our differences and that we
don't need to endanger the bill at all with an amendment like this.
I am not sure exactly what the gentleman is attempting to do. We
already have systems in existence by which those who wish to live in
public housing have to verify their income. I don't know what is being
attempted here. If the attempt is to try and go to financial
institutions and say to them, is it true that this person only has $5
in their bank account or what have you? I am not sure that the housing
authority would want to assume that additional responsibility and that
additional cost, so I have to continue to oppose this amendment.
Perhaps there is a better explanation than I have heard, but I have not
heard a good explanation about why we should adopt it.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chair, my understanding is PHAs asked for this, but
let me just say my amendment will reduce the burdens on families by
using solutions they are already interacting with through other means-
tested programs.
I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment and to
support the underlying bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the
gentleman talked about having talked with the public housing
authorities because we did, too, and they had no idea what your bill
is. They didn't know anything about it, they didn't understand why it
was being done, so we have a difference of opinion, I suppose, about
what the public housing authorities are saying.
I am saying that based on our inquiries, they did not support your
legislation because they didn't understand it. They didn't know it
exists. They didn't know what it was all about.
I would, again, ask for a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Buchanan).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Maxine Waters of California
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in House Report 114-411.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at
the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Strike line 17 on page 20 and all that follows through page
21, line 10, and insert the following:
``(B) Minors, students, and persons with disabilities.--
$480 for each member of the family residing in the household
(other than the head of the household or his or her spouse)
who is less than 18 years of age or is attending school or
vocational training on a full-time basis, or who is 18 years
of age or older and is a person with disabilities.
``(C) Child care.--Any reasonable child care expenses
necessary to enable a member of the family to be employed or
to further his or her education.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Maxine Waters) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would
remove the harmful provision in H.R. 3700 that would effectively raise
rent for thousands of families with children who are living in HUD-
assisted housing by limiting the amount they can deduct from their
income for childcare expenses. These are parents, particularly single
parents, who are already struggling to pay for the cost of child care
in order to work or to go to school.
I believe we should not be crippling their ability to juggle these
responsibilities. We should be supporting them. I believe that my
Republican colleagues share my concerns. We simply did not have the
data that we needed at the markup to truly understand how this
provision would affect these households.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, the Republicans have
indicated that they will support this amendment, which will remove this
harmful language and preserve the current law. This will ensure that
families with children will not be burdened with a rent increase as a
result of this bill.
I would like to thank my colleagues across the aisle for working with
me on this issue to find common ground.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the
time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, if nothing else, I would just like to
throw the ranking member a curve ball and actually accept one of her
amendments, just to show that minor miracles can still occur within the
Halls of Congress and on the floor of the United States House of
Representatives. Particularly after a very robust debate this morning
on the budget views and estimates, this might be a welcome departure.
Anyway, I am prepared to accept the ranking member's amendment.
Again, as she said, H.R. 3700 will allow only families to deduct
childcare expenses that exceed 5 percent. The ranking member's
amendment would revert back to current law. I think that in this
particular case there are some trade-offs to be made, and I am willing
to accept this particular trade-off and work with the ranking member to
forward the overall bill.
I urge all Members to accept it and vote for it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to
the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the ranking member of
the Committee on Small Business and a member of the Committee on
Financial Services.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the
gentlewoman from California's amendment.
Mr. Chairman, in New York City access to safe and affordable housing
is a critical issue. Just in Brooklyn, the city's housing shortage has
driven rents to over $2,500 a month for a 1-bedroom apartment. As a
result, a majority of households spend more than 30 percent of their
income on housing, making these individuals and families rent burdened.
For this reason, the New York City Housing Authority, the Nation's
largest public housing authority, provides a home to more than 4,000
New Yorkers. Unfortunately, tens of thousands of families remain on
waiting lists for units.
Congress cannot dictate market rents, but we can change Federal
programs empowering public housing authorities to address budgetary
shortfalls, adapt to changing conditions, and better assist current and
prospective tenants. That is why we provided the Secretary the ability
to adjust the over-income threshold for public housing tenancy, to
assist those tenants and families living in public housing where rents
and incomes are well above average, like New York.
While this bill makes several reforms like these to public housing
and Section 8 rental assistance, many of which are bipartisan and have
been discussed for years, I am concerned about the bill's impact on
families with children.
According to a recent study by the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, H.R. 3700's changes to the childcare deduction could cost
52,000 families with children to face a rent increase of $25 or more.
More than half the families affected are extremely low income and would
be hard pressed to afford such an increase. Mr. Chair, $25, $50, or $75
might not sound like a lot of money for us, but for low-income families
that have to struggle every day, this is a lot of money.
While updating and improving our Nation's rental assistance and
public housing programs are important goals--one I will continue
fighting for--they cannot be accomplished on the backs of the Nation's
children.
I, therefore, urge adoption of the gentlewoman's amendment, which
will
[[Page H468]]
strike the burdensome childcare deduction language.
I am very impressed with the chairman today. I hope that from now on
we can work in a bipartisan, humane way to address the issues of the
shortage of housing in our Nation. I congratulate the ranking member.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I would simply thank
all of the Members who have worked on this bill, and I thank all of the
support that I am getting for this amendment.
I want to thank the chairman. Despite the fact he had a rather
difficult time on committee today, he conducted himself rather well,
and I enjoyed working with him. I am very thankful that he is here to
give support on this amendment and the leadership he has given.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Maxine Waters).
The amendment was agreed to.
{time} 1600
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 3 printed in House Report 114-411.
Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 26, after line 3, insert the following new subsection:
(h) Study on Impact on Elderly and Disabled Families of
Decreased Deductions in Income.--
(1) Study.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
shall conduct a study to determine the impacts, on rents paid
by elderly and disabled individuals and families assisted
under the section 8 rental assistance and public housing
programs under the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437 et seq), of any decreases in the amounts of any
deductions from income (for purposes of section 3(b) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b))), as compared to such deductions
under such section 3(b) as in effect before the effectiveness
of this section, resulting from the amendments made by this
section.
(2) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to the Congress a
report setting forth the results of the study conducted
pursuant to paragraph (1) not later than the expiration of
the 12-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(3) Effective date.--Notwithstanding subsection (h) of this
section, this subsection shall take effect on the date of the
enactment of this Act.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentlewoman
from Alabama (Ms. Sewell) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Alabama.
Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my
amendment to H.R. 3700.
My amendment is commonsense and straightforward. It simply requires
the Secretary of HUD to conduct a study to determine the impact of the
decreased deductions on rent paid by elderly, disabled individuals, and
families assisted under the Section 8 rental assistance and housing
programs.
Being able to assess quality, safe, and affordable housing is
critically important to all Americans. The Section 8 voucher program
and other rental assistance programs play a vital role in providing
this type of housing for our Nation's most vulnerable citizens,
including seniors, disabled persons, and low-income families. In fact,
nearly all of the households currently under HUD rental assistance
include children, the elderly, or disabled individuals.
These rental assistance programs house over 10 million individuals in
roughly 4.6 million rental units across the country. It is clear that
these voucher and rental assistance programs continue to perform the
task for which they were created, which is providing shelter for
millions of Americans.
In spite of its enormous success, the Section 8 voucher program,
arguably, still suffers under the weight of too many inefficient and
duplicative requirements that threaten the overall effectiveness of the
program.
As drafted, H.R. 3700 takes major bipartisan steps toward helping
preserve our scarce housing resources while expanding housing
availability. However, as we attempt to reform these programs, we must
be mindful and ever diligent in ensuring that the proposed changes are
beneficial to their overall implementation and that there are no
negative, unintended consequences on the program's participants. To
that end, my amendment allows us to gauge the effectiveness of some of
the changes being made here today and their impact on the most
vulnerable segments of our population: the elderly and disabled.
We all know that no program is perfect. We must work together to
strike a delicate balance and ensure programs are both workable and do
what they intend to do without adverse impacts on those who are greatly
benefited by them. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the
time in opposition, although I am not opposed.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentlewoman from Alabama for her
amendment. It is a bipartisan amendment. She makes some good points. We
are happy to accept it.
As long as I am here, I would like to point out to the distinguished
ranking member that anytime my side wins all the votes, I am not having
a tough day. I am having a really good day.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. I thank the chairman for accepting my
amendment. I think that all Americans win when we act in a bipartisan
manner. I am really grateful for your assistance in making this
legislation stronger.
I want to thank the ranking member for her leadership on this bill,
as well as my colleague, Representative Cleaver, for his leadership on
this bill.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4
printed in House Report 114-411.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Hinojosa
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 55, after line 24, insert the following new section:
SEC. 202. GUARANTEED UNDERWRITING USER FEE.
Section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(i) Guaranteed Underwriting User Fee.--
``(1) Authority; maximum amount.--The Secretary may assess
and collect a fee for a lender to access the automated
underwriting systems of the Department in connection with
such lender's participation in the single family loan program
under this section and only in an amount necessary to cover
the costs of information technology enhancements,
improvements, maintenance, and development for automated
underwriting systems used in connection with the single
family loan program under this section, except that such fee
shall not exceed $50 per loan.
``(2) Crediting; availability.--Any amounts collected from
such fees shall be credited to the Rural Development Expense
Account as offsetting collections and shall remain available
until expended, in the amounts provided in appropriation
Acts, solely for expenses described in paragraph (1).''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, today I rise to offer an amendment to
H.R. 3700, entitled, the Housing Opportunities Through Modernization
Act of 2015.
I want to thank Mr. Luetkemeyer for his hard work on this bill and
for the bipartisan and collaborative way in which he went about this
important housing reform. I also wish to thank
[[Page H469]]
the ranking member, Ms. Maxine Waters of California, for her hard work
and for always looking out for those most needy in our society and for
working to improve this bill.
My amendment would authorize a nominal user fee on lenders accessing
the underwriting systems for the Section 502 Single Family Housing
Guaranteed Loan Program. This fee would not exceed $50 per loan and
would enable the United States Department of Agriculture to make much-
needed upgrades to their automated underwriting system in order to
match industry standards.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that access to safe, decent, and affordable
housing can transform lives. Federal programs like the Section 502
Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program play a critical role in
expanding home ownership and opportunity for our rural communities.
This Federal program has helped over 2 million families build wealth
through the equity in their home and encourages lenders to provide
loans to those who cannot usually obtain conventional financing.
Through this program, lenders are enabled and encouraged to serve
borrowers they might typically reject without the guarantee, increasing
borrowers' access to home ownership opportunities. We owe it to our
rural communities to provide the Section 502 program with the resources
it needs to modernize and to continue expanding home ownership and
opportunity in our most underserved rural communities.
The Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program relies on the
Guaranteed Underwriting System for determining loan approvals quickly
and accurately. Unfortunately, the current system is in need of
substantial technological improvements in order to process risk
requests more efficiently. Guaranteed Underwriting System development
is necessary for sound portfolio risk management and will benefit USDA
field staff, rural borrowers, and private sector lenders alike.
My amendment will cover the cost of developing and maintaining the
Guaranteed Underwriting System and enable the Single Family Housing
Guaranteed Loan Program to be administered in a more effective manner,
despite recent staffing reductions.
The nominal fee authorized by my amendment will be used to enhance
and maintain the Guaranteed Underwriting System and bring it into the
21st century. It is expected that a fee ranging between $25 and $50
will generate approximately $4 million a year, starting in 2018. The
fee will support important program improvements, including the
delegation of underwriting to preferred lenders.
The fee will also develop the underwriting system's technological
capabilities to current standards, including enhanced loan and lender
oversight, metrics, and programatic controls. This efficiency upgrade
will allow USDA staff to allocate the necessary time and resources to
the most complex underwriting decisions.
Finally, Congress has long invested in making rural home ownership a
reality. The Section 502 Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program
receives $24 billion a year and has helped millions of families reach
the dream of home ownership.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment supports the USDA fiscal year 2016 budget
request and is supported by prominent rural housing advocacy groups
such as the National Rural Housing Coalition and the Housing Assistance
Council. I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support
this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the
time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment of
the gentleman from Texas. I thank him for his leadership in this area
of rural housing. I think it plays a role in helping develop a more
modern and efficient management and underwriting system to assess
mortgage credit risk, prevent foreclosures, and manage a billion-dollar
portfolio.
This is a bipartisan amendment and a bipartisan bill. We are happy to
accept it. I urge Members to adopt it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Ms. Meng
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6
printed in House Report 114-411.
Ms. MENG. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 55, after line 11, add the following new section:
SEC. 111. PUBLIC HOUSING HEATING GUIDELINES.
Section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42
U.S.C. 1437g), as amended by the preceding provisions of this
Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(o) Public Housing Heating Guidelines.--The Secretary
shall publish model guidelines for minimum heating
requirements for public housing dwelling units operated by
public housing agencies receiving assistance under this
section.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentlewoman
from New York (Ms. Meng) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. MENG. Mr. Chair, this amendment would require HUD to publish
model guidelines for minimum heating requirements for public housing
units.
Unfortunately, Mr. Chair, some public housing agencies across this
country have struggled with the fundamental task of providing adequate
housing and heating to low-income residents.
Less than 2 months ago, the New York Daily News and Reuters published
a series of articles about tenants at the Frederick Douglass Houses in
New York City, complaining that they were without heat for several
frigid evenings in a row.
In response to these complaints, New York City public advocate
Letitia James and Legal Services New York City filed a lawsuit on
behalf of the tenants, and in their filing they quote a November 25
email from Robert Knapp, head of the New York City Housing Authority's
heating management services unit, stating:
NYCHA official policy . . . is heat shut off between 10
p.m. and 5 a.m. when the outside temperatures are above 20
degrees. When the outside temperature falls below 20 degrees,
heat is given through the night.
Frankly, this is appalling.
Many Democratic Representatives from New York City agreed with me,
and that is why we submitted a letter, led by my good friends and
colleagues, Representatives Engel and Rangel, to the head of NYCHA,
urging it to completely abandon the current heating policy. That letter
was submitted to NYCHA--the largest housing agency in the country,
overseeing more than 400,000 residents living in 2,500 buildings--more
than a month ago, and we have yet to receive a response. That is why I
have come to the floor today.
While it is not in our authority to mandate what a building's heating
requirements should be in any particular city across this vast country,
clearly some help is needed. Apparently, some local agencies might need
official guidance from HUD outlining the fact that it is a good idea to
turn the heat on at night when the temperature outside is below
freezing.
I was hopeful things would not come to this point, but right now, in
the middle of winter, when almost one in five public housing residents
in my city are age 62 or older, and more than a quarter of them are
children under the age of 18, I feel that this matter could ultimately
be one of life or death.
{time} 1615
We do not want to return to an age in which tenants of local public
housing authorities are forced to revert to heating their homes with
stoves.
Many of us here are all too familiar with the unfortunate tragedies
that occur as a result of that practice and the fires that can also
occur when residents are forced to rely on individual space heaters.
For not only the safety of public housing residents across America,
but
[[Page H470]]
also their humanity, heating standards must be improved.
It is my hope that this amendment today, which mandates that HUD
produce model heating guidelines, will assist in this endeavor. It is
also my hope that all of my colleagues will support this effort.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the
time in opposition to this amendment, although I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I listened very carefully to the
gentlewoman's comments on the floor. I am prepared to accept the
amendment. She makes some reasonable arguments. I urge its adoption.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. MENG. I thank the Chairman for his support.
Mr. ENGEL. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. MENG. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me.
I certainly support what she is trying to do.
Last December it came to light that the New York City Housing
Authority, NYCHA, has as recently as 2013 shut down boilers in public
housing properties unless outside temperatures drop below 25 degrees.
This forces residents to go without heat during the coldest months of
the year.
I grew up in affordable housing. I grew up in city housing. So I am
particularly sensitive to everything that the New York City Housing
Authority does.
I was outraged by this revelation. More than 400,000 New Yorkers live
in NYCHA buildings, and, what's more, more than half of these residents
live below the poverty line.
These New Yorkers, along with every American living in public
housing, pay rent and, in return, depend on Housing Authority
leadership to fulfill the very reasonable need, a safe and decent
shelter.
A practice that forces tenants to grapple with bitter temperatures
just doesn't fail to meet that need, it is reckless and demeaning.
Myself, Ms. Meng, and eight other members of the New York City
delegation sent a letter to the New York City Housing Authority asking
that they immediately issue guidance condemning this practice and make
certain that none of their buildings continue to adhere to this
outrageous policy.
It is important, though, that no American living in public housing be
forced to suffer through the winter months, and that is exactly what
this amendment will prevent by requiring the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development to issue guidelines on minimum heating requirements.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this and ensure that public housing
residents' health and safety are protected.
I want to thank my colleague from New York (Ms. Meng) for partnering
with me on this important issue, and I thank her for her leadership.
Ms. MENG. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Meng).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Committee will rise informally.
The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Woodall) assumed the chair.
____________________