[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 19 (Tuesday, February 2, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H470-H482]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HOUSING OPPORTUNITY THROUGH MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2015
The Committee resumed its sitting.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Palazzo
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. PALAZZO. 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, insert the following new section:
SEC. 111. EXCEPTION TO PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCY RESIDENT BOARD
MEMBER REQUIREMENT.
Subsection (b) of section 2 of the United States Housing
Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and
inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (3)'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph:
``(3) Exception for certain jurisdictions.--
``(A) Exception.--A covered agency (as such term is defined
in subparagraph (C) of this paragraph) shall not be required
to include on the board of directors or a similar governing
board of such agency a member described in paragraph (1).
``(B) Advisory board requirement.--Each covered agency that
administers Federal housing assistance under section 8 (42
U.S.C. 1437f) that chooses not to include a member described
in paragraph (1) on the board of directors or a similar
governing board of the agency shall establish an advisory
board of not less than 6 residents of public housing or
recipients of assistance under section 8 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) to
provide advice and comment to the agency or other
administering entity on issues related to public housing and
section 8. Such advisory board shall meet not less than
quarterly.
``(C) Covered agency or entity.--For purposes of this
paragraph, the term `covered agency' means a public housing
agency or such other entity that administers Federal housing
assistance for--
``(I) the Housing Authority of the county of Los Angeles,
California; or
``(ii) any of the States of Alaska, Iowa, and
Mississippi.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
Mr. PALAZZO. Mr. Chairman, today's bill to improve public housing is
a strong step in streamlining a massive Federal program. I want to
thank Chairman Hensarling for allowing us to have this debate.
As a former public housing authority executive, I know all too well
how important it is to balance financial and managerial responsibility
and oversight while, at the same time, ensuring residents' needs are
met.
This amendment is simple and addresses an outdated and misinformed
statute in the United States Housing Act that requires the membership
of directors of a public housing agency contain one member who is
directly assisted by the agency.
Opposition to this rule is not new. When HUD proposed these rules in
1999, PHAs across the United States issued statements of opposition.
Some would argue that requiring resident members to serve on the
board is a blatant conflict of interest, as he or she would be making
decisions that financially impact his or her family and their well-
being. While I agree, I am not here to debate that today.
This amendment addresses only the PHAs in three States and one
county. This is because, in our respective State constitutions, there
are provisions that expressly oppose the idea of a board member of any
group receiving benefits from the very agency upon which he or she
serves.
This amendment does not rob the residents in specified areas of a
voice in the affairs of their housing. In fact, it is a Federal
requirement that each PHA have a resident advisory board comprised of
at least one resident who serves as a liaison between the PHA and
housing residents. I speak from experience when I say that their input
is always acknowledged and much appreciated.
This commonsense provision is usually passed through the
appropriations process, as it has been for decades. My amendment simply
makes it permanent. I encourage adoption of this commonsense provision.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition
to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
[[Page H471]]
Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman and Members, I have
serious concerns about providing a permanent exemption for the listed
entities from existing requirements that each public housing authority
must have a resident commissioner serve on the governing board.
In 1998, Congress passed this requirement into law in recognition of
the need for the perspective and participation of tenants in the
governance of public housing authorities. To this day, this requirement
helps to ensure that residents are included in board-level
decisionmaking.
However, in appropriations bills over the last decade, four entities
have received an exemption from this requirement so long as they
maintain a separate advisory board with at least six residents of
public or assisted housing.
The Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles is one of the four
entities that received this exemption. However, last year I learned
that HACOLA was not in compliance with the part of the exemption that
requires that they maintain an advisory board of at least six
residents, and this noncompliance had been going on for many years.
HACOLA's noncompliance resulted in a lack of meaningful engagement by
residents on important policy issues affecting programs that HACOLA
administers.
I successfully offered an amendment in the funding year 2016 housing
funding bill to strike HACOLA's exemption. While this amendment was
ultimately not included in the final omnibus, it did put Congress, HUD,
and the Housing Authority on notice that failure to comply with this
important law is simply unacceptable.
This demonstrates that we need to be extremely careful when providing
exemptions for a requirement as important as this one. The exemption
for HACOLA and others was intended to provide them with special
accommodations while still ensuring meaningful tenant engagement. But
HACOLA's behavior displayed blatant disregard for the law and the
intent behind the law.
That is why I do not believe that we should be making this exemption
permanent. Instead, I think we should be thinking about ways to enhance
compliance with the existing exemption requirements.
For these reasons, of course I am going to urge my colleagues to vote
``no'' on this amendment.
Mr. Chairman and Members, it is just inconceivable that we don't
understand that, if you want to not only educate tenants, but want to
involve tenants in decisionmaking and help them to understand how
democracy works and help them to understand the rules of public housing
and what can and cannot be done and why these rules are adopted--if we
don't understand that, we don't understand anything.
It is inconceivable to me that we would simply say that we do not
want just one commissioner, one resident, to be a part of the governing
board, and it is inconceivable to me that we don't understand that we
allow for exemptions to say: Okay. If you don't want just one
commissioner to serve on the board with you, we will allow you to have
an advisory board of six residents that could involve themselves in the
decisions that are made by the governing board.
I talk about this importance because I think it is so important, as
we engage and lift people out of poverty, that they understand the
rules of the game. The only way you get to understand the rules of the
game is if you get to play. You get to understand how decisions are
made. You get to understand what the rules are and how government
works. To exclude them does not make good sense to me.
Now, I know why my own county would like to have this done. They
would like to have this done because--guess what. We discovered that
they were trying to sell off 241 units of Section 8-type housing at the
same time that they were providing the museum with over $120 million,
and they said they could not afford the upkeep of those units.
They didn't like it that we went out and talked with the residents. I
went out to the homes and I said: Did you know that these units are
about to be sold? Do you know what is going to happen to you and why
the county is giving up these units?
No. They didn't know. They didn't have a clue because they didn't
have proper notification. They didn't have one resident that served on
the governing board. They didn't have an advisory committee, even
though L.A. County had gotten an exemption. They refused to even comply
with the exemption to simply have an advisory board.
This is not right. This does not make good sense. I don't know why
you would support something like this. I urge a ``no'' vote on this
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PALAZZO. Mr. Chair, I want to thank my colleague for expressing
some good points. This amendment actually continues to allow residents
of housing authorities to have a strong voice.
It monitors the situation not just in our housing authorities that we
are trying to exempt under States where their constitution prohibits
board members from being able to sit on boards where they have a
monetary or fiscal interest in that. It is a huge conflict of interest.
We are not going after all 2,700-plus public housing authorities. We
are just trying to make sure the States that have constitutions
prohibiting such blatant disregard to common sense and having that
conflict of interest are protected.
Apparently, there is a personal interest in the one jurisdiction.
Hopefully, when my amendment is adopted, if we are going through the
conference process with the Senate, we can work with my colleague to
make sure that her State HA that she is referencing is taken care of.
But, again, my amendment I think adds more voices to the governing
process for them to know what is going on in their local housing
authority.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. PALAZZO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi
will be postponed.
{time} 1630
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Welch
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. WELCH. 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, insert the following new section:
SEC. 111. USE OF VOUCHERS FOR MANUFACTURED HOUSING.
(a) In General.--Section 8(o)(12) of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(12)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking the period at the end
of the first sentence and all that follows through ``of'' in
the second sentence and inserting ``and rents' '''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B)--
(A) in clause (i), by striking ``the rent'' and all that
follows and inserting the following: ``rent shall mean the
sum of the monthly payments made by a family assisted under
this paragraph to amortize the cost of purchasing the
manufactured home, including any required insurance and
property taxes, the monthly amount allowed for tenant-paid
utilities, and the monthly rent charged for the real property
on which the manufactured home is located, including monthly
management and maintenance charges.'';
(B) by striking clause (ii); and
(C) in clause (iii)--
(i) by inserting after the period at the end the following:
``If the amount of the monthly assistance payment for a
family exceeds the monthly rent charged for the real property
on which the manufactured home is located, including monthly
management and maintenance charges, a public housing agency
may pay the remainder to the family, lender or utility
company, or may choose to make a single payment to the family
for the entire monthly assistance amount.''; and
(ii) by redesignating such clause as clause (ii).
(b) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development shall issue notice to implement the amendments
made by subsection (a) and such amendments shall take effect
upon such issuance.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from Vermont (Mr. Welch) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
[[Page H472]]
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Vermont.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I am a strong supporter of the
good work that is represented in H.R. 3700, and I congratulate Chairman
Luetkemeyer and Ranking Member Cleaver for their hard work on this, as
well as Chairman Hensarling and Ranking Member Waters.
This bill is a really solid, bipartisan improvement over the status
quo. This amendment would extend some of the benefits of H.R. 3700 to
folks who live in mobile homes, and that happens to be an awful lot of
Vermonters who are working real hard trying to make ends meet. The idea
of a bricks and sticks house is a dream for them, but they love the
mobile home they have, and they have economic challenges in that home.
I think that is true not just in Vermont but really across rural
America.
What this amendment would allow is for the Section 8 housing vouchers
to be used for some of the obvious expenses that are associated with
owning a mobile home, Mr. Chairman. Right now, only the land rent is
what can be included in the voucher. But in addition to that,
obviously, you have got the true cost of the mobile home that the owner
pays for the housing. In addition to the land rent underneath the home,
mobile homeowners often pay a number of other costs, including
utilities, insurance, and financing for their mobile homes.
People renting apartments where it is not a mobile home, all of those
are factored into the rent. So what this amendment would do is allow
those costs to be included in the calculation for Section 8 that in our
view put an unnecessary and unfair limitation on what can be
considered. Compare that to the housing cost vouchers that individuals
in rental units get. All of those are included in the rent.
So this amendment would address that issue by allowing the property
taxes on a mobile home, as well as insurance, utilities, and financing,
to be included as components of the housing costs eligible for a
voucher.
It would make a huge difference in affordability for Vermonters and
for Americans across this country who are working hard every day and
whose option for safe shelter is a mobile home.
Mr. Chairman, I urge that my colleagues support this amendment. I
thank my colleagues for the bipartisan, solid work they have done on
this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim 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. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from
Vermont. I appreciate his amendment. I think that this helps equalize
for a number of Section 8 users the ability to use manufactured housing
to help equalize this with other housing options. So I think it is an
important step forward.
I thank the gentleman from Vermont for his leadership, and I
recommend Members vote for it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank the gentleman from
Texas for his gracious remarks. He spent a fair amount of time in the
Green Mountain State, so he knows about these mobile homes. I am going
to go back and tell folks that you are still the good guy you were when
you were spending more time in the Green Mountain State.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Peters
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk on behalf
of Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 64, line 16, strike ``and''.
Page 64, after line 16, insert the following new
subparagraph:
``(G) collaborating with the Department of Veterans Affairs
on making joint recommendations to the Congress, the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs on how to better coordinate and improve
services to veterans under both Department of Housing and
Urban Development and Department of Veteran Affairs veterans
housing programs, including ways to improve the Independent
Living Program of the Department of Veteran Affairs; and''
Page 64, line 17, strike ``(G)'' and insert ``(H)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Peters) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment for my
friend, Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico.
As of 2014, there were over 130,000 veterans living in shelters and
transitional housing in the United States. About 56 percent of these
veterans have a disability. I think we agree that that is unacceptable.
Since 2009, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the
Department of Veterans Affairs have made significant progress to reduce
the number of homeless veterans. But more must be done to get veterans
off the streets and into permanent housing.
This can be seen in my home district where we have one of the largest
homeless populations in the country, and also perhaps the largest
populations of homeless veterans.
The underlying bill improves housing services for veterans by
creating a new special assistant for veterans within the Department of
Housing and Urban Development. This new position will coordinate
veterans' housing efforts within HUD, serve as a liaison with the VA,
and ensure veterans have fair access to housing programs.
The amendment builds upon those improvements to further coordination
between the VA and HUD, both of which provide a range of veteran
homeless services and support. The amendment requires the Special
Assistant to work with the VA and provide recommendations to each
department and to Congress on how to improve coordination and housing
services for our Nation's veterans.
We can do much more to not only keep veterans off the streets, but to
provide them with the resources and support they need to have a safe,
stable place to live and build a life after completing their service.
In San Diego, organizations like zero8hundred and the Veterans
Village of San Diego offer the kind of comprehensive transition support
to help veterans be successful.
These are also the collective goals of many HUD and VA programs,
including the VA's Independent Living Program, which assists veterans
to become more independent in their homes so they never become homeless
in the first place.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to
ensure that HUD and VA coordinate their efforts on addressing the many
different issues and aspects associated with veteran homelessness.
Mr. Chairman, 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. Mr. Chairman, we all know on this House floor there
is not enough we can ever do for our veterans, the brave men and women
who served us in uniform. I think that the author of the amendment, in
attempting to get HUD and the VA to work more closely together to
address problems like veterans' homelessness, is an important thing to
do. I hope it has some benefit.
Mr. Chairman, again, I just want to accept the amendment and urge all
Members to adopt it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page H473]]
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for his gracious
support and for his work on behalf of veterans.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Peters
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. PETERS. 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 68, after line 4, insert the following new section:
SEC. 405. REOPENING OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR CONTINUUM OF
CARE PROGRAM REGULATIONS.
Not later than the expiration of the 30-day period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall re-open the
period for public comment regarding the Secretary's interim
rule entitled ``Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid
Transition to Housing: Continuum of Care Program'', published
in the Federal Register on July 31, 2012 (77 Fed. Reg. 45422;
Docket No. FR-5476-I-01). Upon re-opening, such comment
period shall remain open for a period of not fewer than 60
days.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Peters) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, each Member of this body represents a
district that is affected to some degree by homelessness. We all work
diligently to grow the economy, create high-quality jobs, and create
opportunity so that no one has to live on the streets. But for many in
our districts, ending the scourge of homelessness is an ongoing battle
that take resources and coordination from our communities.
All of our districts are supported by the Continuum of Care program,
which assists local leaders working diligently to distribute funding to
public and nonprofit institutions that shelter the homeless, set up
transitional housing, and provide support programs.
In San Diego we recently completed our Point in Time count. My office
and other public servants counted the homeless living on the street and
in shelters to determine how better to serve them as we work to end
homelessness. In 2014, this count found that San Diego had the fifth
largest homeless population in our country. But in that same year, our
Continuum of Care program received the 23rd highest level of Federal
anti-homelessness funds.
San Diego is not the only city that is disadvantaged by the formula
that is used to determine how Federal anti-homelessness funds are
distributed. Other western cities like Houston, Las Vegas, Seattle, San
Jose, and Denver also receive a disproportionately low amount of
Federal resources.
My amendment would require the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development to reopen the public comment period on the Continuum of
Care formula. This would allow service organizations, housing
providers, community faith leaders, and elected officials the
opportunity to provide input on how HUD's limited and valuable
resources can be most equitably and effectively used to end
homelessness in our country. The amendment would not change the
formula, and it would not unfairly disadvantage the district of any
Member of this body.
Since coming to Congress, I have been fighting to ensure that every
city receives its fair share of Federal funding to help the homeless. I
have corresponded with both Secretary Donovan and now-Secretary Castro
to advocate for changes to the Continuum of Care formula and ask for a
public comment period. The people working on the ground to end
homelessness deserve the opportunity to weigh in on how this formula is
affecting them and the work they are doing.
Mr. Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment to
ensure we are doing all we can to end the scourge of homelessness in
this country.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve 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 think the comment period does need to
be reopened. It is an important issue. Voices need to be heard.
The gentleman from California is now batting a thousand. I am not
sure if he has any other amendments. He may be pressing his luck after
that.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I am well aware of what success looks like
in this body, and I am finished offering amendments. I want to thank
all the people, including the ranking member and Chairman Hensarling,
for their hard work on this bill. This is a good piece of work.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Ellison
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. ELLISON. 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:
Add at the end of the bill the following new title:
TITLE VI--FURNISHING RENT PAYMENT INFORMATION TO CREDIT REPORTING
AGENCIES
SEC. 504. FURNISHING INFORMATION ABOUT RENT PAYMENTS TO A
CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCY.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development or any
other person having authorized access may furnish to a
consumer reporting agency (as defined in section 603 of the
Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a)) information
relating to the on-time performance of an individual in
making payments under a lease agreement with respect to a
dwelling unit for which any subsidy or assistance for
occupancy in the dwelling unit is provided under a program
administered by the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development.
(b) Additional Requirements for Furnishers.--Any person who
furnishes such information shall--
(1) ensure that the payment information is reported in a
manner that does not by itself identify the individual as a
recipient of housing assistance under a program administered
by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; and
(2) notify the individual that such information will be
provided to a consumer reporting agency before providing such
information to a consumer reporting agency.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlewoman, Ranking
Member Waters, and Chair Hensarling for their leadership on the
committee.
Mr. Chairman, too many people are excluded from the financial
mainstream. Fifty million Americans lack a credit score. Either they
have no credit file at all, or they have too few trade lines to
establish a credit score.
There have been some real innovations in helping these people we call
``credit invisibles'' to build an accurate score. FICO, which has a
large presence in my State, has been a real leader in building more
inclusive and accurate scoring methodology.
But credit scoring agencies cannot score information they don't have,
and they tend to have late payment information but not on-time payment
information. In other words, Mr. Chairman, if somebody doesn't pay a
bill, probably it is scored. If they do pay it, probably it is not.
This is the case for HUD residents. That is why we need to make it
easier for firms to provide customers' on-time payment data.
My amendment specifically aims to help some of the 3 million people
who live in HUD-assisted housing. By law,
[[Page H474]]
families, people with disabilities, and the elderly who receive HUD
assistance pay 30 percent of their income for rent. I want to see them
get credit they deserve for paying their rent on time. These folks pay
their rent on time, yet it never shows up in their FICO score.
Why are we not reporting their on-time rental payment? Because the
law requires each tenant to provide prior written consent before having
their on-time rental payment information reported, but it does not
require the same information to report late payments of rent. So they
can get hit for late payment, no credit for on-time.
The prior written consent is mandated by the Privacy Act of 1974,
which I believe was a well-meaning and good piece of legislation--
except it needs to be updated. This piece of legislation, the Privacy
Act of 1974, wants to protect the privacy of affordable housing
residents, which is good, and I support that. But in this case, it is
causing more harm than good. Requiring each resident to grant written
permission and then have the housing provider manage all those forms is
a burden.
{time} 1645
We have empirical evidence to show that such rent reporting helps
tenants. Recently, Credit Builders Alliance led a Rent Reporting for
Credit Building pilot in eight communities. The Rent Reporting for
Credit Building pilot reported rent payments of 1,255 low-income
residents who lived in assisted housing.
The research found that credit-invisible residents who participated
in the pilot were able to build a high nonprime of 646, or prime score
of 688 with the inclusion of their rental payment history. Even if they
don't want to borrow money, their scores are going up, meaning that
they apply for, perhaps, lower interest rates, apply for jobs, and have
a better situation all around.
To repeat: from credit-invisible to credit scores above 646, and some
much higher. Even those who had a credit score already saw it go up.
Seventy-nine percent--a vast majority--saw an increase in credit
scores. This was an average increase of 23 points.
Credit Builders Alliance and other researchers want to expand their
efforts to help more residents. Another pilot program is pending. HUD
is partnering with Experian; FICO; LexisNexis; the Policy and Economic
Research Council, PERC; and TransUnion to evaluate the impact of
reporting rental payment history on credit scores of subsidized housing
residents and the general population.
The Privacy Act requirement has hindered their effort. Already
overworked housing staffs struggle to maintain the paperwork necessary
to report renters' on-time payment. Housing staffs find that it is
difficult to set up automated payment data transmission between
property managers and the credit bureaus with an always changing
database.
My amendment includes language from H.R. 4172, the Credit Access and
Inclusion Act. H.R. 4172 has 20 cosponsors. Ten are Republican. Seven
of the ten Republicans serve with me on the Financial Services
Committee.
In conclusion, please support this amendment because it would do a
number of very important things:
It would help credit invisibility for hundreds, if not thousands--
millions, even, and that is not an exaggeration--of very low-income
people.
It makes it easier to provide predictive data of someone's ability to
pay and willingness to repay. And based on solid empirical evidence,
that rental payment data can move people from unscoreable to prime or
near prime.
We should help HUD-assisted tenants enter the financial mainstream.
Let's implement rent reporting on a large scale.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I listened carefully to the gentleman
from Minnesota. He makes a number of important points. We have had this
discussion previously. I know the gentleman from Minnesota is aware of
my commitment that, within the committee, we will have a hearing that
will include the subject matter of his amendment.
I think the gentleman's amendment, obviously, addresses the Fair
Credit Reporting Act, which is not part of this underlying housing
bill. Again, we will debate his issue, research his issue, and take
testimony on his issue in the future.
I do not believe that this is the appropriate bill for his particular
amendment, so I am going to urge rejection at this time.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HENSARLING. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, in listening to the discussion with
the gentleman from Minnesota with regard to his amendment, he made the
comment that they already report it whenever the people don't make
their payments, and they need to be reporting it when they do make
their payments. Does that mean we are going to have to start reporting
car payments, house payments, and all those things, too, when people
make them on time? Because this is what he is asking us to do is, every
time somebody does something right, suddenly now we have got to be
reporting that. If you go down that road, then I think we have got some
problems.
Also, in your amendment here, you indicate that, with the data as
reported, they are not able to identify if the person is a recipient of
housing assistance--we are going to tie their hands, yet force them to
do some stuff.
I think this is a rather ill-conceived amendment, quite frankly, Mr.
Chairman. I certainly urge the body to reject it.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair reminds Members to address their remarks
to the Chair and not to other Members in the second person.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. 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:
At the end of the bill, add the following new title:
TITLE VI--FHA PILOT PROGRAM FOR ADDITIONAL CREDIT RATING INFORMATION
SEC. 601. PILOT PROGRAM FOR ADDITIONAL CREDIT RATING
INFORMATION FOR FHA MORTGAGORS.
Section 258 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-
24) is amended as follows:
(1) Authority.--In the first sentence of subsection (a), by
striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''.
(2) Extension of program.--By striking subsection (d).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Al Green) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment that is
known to the ranking member as well as the chairman of the committee. I
will not complicate it. It is a very simple amendment. It simply says
that HUD may--HUD may--develop a pilot program to consider additional
credit scoring information.
We know that there are people who have insufficient credit files and,
as a result, they don't get consideration for a light bill, gas bill,
water bill, or phone bill. These are some of the things that we have
people making payments on quite regularly timely, but they don't get
considered.
We are simply asking HUD to develop a pilot program. We say ``may
develop.'' There really is no requirement that HUD do it within some
statutory period of time. There is no requirement that HUD will perform
this in a certain way. But just see if there is some way to help people
who make these payments timely such that this can become a part of the
additional credit information.
Now, I am emphasizing ``additional'' because, quite frankly, I had
``alternative'' at one time, ``alternative credit scoring.'' That
created some confusion because we are not using this as an alternative.
This becomes additional information.
[[Page H475]]
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, because the gentleman from Texas is a
friend--and you hear Members say that frequently, but in this case it
is as sincere as it can be--the committee has attempted to work with
the gentleman from Texas. Both sides worked in good faith. Regrettably,
we did not come to a point of mutual agreement on the resolution of his
amendment, so I am going to oppose it at this time.
The amendment would essentially provide a reauthorization of a
program that the Obama administration even believed was too risky to
establish because they had years to establish it and they chose not to.
I appreciate the effort. I appreciate the sincerity of the gentleman
from Texas. I understand what he is trying to do. But I also fear that,
ultimately, the impact of what the gentleman is trying to do very well
could help hasten the insolvency and bankruptcy of the FHA, hurting
their financials.
I am happy that the FHA, after 7 years, has finally decided to
actually obey the law, but I am not sure that the program that the
gentleman from Texas is advocating could not put further pressure on
FHA's insurance fund, ultimately hurting those it is designed to help.
I would say again that, regardless of one's good intentions, I am
still very, very fearful of pilot programs' mays and shalls that
somehow get the political process involved in telling lenders, or
cajoling lenders, or suggesting to lenders what credit standards they
should use. That is exactly what helped bring us to the housing crisis
in the first place.
No matter how well-intentioned Federal policy was, ultimately, there
was Federal policy that incented, cajoled, and, in some cases, mandated
financial institutions to put people into homes they could not afford
to keep. It didn't do the economy any good, it didn't do the taxpayer
any good, and it certainly didn't do the homeowner any good to put them
in a home they could not afford to keep.
Again, I have no doubt that is not the intention of the gentleman
from Texas. But I have fears--I have fears--that once we start going
down this road of telling lenders essentially what type of--and,
ultimately, that is what we are doing with FHA. You are, ultimately,
telling lenders, or suggesting to lenders, what credit standards they
should employ.
I am fearful of going down this road. We had discussed a number of
compromises. We came close. Unfortunately, we didn't get there with the
gentleman from Texas.
I am going to oppose this amendment, simply because of who he is,
somewhat reluctantly. But, nonetheless, the bottom line is the bottom
line. I will oppose the gentleman's amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green) has 3\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Hensarling) is imminently correct. We are friends. I say it in the
sincerest way as well. He and I have collaborated on many issues, and
we have gotten a lot of things done in Congress. I hope that doesn't
hurt him back home, letting people know that we have worked on things
together.
But, obviously, I have a different perch, and from my perch here is
what I see. I see an opportunity for additional credit scoring to be
used, and if it is negative, it is not going to benefit the person that
is being scored. It does not prevent any other negative information
from being properly scored. It simply says that HUD may use this
information, indicating that persons have paid a light bill, gas bill,
water bill, or phone bill as additional information. That is all it
says, that it may do this and it may create the scoring.
Now, with reference to HUD, HUD has given me an indication--and I
don't have it in writing to hand to you, Mr. Chairman, but I believe
you would trust my word--that they are not opposing this.
One of the reasons why it wasn't done previously was a function of
HUD's budget. I believe this to be the reason. And because of budgetary
concerns, it did not get done--it was codified in the law--and that is
why I am reintroducing it. But this is a milder version of what I
introduced previously, because previously we said HUD shall do this,
and this time we have made it as mild as possible.
The Realtors are very much supportive of it. This will give 50
million people who are currently with light credit files, don't have
sufficient credit scores, to have some additional information to be
considered.
But it does not in any way require that negative information be
received in a positive manner. If it is negative, it remains negative.
If you haven't paid your car note, it is still a negative. If you
haven't paid your light bill, gas bill, or water bill, it is still a
negative.
It only gives the opportunity to add these other things as things to
consider for many people who, quite frankly, don't have a lot of
traditional credit. They don't have bad credit; they just don't have
traditional credit. There are a lot of my constituents who fall into
this category.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, as persuasive as my friend is from
Texas, he wasn't quite persuasive enough. At this particular moment, I
continue to oppose the amendment of from the gentleman from Texas.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will
be postponed.
{time} 1700
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in House Report 114-411.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. 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:
At the end of the bill, add the following new title:
TITLE VI--REPORTS
SEC. 601. REPORT ON INTERAGENCY FAMILY ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT
STRATEGIES.
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, in
consultation with the Secretary of Labor, shall submit a
report to the Congress annually that describes--
(1) any interagency strategies of such Departments that are
designed to improve family economic empowerment by linking
housing assistance with essential supportive services, such
as employment counseling and training, financial education
and growth, childcare, transportation, meals, youth
recreational activities, and other supportive services; and
(2) any actions taken in the preceding year to carry out
such strategies and the extent of progress achieved by such
actions.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and ranking
member of the full committee and express my excitement in talking about
reform and real housing issues.
If there is ever an issue that we, as Members of Congress, are
confronted with when we go home to our districts, it is about people
who need housing, about people who don't have housing, about people who
have poor housing, about seniors who need housing, about young families
who need housing.
I am delighted to be part of this reformation that has been done by
the Committee on Financial Services and to acknowledge the chairman and
the ranking member of the subcommittee from which this comes and to
congratulate this bipartisan process.
I am delighted to offer an amendment. I thank the Rules Committee for
making it in order, for I think it adds to the improvement of some of
the issues that we are confronted with.
[[Page H476]]
My amendment indicates that the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor and with other
relevant agencies, shall submit a report to Congress annually that goes
to the heart of some of the issues unaddressed of interagency
strategies of such departments that are designed to improve family
economic empowerment by linking housing assistance with essential
supportive services, such as employment, counseling, training,
financial education and growth, child care, transportation, meals,
youth recreational activities, and other supportive services.
It goes on to say: any actions taken in the preceding year to carry
out such strategies and the extent of progress achieved by such
actions.
My amendment recognizes that, in addition to housing connecting low-
income families to job training and supportive services, such as child
care, transportation, it is key to enabling families across the
country--from Texas to California, from New York to California--to
access employment and other services that foster upward economic
mobility and family stability. It allows them to look at their family
structure and at people who are in need.
My amendment acknowledges and recognizes that helping families
achieve economic empowerment requires interagency collaboration.
Let me cite, Mr. Chairman, two supportive letters from the National
Coalition for the Homeless and from the Heartland Alliance, which are
supporting this constructive and instructive amendment to find out what
our families need to be strong.
Leading Houston Home,
February 2, 2016.
Speaker Paul Ryan,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Blaine Luetkemeyer,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance Financial
Services Committee, Washington, DC.
Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance
Financial Services Committee, Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Leader Pelosi: The Coalition for the
Homeless of Houston/Harris County is dedicated to preventing
and ending homelessness in Houston, Harris County, and Fort
Bend County. We are writing in support of H.R. 3700, the
Housing Opportunity through Modernization Act. The proposed
legislation includes many provisions that would increase the
efficiency and effectiveness of critical rental assistance
programs that serve extremely low-income households.
In particular, we are writing in support of Amendment Four,
submitted by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18) to the
Rules Committee. Representative Jackson Lee's Amendment Four
directs the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
to work with the Secretary of Labor to produce an annual
report on interagency strategies to strengthen family
economic empowerment by linking housing with essential
supportive services such as employment counseling and
training, financial growth, childcare, transportation, meals,
and other support services.
Representative Jackson Lee's amendment recognizes that in
addition to housing, connecting low-income families to job
training and supportive services are key to helping families
access employment and economic opportunity and achieve
stability. Representative Jackson Lee's amendment also
recognizes that helping families achieve economic empowerment
requires interagency collaboration. We know that public
systems are better at solving big problems when they work
together to share capacity, knowledge, and resources. We
commend Representative Jackson Lee for encouraging systems
collaboration to help ensure that low-income families succeed
in housing and employment. We further encourage HUD to
collaborate with the Department of Health and Human Services
and the Department of Agriculture, as these agencies can
offer families critical supports such as child care and
nutrition assistance that are necessary for success.
The Coalition for the Homeless of Houston/Harris County, as
a leader of The Way Home, the collaborative model to prevent
and end homelessness in Houston, Harris County, and Fort Bend
County knows the importance of interagency collaboration and
the incredible successes that can be achieved as a result of
shared capacity, knowledge and resources. We have made
tremendous progress in our community and are happy to serve
as a resource moving forward. Thank you for recognizing the
important role of employment in helping low-income families
achieve housing and financial stability.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
Marilyn Brown ([email protected]), President/CEO of
the Coalition for the Homeless of Houston/Harris County.
Sincerely,
Marilyn L. Brown,
President/CEO.
____
Heartland Alliance National
Initiatives,
February 1, 2016.
Speaker Paul Ryan,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Blaine Luetkemeyer,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance Financial
Services Committee, Washington, DC.
Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance
Financial Services Committee, Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan and Leader Pelosi, Heartland Alliance's
National Initiatives on Poverty & Economic Opportunity is
dedicated ending chronic unemployment and poverty. We are
writing in support of H.R. 3700, the Housing Opportunity
through Modernization Act. The proposed legislation includes
many provisions that would increase the efficiency and
effectiveness of critical rental assistance programs that
serve extremely low-income households.
In particular, we are writing in support of Amendment Four,
submitted by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee's (TX-18) to
the Rules Committee. Representative Jackson Lee's Amendment
Four directs the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
to work with the Secretary of Labor to produce an annual
report on interagency strategies to strengthen family
economic empowerment by linking housing with essential
supportive services such as employment counseling and
training, financial growth, childcare, transportation, meals,
and other support services.
Representative Jackson Lee's amendment recognizes that in
addition to housing, connecting low-income families to job
training and supportive services such as childcare and
transportation are key to helping these families access
employment and economic opportunity and achieve stability.
Representative Jackson Lee's amendment also recognizes that
helping families achieve economic empowerment requires
interagency collaboration. We know that public systems are
better at solving big problems when they work together to
share capacity, knowledge, and resources, and we commend
Representative Jackson Lee for encouraging systems
collaboration to help ensure that low-income families can
succeed in housing and employment. We further encourage HUD
to collaborate with the Department of Health and Human
Services and the Department of Agriculture, as these agencies
can offer families critical supports such as child care and
nutrition assistance that are necessary to for employment
success.
Heartland Alliance's National Initiatives Team has a number
of resources and tools that can support efforts to help
individuals and families facing barriers to employment
succeed in the work. We are happy to serve as a resource
moving forward, and thank you for recognizing the important
role of employment in helping low-income families achieve
housing and financial stability.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
Melissa Young, Director of Heartland Alliance's National
Initiatives on Poverty & Economic Opportunity.
Sincerely,
Melissa Young,
Director, Heartland Alliance's National Initiatives on
Poverty & Economic Opportunity.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I am delighted to tell the story of Finney from the
Houston Housing Authority where we gave her supportive services through
the Family Sufficiency Program. She has gotten to the point of
attaining a credit score of 640, and she is now a proud homeowner. What
a legacy.
So I would ask my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas has 2 minutes remaining.
Modification to Amendment No. 13 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, as my dear colleague
from Guam missed her time in which to offer her amendment, I ask
unanimous consent to modify my amendment with the modification by the
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), which I have placed at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:
At the end of the amendment, add the following:
Page 55, after line 11, insert the following new section:
SEC. 111. PREFERENCE FOR UNITED STATES CITIZENS OR NATIONALS.
Section 214(a)(7) of the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 1436a(a)(7)) is amended by striking
``such alien'' and all that follows through the period at the
end and inserting ``any citizen or
[[Page H477]]
national of the United States shall be entitled to a
preference or priority in receiving financial assistance
before any such alien who is otherwise eligible for
assistance.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Texas?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is modified.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman
from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
Ms. BORDALLO. I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment fixes a misinterpretation of law and gives
U.S. citizens and nationals a preference over migrants from the
Republic of Palau, from the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and from
the Federated States of Micronesia when receiving Federal aid.
I continue to support allowing these migrants to receive housing
assistance. Otherwise, our housing situation in Guam and in other
affected jurisdictions would get even worse. However, it was not the
intent of Congress to displace our citizens when it extended
eligibility to migrants in 2000.
Unfortunately, limited resources have led many U.S. citizens in Guam
to be displaced by COFA migrants who have entered our country as a
result of the Compact of Free Association. Guam's local housing
authority has indicated that demand for housing assistance far
outweighs the resources available.
A recent Guam PDN article indicated that homeless data shows that
local residents of Guam make up nearly 42 percent of the homeless on
Guam, that 536 Chamorros, the indigenous people, and 42 Filipinos were
considered homeless.
I ask for the support of my amendment.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentlewoman.
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, first, in dealing with the amendment
from the gentlewoman from Texas, I often don't have an opportunity to
work with her. I am happy to work with her on this matter and to
recognize that this report could, indeed, add value.
I think anything that we can do to help with family economic
empowerment in the areas that she has identified, such as in employment
counseling and training and the coordination of these areas, can be
very valuable.
I appreciate the gentlewoman's amendment, and I am prepared to accept
it. The same is true for the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
I am sorry she missed her opportunity earlier, but I am glad she has
her opportunity now. I am prepared to accept her amendment as well.
I urge adoption.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas.
I was very pleased to help out the gentlewoman from Guam, and I want
to indicate that these are two amendments that stand on their own
right.
I close by indicating the purpose of the amendment offered by Ms.
Jackson Lee to again refer to Finney, a woman who tried to get a home.
She stayed in the program and completed the criteria that was needed
for her to qualify. She earned wages of at least $20,000 and got that
credit score and established a savings account of $1,000.
This is what we are talking about with regard to supportive services.
What we want to do is to emphasize employment counseling, financial
education, growth, child care, transportation, meals, youth
recreational activities, and other supportive services.
I am very glad to have the support, if you will, of the National
Coalition for the Homeless of Houston, Harris County, as well as of the
Heartland Alliance to be able to say that this makes for a better
roadmap for getting housing to people who are in need.
I celebrate the fact that we are on the floor with this reform bill,
talking about housing. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, let me express my appreciation to
Chairman Luetkemeyer and Ranking Member Cleaver for their leadership,
commitment and effort to modernize and improve Federal Housing programs
for millions of Americans who are working their way up to economic
empowerment and stability.
I also wish to thank Chairman Sessions, Ranking Member Slaughter, and
the members of the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee
amendment Number 13.
Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to explain my amendment,
which provides:
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, in consultation with
the Secretary of Labor and other relevant agencies, shall submit a
report to the Congress annually that describes--
(1) any interagency strategies of such Departments that are designed
to improve family economic empowerment by linking housing assistance
with essential supportive services, such as employment counseling and
training, financial education and growth, childcare, transportation,
meals, youth recreational activities, and other supportive services;
and
(2) any actions taken in the preceding year to carry out such
strategies and the extent of progress achieved by such actions.
Mr. Chair, my amendment recognizes that in addition to housing,
connecting low-income families to job training and supportive services
such as childcare and transportation are key to enabling families
across the country from Texas to California access to employment and
other services that foster upward economic mobility and family
stability.
Jackson Lee amendment Number 13 acknowledges and recognizes that
helping families achieve economic empowerment requires interagency
collaboration.
I am pleased to submit into the Record letters supporting my
amendment authored by the Coalition for the Homeless of Houston/Harris
County and the Heartland Alliance National Initiatives on Poverty and
Economic Opportunity.
Mr. Chair, we all know that public systems are better at solving big
problems when there is coordination amongst various implementing
agencies motivated to work together to share capacity, knowledge, and
resources.
My amendment encourages agency collaboration to help ensure that low-
income families can succeed in housing, in employment and in life.
Interagency collaborations between agencies such as the Department of
Labor, Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of
Agriculture can offer families critical support such as child care and
nutrition assistance that are necessary for family stability and
employment success.
Livelihood and self-dignity are tied to employment and employment is
critical to achieving financial independence and stability and
stimulation of the economy.
My amendment seeks to bridge the opportunities that abound when there
is interagency/intersystem collaboration and the success that can come
about.
Take for instance the success story of Fini Tuamokumo, a single
mother of three children and former Housing Choice Voucher participant,
enrolled in the Houston Housing Authority's Family Self-Sufficiency
program (FSS).
Among other supportive services, the Houston Housing Authority's FSS
program facilitates a pathway for public housing tenants to meet their
individual goals by connecting them to community resources and
homeownership assistance.
Aspiring home owners like Fini receive support and resources towards
employment success and homeownership.
I am proud to report that Fini began the process, stayed the course
and completed the criteria needed to qualify for homeownership: earned
wages of at least $20,000 per year, a credit score of 640 or higher,
the establishment of an Individualized Development (savings) Account
with a minimum balance of $1,000, and completion of the FSS program's
Financial Literacy and First Time Home Ownership classes.
Fini is now a proud homeowner and can now pass on the legacy of the
importance of a work ethic, grit and homeownership to her children.
Fini is just one of many success stories of intersystem/interagency
coordination as a nexus towards federal housing and economic
empowerment.
Mr. Chair, my amendment will create the space and opportunity for the
economic mobility of federal housing recipients through linking housing
assistance with essential supportive services such as employment
counseling and
[[Page H478]]
opportunities, financial education and growth, childcare,
transportation, meals, youth recreational activities and other
supportive services.
For all these reasons, I urge my colleagues to join me and support
Jackson Lee Amendment Number 13.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment, as modified,
offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Price of North Carolina
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14
printed in House Report 114-411.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. 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:
At the end of the bill, add the following new title:
TITLE VI--HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS
SEC. 601. FORMULA AND TERMS FOR ALLOCATIONS TO PREVENT
HOMELESSNESS FOR INDIVIDUALS LIVING WITH HIV OR
AIDS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (c) of section 854 of the AIDS
Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)) is amended by--
(1) redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (5); and
(2) striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the
following:
``(1) Allocation of resources.--
``(A) Allocation formula.--The Secretary shall allocate 90
percent of the amount approved in appropriations Acts under
section 863 among States and metropolitan statistical areas
as follows:
``(I) 75 percent of such amounts among--
``(I) cities that are the most populous unit of general
local government in a metropolitan statistical area with a
population greater than 500,000, as determined on the basis
of the most recent census, and with more than 2,000
individuals living with HIV or AIDS, using the data specified
in subparagraph (B); and
``(II) States with more than 2,000 individuals living with
HIV or AIDS outside of metropolitan statistical areas.
``(ii) 25 percent of such amounts among States and
metropolitan statistical areas based on the method described
in subparagraph (C).
``(B) Source of data.--For purposes of allocating amounts
under this paragraph for any fiscal year, the number of
individuals living with HIV or AIDS shall be the number of
such individuals as confirmed by the Director of the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, as of December 31 of the
most recent calendar year for which such data is available.
``(C) Allocation under subparagraph (A)(ii).--For purposes
of allocating amounts under subparagraph (A)(ii), the
Secretary shall develop a method that accounts for--
``(I) differences in housing costs among States and
metropolitan statistical areas based on the fair market
rental established pursuant to section 8(c) of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)) or another
methodology established by the Secretary through regulation;
and
``(ii) differences in poverty rates among States and
metropolitan statistical areas based on area poverty indexes
or another methodology established by the Secretary through
regulation.
``(2) Maintaining grants.--
``(A) Continued eligibility of fiscal year 2016 grantees.--
A grantee that received an allocation in fiscal year 2016
shall continue to be eligible for allocations under paragraph
(1) in subsequent fiscal years, subject to--
``(I) the amounts available from appropriations Acts under
section 863;
``(ii) approval by the Secretary of the most recent
comprehensive housing affordability strategy for the grantee
approved under section 105; and
``(iii) the requirements of subparagraph (C).
``(B) Adjustments.--Allocations to grantees described in
subparagraph (A) shall be adjusted annually based on the
administrative provisions included in fiscal year 2016
appropriations Acts.
``(C) Redetermination of continued eligibility.--The
Secretary shall redetermine the continued eligibility of a
grantee that received an allocation in fiscal year 2016 at
least once during the 10-year period following fiscal year
2016.
``(D) Adjustment to grants.--For each of fiscal years 2017,
2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021, the Secretary shall ensure that a
grantee that received an allocation in the prior fiscal year
does not receive an allocation that is 5 percent less than or
10 percent greater than the amount allocated to such grantee
in the preceding fiscal year.
``(3) Alternative grantees.--
``(A) Requirements.--The Secretary may award funds reserved
for a grantee eligible under paragraph (1) to an alternative
grantee if--
``(I) the grantee submits to the Secretary a written
agreement between the grantee and the alternative grantee
that describes how the alternative grantee will take actions
consistent with the applicable comprehensive housing
affordability strategy approved under section 105 of this
Act;
``(ii) the Secretary approves the written agreement
described in clause (I) and agrees to award funds to the
alternative grantee; and
``(iii) the written agreement does not exceed a term of 10
years.
``(B) Renewal.--An agreement approved pursuant to
subparagraph (A) may be renewed by the parties with the
approval of the Secretary.
``(C) Definition.--In this paragraph, the term `alternative
grantee' means a public housing agency (as defined in section
3(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437a(b))), a unified funding agency (as defined in section
401 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.
11360)), a State, a unit of general local government, or an
instrumentality of State or local government.
``(4) Reallocations.--If a State or metropolitan
statistical area declines an allocation under paragraph
(1)(A), or the Secretary determines, in accordance with
criteria specified in regulation, that a State or
metropolitan statistical area that is eligible for an
allocation under paragraph (1)(A) is unable to properly
administer such allocation, the Secretary shall reallocate
any funds reserved for such State or metropolitan statistical
area as follows:
``(A) For funds reserved for a State--
``(I) to eligible metropolitan statistical areas within the
State on a pro rata basis; or
``(ii) if there is no eligible metropolitan statistical
areas within a State, to metropolitan cities and urban
counties within the State that are eligible for grant under
section 106 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1974 (42 U.S.C. 5306), on a pro rata basis.
``(B) For funds reserved for a metropolitan statistical
area, to the State in which the metropolitan statistical area
is located.
``(C) If the Secretary is unable to make a reallocation
under subparagraph (A) or (B), the Secretary shall make such
funds available on a pro rata basis under the formula in
paragraph (1)(A).''.
(b) Amendment to Definitions.--Section 853 of the AIDS
Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12902) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or `AIDS' '' before
``means''; and
(2) by inserting at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(15) The term `HIV' means infection with the human
immunodeficiency virus.
``(16) The term `individuals living with HIV or AIDS'
means, with respect to the counting of cases in a geographic
area during a period of time, the sum of--
``(A) the number of living non-AIDS cases of HIV in the
area; and
``(B) the number of living cases of AIDS in the area.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Price) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I am offering this
amendment on behalf of our colleague from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt) and
myself.
I thank the chairman, the ranking member, and the staffs on both
sides for their cooperation in moving this amendment forward.
This is a bipartisan amendment that provides a long, overdue update
to HUD's statutory funding formula for the Housing Opportunities for
Persons with AIDS Program, also known as HOPWA.
HOPWA is the only Federal program that is solely dedicated to
providing housing assistance and related supportive services for low-
income people and their families who are living with HIV/AIDS.
In short, this amendment would base the distribution of HOPWA funds
on the current number of people who are living with HIV/AIDS, who
desperately need this support.
This would replace the current formula based, incredibly, on the
cumulative number of AIDS cases since the epidemic began decades ago.
Last year more than 50 percent of the people counted in the HOPWA
formula were deceased.
To say the least, this has drastically reduced HOPWA's ability to aid
jurisdictions where the present need is most acute. This is
particularly true in rural areas and in cities that are currently
bearing the brunt of the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Mr. Chairman, Congress has sensibly adjusted other AIDS support
programs, including the Ryan White program. So formula funds are
distributed based on the number of living HIV and AIDS cases in a given
jurisdiction. Only the HOPWA formula remains out of whack, and it is
denying thousands of those
[[Page H479]]
with HIV/AIDS the housing support they need.
The Price-Aderholt amendment makes three changes to the current HOPWA
formula:
Firstly, it utilizes living HIV/AIDS cases as the major basis of
funding distribution, consistent with changes made to the Ryan White
program.
Secondly, it directs HUD to take into consideration housing costs and
local poverty rates to ensure the HOPWA program can better address
varied housing needs within jurisdictions.
Thirdly, the amendment provides for a gradual implementation of the
new funding formula over 5 years in order to ensure that jurisdictions
have adequate time to adjust to the new funding levels. A stop-loss
provision is also included so that no jurisdiction can lose more than 5
percent of its funding or gain more than 10 percent of its funding on a
year-over-year basis.
Mr. Chairman, ever since 1997, the Government Accountability Office
has identified the need to update the HOPWA formula. The Department of
Housing and Urban Development has included similar proposals to update
the formula in its budget requests year after year. According to the
Department's most recent formula projections, 115 out of 139
jurisdictions in this country would benefit under the proposed formula
change.
The AIDS advocacy community also supports updating the HOPWA formula
to account for living cases of HIV/AIDS. These groups include the
National AIDS Housing Coalition, AIDS United, the National Low Income
Housing Coalition, and the AIDS Institute.
In closing, this bipartisan amendment will ensure that our existing
Federal dollars, without additional spending or new revenue, are
allocated most efficiently and most effectively and most fairly to help
those who are living with HIV/AIDS.
HOPWA is often the difference between homelessness and access to
lifesaving treatment for low-income people with this awful disease. It
is long past time to update the HOPWA formula to bring it in line with
Ryan White and other AIDS support programs.
So I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1715
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, for more than 20 years, I have been an adamant
supporter of HOPWA. I share many of Mr. Price's concerns about the
outdated formula for how HOPWA funding is allocated. However, I cannot
support this amendment.
The current formula's reliance on cumulative AIDS cases is
problematic and does need to be updated to better reflect the new
reality of the incidence of the disease.
Mr. Price's proposal, while well intended, will just shift scarce
resources around, cutting off thousands of current beneficiaries to
move the money to different parts of the country.
If the amendment changed the formula for new HOPWA funds, if there
were new HOPWA funds, it would be more acceptable, but the amendment
would shift existing funds on which people now rely.
New York City is a stark example. This formula change would
eventually cut the city's annual HOPWA funding by nearly 25 percent.
That cut would translate into real people.
A quarter of New Yorkers living with AIDS and currently receiving
HOPWA support for their housing would be thrown out of their homes. We
are talking about people living with AIDS with HOPWA support being
ousted from their present homes.
I understand that people in many areas living with AIDS need housing,
but Congress should be focused on growing HOPWA and expanding the
number of people enrolled in the program, not on throwing more people
living with AIDS out of their present homes.
If people living with AIDS in Mr. Price's district and in other
districts need more HOPWA funding--and they do--Congress should provide
it to them without depriving people living with AIDS in New York,
Atlanta, and San Francisco of their existing housing.
Rather than shifting around limited pools of money and helping
homeless people in one part of the country by creating more
homelessness in another part of the country, we should be increasing
funding for HOPWA to meet the actual needs of the people living with
AIDS in the United States.
That is why every year I offer an amendment to the T-HUD
appropriations bill increasing HOPWA funding and will continue to do
so.
I recognize Mr. Price's hard work and long years of advocacy for
HOPWA, but I cannot support this amendment as written today.
I hope that, going forward through regular legislative order, we can
identify a fair, equitable formula update that does not harm current
beneficiaries, that is to say, harm people living with AIDS because of
their HOPWA funding in their homes today.
Mr. PRICE OF North Carolina. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. NADLER. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I inadvertently used the
last minute of my time that I hoped to yield to Mr. Quigley. I wonder
if the gentleman might yield to Mr. Quigley.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, do I have 1 minute remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Quigley).
Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Price-Aderholt
amendment, which seeks to modernize the Housing for Persons with AIDS
Program to better reflect the current case concentration and
understanding of HIV/AIDS.
This will help ensure that funds are directed in a more equitable and
effective manner. The AIDS population in Chicago certainly stands to
benefit from such an update.
The HOPWA program is a national safety net for people battling HIV/
AIDS, providing competitive formula grants since 1992. HOPWA prevents
homelessness and permits thousands of households coping with the
debilitating and impoverishing impact of HIV/AIDS to access and remain
in care.
It is also a proven prevention mechanism by helping people achieve
lower viral loads, thus becoming less infectious. This is the
foundation for better individual and community health outcomes.
It is time for us to change the HOPWA distribution formula from one
based on cumulative HIV/AIDS cases to a more updated formula based on
current HIV/AIDS cases that reflect today's needs.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).
The amendment was agreed to.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 114-411 on
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 7 by Mr. Palazzo of Mississippi.
Amendment No. 12 by Mr. Al Green of Texas.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Palazzo
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
[[Page H480]]
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 236,
noes 178, not voting 19, as follows:
[Roll No. 50]
AYES--236
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
Lewis
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marino
McCarthy
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Salmon
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOES--178
Adams
Aguilar
Amash
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--19
Beyer
Castro (TX)
Fattah
Green, Gene
Gutierrez
Huizenga (MI)
Johnson (GA)
Lofgren
Marchant
Massie
McCaul
McDermott
Moulton
Roby
Roybal-Allard
Sinema
Smith (WA)
Takai
Westmoreland
{time} 1740
Mr. ASHFORD, Ms. DUCKWORTH, Messrs. KEATING and SANFORD changed their
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. RIGELL changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 50, I was unavoidably detained.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
Stated against:
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, during Rollcall vote No. 50 on
the Pazazzo Amendment, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present,
I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Al Green) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 181,
noes 239, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 51]
AYES--181
Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gibson
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McGovern
McNerney
Meng
Moore
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--239
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
[[Page H481]]
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Salmon
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOT VOTING--13
Castro (TX)
DeSaulnier
Fattah
Green, Gene
Huizenga (MI)
Lowenthal
Massie
McDermott
Meeks
Moulton
Mulvaney
Smith (WA)
Westmoreland
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1744
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, during rollcall Vote No. 51 on H.R. 3700,
I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``no'' when I should have voted
``Yes.''
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, during rollcall vote No. 51 on
the Al Green amendment, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present,
I would have voted ``yes.''
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Womack) having assumed the chair, Mr. Poe of Texas, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3700) to
provide housing opportunities in the United States through
modernization of various housing programs, and for other purposes, and,
pursuant to House Resolution 594, he reported the bill back to the
House with an amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment
reported from the Committee of the Whole?
If not, the question is on the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, and the
order of the House of January 25, 2016, this 5-minute vote on passage
of H.R. 3700 will be followed by 5-minute votes on passage of H.R.
3762, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding,
and passage of H.R. 3662.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 427,
nays 0, not voting 6, as follows:
[Roll No. 52]
YEAS--427
Abraham
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Ashford
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bera
Beyer
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bost
Boustany
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Byrne
Calvert
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clawson (FL)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Curbelo (FL)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Donovan
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graham
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Honda
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Knight
Kuster
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Matsui
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McGovern
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Moore
Moulton
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nolan
Norcross
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Olson
Palazzo
Pallone
Palmer
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (NC)
Price, Tom
Quigley
Rangel
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Russell
Ryan (OH)
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Speier
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Torres
[[Page H482]]
Trott
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westerman
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOT VOTING--6
Castro (TX)
Fattah
Massie
McDermott
Smith (WA)
Westmoreland
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.
{time} 1752
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________