[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 36 (Wednesday, March 1, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1514-S1521]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
President's Address to Congress
Mr. President, I want to comment briefly on last night's address by
President Trump to a joint session of Congress.
I think it is safe to say that the President had an extraordinary
night last night. This is not just a view from a partisan, but, I
think, on a bipartisan basis, people were enormously impressed by the
vision the President laid out.
I have had some private conversations with colleagues on the floor,
who have said to me, in essence, that this is an unusual and
unconventional President but one who is clearly interested in making
progress for the American people. He laid out a broad, welcoming vision
of some of the things he wants to accomplish, but he did so in a way
that welcomed Democrats and bipartisan support to help make that
progress for the American people. I think they were somewhat surprised
but gratified to hear the President make those sorts of remarks, and I
congratulate President Trump for doing it.
Basically, he articulated an optimistic vision and a new direction
for the country. This election, like the election back in 2008, was a
change election. We have those every now and then. After one party is
in power for 8 years, frequently, people say: We would like to try
something different. We would like a change election.
We had a true change election in 2016.
The American people made clear that they wanted to get back in the
game when they elected President Trump in November--by that I mean in
terms of our American prosperity, our American strength, our American
leadership in the world. President Trump talked about a new national
pride and of cultivating a surge of economic security across the
country. I think, at bottom, his speech was a message about
confidence--confidence in the American people, confidence in our
economic system, which has lifted more people out of poverty than has
any other system the world has ever known, confidence that,
unfortunately, had been lost during the Obama years that focused so
much on self-doubt and America's role in the world--retreating from
that role--unfortunately, leaving a void that has been filled, all too
eagerly, by tyrants, dictators, and thugs, like Vladimir Putin, for
example.
It is also true that this President was elected because, for too
long, many people in this country had felt left out and felt like they
just were not a part of the conversation we were having here about the
great issues of the day. Many felt sidelined, even alienated, by
irrelevant policy debates that had nothing to say to their quality of
life in America. Many believed they truly didn't have a seat at the
table.
President Trump's message throughout the campaign and now--about 5
weeks into his new administration--reflects, I think, the frustration
and even the angst many Americans had felt and the gratification now,
as they feel like they have somebody who believes in what they believe
and will not leave them on the sidelines.
I believe what President Trump represents is an antidote to what many
people saw as wrong with Washington, DC. While it is true that
President Trump has never held public office before--by all accounts,
he is an unconventional political leader--last night, we heard he will
work with all of us to actually do something about the concerns of
hard-working American families. He will usher in a new era of renewed
confidence in what the American people can accomplish together as we
enter into, as he put it, a time of national rebuilding.
This is about restoring faith in the American dream. My parents were
part of the ``greatest generation''--of those who fought in World War
II, who preserved America and a great future for their children and
grandchildren. It sickens me, when I read public opinion polling, that
too many people today say they do not see that better life--more
secure, more prosperous--for their children and grandchildren in the
future. What they are saying, in essence, is that we are losing faith
in the American dream. I think what President Trump talked about last
night is a renewed faith and a renewed commitment to the American
dream, which means some sacrifice on the part of the present
generation, not just in spending money we do not have and in racking up
debt we will never repay and that our children and grandchildren will
be saddled with.
Just as one example, President Trump talked about taking on this
tepid economic recovery he inherited and turning it into a jobs machine
that grows our economy for everyone. This is an optimistic message, as
many have noted--it is Reaganesque, really, in its tone--in its talking
about building the American economy and reestablishing America's
leadership role in the world. I know it is just one indicator.
If you want to look at some objective measure of the American
people's hopefulness and optimism about the future, all you need to do
is to look at the stock market, as it has gone up 10 percent since
President Trump was sworn in and closed at a record high for the 12th
day in a row--a record that goes back to 1987. To me, that is saying
that the markets and the American people are hopeful about what might
be accomplished together under this administration.
One of the things we heard last night, as well, is a reflection of
what Vice President Pence has told us in private gatherings--I have
heard him say it in public gatherings as well--which is that the
administration is in the ``promise-keeping business.'' Keeping your
promises is important. How are you going to maintain the public's
confidence when people say one thing when they are campaigning, and
then,
[[Page S1515]]
once they are sworn into office, they forget about those promises and
move on? I am grateful this administration believes in the importance
of keeping promises.
We have already seen the President keep his promises to help rein in
overreaching regulations; his commitment to reforming the Tax Code,
which he talked about last night, so that the economy can grow again
and we can all benefit; and his commitment to repealing and replacing
the failed experiment of ObamaCare. All of these, he reiterated, he has
begun to work on, and he has actually committed to seeing them through
to completion. These just aren't talking points, these are promises he
has already begun delivering on.
I am personally grateful--and I am sure the Presiding Officer is as
well--that he has also reprioritized our national security. National
security is just not one on a cafeteria plan that we can kind of walk
into and say: I will take a little of this and a little of that.
National security is the No. 1 priority for the Federal Government. No
one else can do that. At a time when our country faces innumerable
threats from all around the world, including terrorism here at home, I
appreciate the fact that the President is committed to doing what it
takes to restore our national security, to protect our borders, and to
restore the rule of law.
I think it is just as simple as this President is committed to
getting back to the basics of governing. He is doing what he said he
would do, and I find that reassuring, together with the outstanding
Cabinet members he has selected to serve with him in his
administration.
What America needs and what my constituents in Texas call, write, and
ask me about all the time is a way forward that delivers security to
our people, encourages prosperity for everyone, and instills confidence
in the job creators and investors so we can enjoy a new era of
prosperity for all of our people.
I am confident President Trump, in working closely with Congress, can
deliver on these and many more promises he has made to the American
people. It is obvious to me, from his comments last night, that he is
welcoming and inviting our Democratic colleagues to stop the
resistance--to stop the obstruction--and to actually come join us in
helping to move the country forward. I find that refreshing and
welcome, as I hope some of our colleagues will who still haven't quite
gotten over the election on November 8 and the constituents they have
who feel they are still in a protest mode. There is a time for
competing in elections, and then there is a time for governing. That
takes all of us, as adults who care deeply about our country, working
together on a bipartisan basis to try to find common ground and move
the American people's agenda forward.
I look forward to working with the President to make America a
stronger, safer, and more economically vibrant nation. That is
something we all want and something we should all work together to
achieve.
As I said, as we go forward, I hope our friends on the other side of
the aisle look at the bigger picture. I have been here long enough to
experience when people run for election--like many will do in 2018--and
have no record of accomplishment to point to. I believe the Presiding
Officer knows what I am talking about. Growing our economy and
protecting our homeland should be bipartisan. It should be nonpartisan.
And, as the President mentioned, now is the time to come together to
unify as Americans to make our country stronger.
I hope all of our colleagues will join together, including our
Democratic friends, to let us get to the work of legislating, to let us
get off of this extended foot-dragging timetable on confirming the
President's nominees for his Cabinet, especially when we are seeing
votes like we saw on Mr. Zinke and Mr. Ross--68 to 31, 72 to 27. There
is no rationale for delaying those confirmations when our Democratic
colleagues are voting to confirm them. We could have done this on
January 20.
Mr. President, I thank my friend from Ohio for his courtesy.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise in support of Dr. Carson for
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. However, I just can't
resist, as I listened to my friend Senator Cornyn--and I do like and
respect Senator Cornyn, and I do mean that. It is always said here, but
I actually do. I am just amused by the term ``obstructionism.'' This
President was 100 yards down the hall speaking last night and still
hasn't put any legislative proposals forward--nothing on immigration
except Executive orders; nothing on infrastructure even though
Democrats have followed the four corners, if you will, of his proposal,
$1 trillion over 10 years--put ink to paper and actually written a real
plan that includes public transit, that includes highways and bridges
and water and sewer and housing and airports and ports and all of the
things we do in doing it right on infrastructure, on public works. So
we are all still waiting.
The President has made a lot of speeches. Last night he was not as
combative as usual. That was welcome. I think we all, as Senator Cornyn
said, applauded that. But we are still looking for substance. We are
looking for one bill. Repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act--what
does that mean? He still hasn't given us anything specific. They have
been voting on replacing and repealing the Affordable Care Act for more
than a decade, but they still don't have a plan.
If we listen to the Governor from my home State, the State where the
Presiding Officer grew up--they should listen to our Republican
Governor, who admonishes colleagues here: Don't repeal the Affordable
Care Act unless you have a way to take care of 700,000 Ohioans who have
lost their insurance under Medicaid; not to mention 100,000 who will
lose their insurance who are on their parents' health plan; not to
mention 100,000 who are on the exchanges; not to mention 100,000
seniors who are saving $1,100 on their prescription drugs a year; not
to mention 1 million Ohio seniors who get free, no copay, no deductible
osteoporosis and diabetes screenings and physicals and all the things
the Affordable Care Act gives them. They offer no proposals to replace
any of those services. They talk about State lines, and they talk about
health savings accounts, and they talk about tort reform. That is like
this many people compared to this many people. They know that. Yet I
still hear this talk of obstructionism. Give us stuff. Give us
legislative proposals.
The assistant majority leader started off by talking about I guess a
slow-walk of nominees. Now, I am the ranking Democrat, and my friend
Senator Crapo is now the chairman of the committee. He was not chairman
then, and he is not mostly responsible for this. But I am on the
Banking Committee, and last year, with a Democratic President--I don't
want to look back and do tit-for-tat. It is not about that. It is about
moving the country forward. But last year--what was it--25 to 30
nominees came from the President. Some were very significant, including
the Export-Import Bank. Some were Federal Reserve. Some of them were
inspectors general, and most people don't quite know what they do. But
all nominees, more than 25, more than two dozen nominees--1 of them was
confirmed by the Senate last year, 1 of 28 or so in our committee, and
he was confirmed in December, in the 24th month of the 2-year term. So
don't lecture us about people slow-walking and obstructionism and all
of that. There were more than 25 nominees, and 1 of them was confirmed.
SEC, Securities and Exchange Commission, didn't move; Federal Reserve,
didn't move; the public transit administrator, didn't move--one after
another after another. The Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial
crimes didn't move. Even though he was originally a Bush nominee and
then was promoted in the Obama years, he didn't even come to a vote
because of whatever reason the Banking Committee gave us. So we don't
need that lecture.
But more important, on these nominees, we all know the history. When
I look at criticism and hear ``Why aren't these nominees all passed?''
let's look at about 6 or 8 months ago. Every Presidential candidate,
until this last election, starts to put together a transition team in
August, and President Trump--Candidate Trump began to do that but not
with much seriousness. Then the person he had leading his
[[Page S1516]]
transition team he fired in November, soon after the election, so he
had to start again. So he had no people kind of ready to go on these
nominations, what, in fact, he was going to do on all of these Cabinet
positions.
After that, he didn't really vet, he didn't really analyze, he didn't
really look at the backgrounds of these nominees. So if they didn't do
it--usually the President's people look at these nominees and analyze
and see how corrupt they are, if they have conflicts of interest, all
of that. Well, they didn't do that in this administration because
apparently they didn't have time. So they nominated these people, and
we have never seen this many conflicts of interest, we have never seen
this kind of wealth, and we have never seen this many billionaires
appointed to the Cabinet.
Just out of the Finance Committee, the Secretary of Health and Human
Services bought and sold health care stocks of companies--on the floor
of the House of Representatives, he was working on bills and
amendments; yet he bought and sold hundreds of thousands of dollars'
worth of health care stock, and then he didn't tell the committee the
full story.
The Secretary of the Treasury had a $100 million investment he forgot
to report. Maybe somebody out there would forget if they had a $100
million investment. They might forget they had it, but most Americans
wouldn't forget that. He lied to the committee. He lied to the
committee about robo-signings. Hundreds of--and this was directly
related to this nomination--hundreds of Ohioans, at least, maybe
thousands, lost their homes--including in the Presiding Officer's home
city where he grew up--because of these robo-signings.
So that is why this has been slowed down--because many of these
nominees are unqualified for the jobs, many of them have conflicts of
interest, and many of them have very complex financial holdings and
portfolios that take a long time to sort through. That is the reason
for the delay, and to accuse us of anything else is just playing
politics.
As I said, I am here today to argue for the confirmation of Dr.
Carson.
I voted for a number of these nominees when I thought they could
offer something to our country. I voted against some of the most
corrupt and some of the most out-of-step and some of the most far-
right, radical nominees, and that list is, unfortunately, much longer
with this President than any President in American history.
Dr. Carson had a distinguished career as a pediatric neurosurgeon. We
know that about him, and that is good. His remarkable life story is
well known to millions of Americans. We know that about him, and that
is good. But he is not the nominee I would have chosen to lead HUD. In
fact, he is not the nominee any President in my lifetime would have
chosen to lead HUD because he has no direct experience with the housing
and community development fields.
He made troubling statements on public policy issues prior to his
nomination. My colleagues and I on the Banking Committee asked Dr.
Carson several very direct questions about his views now that he is the
nominee for Secretary of HUD. I will give Carson the benefit of the
doubt--that is why I will vote for him--because he made commitments to
me in person, sitting in my office, across the table, and he made
commitments in the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee in his
testimony and in his written responses.
Dr. Carson promises to address the scourge of lead hazards that
threaten the health and the future of children in Ohio and nationwide.
Under oath, he pledged to uphold the Fair Housing Act and the housing
rights of LGBTQ individuals. That wasn't what his past has been. He has
made comments that I find offensive or worse about gay people in this
country, but he made the commitment under oath to our committee that he
would fight any discrimination against people because of their sexual
orientation.
He has pledged to advocate for rental assistance and investment to
end homelessness. He has pledged to push to include housing in the
President's infrastructure plan.
Those are commitments he made. Those are commitments he made under
oath. Those are commitments I will hold him to in spite of perhaps his
prior philosophy of government and in spite of perhaps some of his
comments he might have made in the past. My job is to hold him
accountable for this. The job of everybody in this Senate, of both
parties, is to hold him accountable.
Dr. Carson's responses to my questions for the record are available
as part of the record of the Banking Committee's January 12, 2017,
hearing on the nomination of Dr. Carson to be Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. I have also made them
available online as part of my statement on the Banking Committee's
approval of Dr. Carson's nomination on January 24, 2017.
My statement and the link to the questions for the record are
available on the Banking Committee's website at http://
www.banking.senate.gov/public.
Mr. President, as the ranking member of the Banking Committee--and I
would emphasize the committee--while the last 2 years, it might only
have been called banking, maybe it could have just been called Wall
Street for the way it was running, but the full name of the committee
is Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. It is important to remember
that. We oversee housing policy, and I see how important this
Department is for people in Ohio and across our country.
HUD is in charge of enforcing fair housing laws. It has been an
essential partner in our national efforts to prevent and end
homelessness for veterans--something Senator Crapo talked about--for
the chronically homeless, and for youth and families. The Department's
primary rental assistance program helped 4.5 million low-income
families, the elderly, and people with disabilities find a place to
call home--something that should be a right in this country.
HUD has assisted cities and towns in their efforts to revitalize
neighborhoods and invest in communities and promote lead-safe, healthy
housing for children. There is still a great challenge in States like
mine where there is deteriorating lead paint in old homes that threaten
so many children. In my hometown of Cleveland and where I grew up in
Mansfield and in Appalachia and in city after city and community after
community in my State, there are lots of older homes. In the city of
Cleveland, well over half the homes are at least 60 years old.
I asked somebody from the Cleveland health department: What
percentage of those homes have toxic levels of lead? And he said 99.
Understand that old homes in this country--homes that are 60, 70, 80
years old--many homes fall into that category, and they overwhelmingly
have toxic levels of lead.
My support for Dr. Carson centers around the fact that he may not
know much about housing policy yet--I am hopeful that in the tours he
takes, including to my State and the chairman's State of Idaho--I hope
and I assume he will learn more about housing, but one thing he does
know as a brain surgeon is he knows what lead does to the development
of children.
The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported 70 census tracts in Cuyahoga
County where as many as one in three children are poisoned because of
the age and the condition of the housing stock. One in three children
has her or his physical and emotional and mental development sometimes
arrested or slowed because of lead poisoning.
Through the Federal Housing Administration, HUD works with lenders to
help creditworthy borrowers access stable mortgage credit so they can
purchase a home. FHA played a central countercyclical role in providing
mortgage credit following the financial crisis when the private sector
largely withdrew from the field, as we remember. It has since receded
into its typical share of the housing market. It is still essential,
though, for home buyers, including many first-time and minority home
buyers. HUD'S role will only become more important as housing
communities' development challenges have grown. The need for affordable
housing has grown dramatically since the great recession. The demand
for units has increased while wages have stagnated.
The market alone is not producing sufficient housing for families and
those on fixed incomes. Studies have demonstrated that many people who
perform essential work--child care
[[Page S1517]]
teachers, school bus drivers, retail workers, people working full time,
people working just as hard as the staff in front of me, people working
just as hard as people who have titles like mine--simply can't afford
the rent in the communities they serve. Half of the people who rent pay
more than 30 percent of their income for housing.
One-quarter of all renters--25 percent of all renters, 11 million
people in this country--pay more than half of their incomes for rent.
If you are paying 51, 52, 55 percent of your income in rent, if one bad
thing happens--a sick child, your plant lays you off for 2 weeks, your
roof leaks, any number of things can happen. When you are living on the
edge, when half of your income is for housing, what happens? You lose
your home. You get evicted.
These burdens are more severe at the bottom of the income spectrum
among extremely low-income renter households--those with incomes at or
below 30 percent of median income, and 75 percent may pay more than
half of their income in rent.
The National Low Income Housing Coalition identified a shortage of 7
million affordable and available rental units for the Nation's
extremely low-income renter households. We are reaching only one out of
four of those eligible families. Many end up on years' long waiting
lists for lack of funding.
Government extends a hand to some of these families, but not to
nearly enough. That needs to change. Despite the growing need for
affordable housing, we risk losing the affordable housing resources we
have due to physical deterioration or the end of long-term
affordability contracts of property owners.
Families burdened by high housing costs have fewer resources
available to meet other needs such as transportation for work and food
and medicine. They even face eviction and homelessness; 500,000 people
were homeless on any given night in January of 2016--550,000, actually.
The Department of Education data, which includes families doubled up
for economic reasons, indicates that 1.4 million school children and
their families were homeless at some point during the 2013-2014 school
year. Think about that. Some of these kids were exposed to lead and
have learning disabilities. Others don't get enough to eat, in spite of
the family school breakfast and lunch program, because they don't eat
so well on weekends and at night and on summer vacations or whenever.
In addition, 1.4 million are homeless.
Matthew Desmond wrote a book called ``Evicted.'' He is a gentleman I
have gotten to know a little bit. He lived in Milwaukee, a poor White
neighborhood, a poor Black neighborhood. He wrote about people he got
to meet and got to know, and he spent enough time where he got to know
people. When he signed this book, he wrote: Home equals life. If you
don't have a decent place to live--and I would imagine that none of us
in this Chamber has that challenge. When you don't have a place to call
home, your life can be upside down. With all of the challenges and all
of the things that can happen, when you get evicted, your kids have to
move to a new school district. You don't know where you are going to
end up. You lose the few possessions you have when you're evicted. This
book is recommended reading for anybody who works on housing issues. It
is a book called ``Evicted'' by Matthew Desmond.
One last point: I look forward to working with colleagues in the
administration on the President's proposed $1 trillion investment and
infrastructure, including housing. To jump-start the conversation about
the President's proposed infrastructure package, my colleagues and I
announced a blueprint to rebuild America's infrastructure.
I find it interesting, again, that the assistant majority leader
talked about Democrats' intransigence and Democrats' obstruction when
the President has put nothing out there on infrastructure, nothing out
there on housing, nothing out there about healthcare--repeal and
replace--none of those kinds of legislation.
We don't even know what he is talking about, other than saying ``$1
trillion.'' Democrats acted responsibly and put out our $1 trillion 10-
year plan, hoping the President's $1 trillion 10-year plan can match up
and we can work together. This blueprint talks about ways we invest in
American infrastructure to improve the Nation's transportation, water,
housing, and community infrastructure and create thousands of good-
paying union jobs in construction and manufacturing jobs with strong
``Buy American'' provisions.
Even though the President in his prior life as a businessman wore
suits, sold suits, sold tableware, and sold glassware made overseas,
and even though this suit I wear is made by union workers 10 miles from
my house, the President, now that he is President--the issue is not his
own private business or his family's own private business where they
outsource jobs to do production so they make more money. I don't like
that, but that is no longer our business. What is our business is that
the President steps forward with ``Buy American.''
``Buy American'' means if there is steel in an infrastructure
project, it should be made by steelworkers in Youngstown or Lorain, OH,
or somewhere in Ohio. If there is iron in these projects, if there is
aluminum in these projects, if there is concrete, if there is any kind
of product, if taxpayers are paying for it, it should be made by
American workers.
Our blueprint is central to HUD's mission. It includes $100 billion
to rebuild Main Street and communities. It includes ideas to address
affordable housing challenges, eliminate blighted properties that bring
down local property values, and remediate lead hazards that threaten
children. We are ready to work on real infrastructure.
As I said, I am going to vote for Ben Carson for Secretary of HUD. He
is not an inspiring choice, but he is someone who is an accomplished
man. I count on him to help us address this terrible lead problem. I
count on him to stand with us, as he pledged, to address the scourge of
lead. I count on him to uphold the Fair Housing Act and the housing
rights of LGBTQ individuals. I count on him to advocate for rental
assistance and investment and homelessness. I count on him to push to
include housing in the President's infrastructure plan. I count on him
to fight the President. If the President is going to increase defense
by $50 billion and cut a whole host of housing and urban programs, I
count on this nominee. He promised our committee. He said it. He said
it in private meetings. He said it in public meetings. We will hold him
accountable. I plan to vote yes.
To reiterate, I rise today to speak on the pending nomination of Dr.
Benjamin Carson to be the new Secretary of the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, or HUD.
Dr. Carson is not the nominee I would have chosen to lead HUD, due to
both his lack of direct experience with the housing and community
development fields, and his often troubling public statements prior to
his nomination.
Despite my reservations, and my disagreements with some of his
positions, I will give Dr. Carson the benefit of the doubt based on
commitments he has made to me in person and to the Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs Committee in his testimony and written responses.
This includes Dr. Carson's promises to:
Address the scourge of lead hazards that threaten the health and
futures of children in Ohio and nationwide; Uphold the Fair Housing Act
and the housing rights of LGBTQ individuals; Advocate for rental
assistance and investment to end homelessness; And push to include
housing in the President's infrastructure plan. Let me be clear: I will
do everything in my power to hold Dr. Carson accountable for making
good on his promises.
Role of HUD. As the ranking member of the Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs Committee responsible for housing policy, I have seen how
important the Department is for people in Ohio and across the country.
HUD is charged with enforcing our fair housing laws. It has been an
essential partner in our national efforts to prevent and end
homelessness for veterans, the chronically homeless, and youth and
families.
The Department's primary rental assistance programs help over 4.5
million low-income households of families, the elderly, and people with
disabilities find a place to call home.
[[Page S1518]]
It assists cities and towns in their efforts to revitalize
neighborhoods and invest in communities; and promotes lead-safe,
healthy housing for children.
Through the Federal Housing Administration, HUD works with lenders to
help creditworthy borrowers access sustainable mortgage credit so they
can purchase a home.
The FHA played an essential, countercyclical role in providing
mortgage credit following the financial crisis, when the private sector
largely withdrew from the field.
It has since receded to its typical share of the housing market, but
it is still essential for many homebuyers, including first-time and
minority homebuyers.
HUD's role has only become more important as our housing and
community development challenges have grown.
The need for affordable housing has grown dramatically since the
Great Recession, as demand for rental units has increased and wages
have stagnated.
The market alone is not producing sufficient affordable housing for
families and those on fixed incomes.
A person with a full-time job would need to earn an hourly wage of
$20.30 in order to afford a modest, two-bedroom rental at HUD's
national average fair market rent.
This ``housing wage'' is far above the minimum wage, income available
to people with disabilities who rely upon Supplemental Security Income,
or even the median wage earned by renters.
Studies have demonstrated that people performing essential work--like
child care teachers, school bus drivers, and retail workers--are often
unable to afford rent in the communities they serve.
Half of all renters--over 21 million households--paid more than 30
percent of their incomes towards housing in 2014. And a quarter of all
renters--over 11 million--paid more than half their incomes for rent.
These burdens are more severe at the bottom of the income spectrum.
Among extremely low income renter households--those with incomes at or
below 30 percent of area median income, 75 percent pay more than half
their incomes on rent.
In 2016, the National Low Income Housing Coalition identified a
shortage of 7.2 million affordable and available rental units for the
nation's ELI renter households.
We are reaching only one out of four eligible families. Many end up
on years-long waiting lists for lack of funding.
Despite the growing need for affordable housing, we risk losing the
affordable housing resources we have due to physical deterioration or
the end of long-term affordability contracts with property owners.
Public housing alone needs an estimated $26 billion in major repairs.
HUD estimates that we are losing 10,000 units of public housing every
year due to physical obsolescence.
According to Harvard's Joint Center on Housing Studies, nearly 2.2
million units of HUD-assisted and low income housing tax credit-
supported housing will reach the end of their affordability periods by
2025. Families burdened by high housing costs have fewer resources
available to meet other needs like transportation to work, food, and
medicine, and they may even face eviction and homelessness.
Nearly 550,000 people were homeless on a given night in January 2016.
Department of Education data, which include families doubled up for
economic reasons, indicate that nearly 1.4 million school-age children
and their families were homeless at some point during the 2013-2014
school year.
The hardships stemming from evictions and homelessness make it harder
for families to climb the economic ladder.
As Matthew Desmond, author of Evicted, points out: ``Eviction is a
cause, not just a condition, of poverty.''
Trump Urban Renewal Plan. Throughout his campaign, President-elect
Trump promised to rebuild America's ``inner cities,'' which he labeled
``hell holes.''
Mr. Trump spelled out his views in his, quote, ``New Deal for Black
America, With a Plan for Urban Renewal.''
The plan covers issues such as school choice, investing in law
enforcement, tax reform, trade, and infrastructure investment.
At a time when more than 11 million families are paying more than
half their income toward rent, and half a million people have no place
to call home, the President-elect's plan does not mention this housing
crisis.
In addition, cities, like Black Americans, are not monolithic.
In recent years, many cities have seen a wave of population growth
and investment that have led to greater economic activity, tighter
rental housing markets, and rising rental housing costs.
As a result, many lower-income families and businesses who endured
challenging decades in their communities are finding themselves priced
out of their long-time neighborhoods just when additional economic
opportunities are opening up.
Loss of housing in urban neighborhoods can push residents away from
access to jobs, transit, and local support networks such as hospitals
and child care.
In many of these neighborhoods, federally-assisted housing may be
coming to the end of long-term affordability contracts or at risk of
loss due to physical deterioration and HUD will be called on to help
low-income people access the opportunity that has finally come to their
neighborhoods.
HUD will need to respond to a diverse set of challenges across the
country.
Dr. Ben Carson is a distinguished pediatric neurosurgeon. His
remarkable life story is well known to all of us, and to millions of
Americans beyond this room. He is an inspiration and a testament to the
American dream.
Dr. Carson's experience, while impressive, does not automatically
qualify him to lead HUD.
In reviewing Dr. Carson's nomination, I had the opportunity to
question him extensively about his plans as Secretary. His answers were
responsive, in contrast to many of President Trump's nominees.
Dr. Carson committed to: Address the scourge of lead paint hazards
that threaten the future of too many of Ohio's children; Uphold the
Fair Housing Act and housing rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender and queer (LGBTQ) individuals; Advocate for rental
assistance and investment to end homelessness; and Push to include
housing in the President's infrastructure plan.
Some of Trump's appointees have taken positions antithetical to the
agencies for which they would be responsible. In his testimony, Dr.
Carson did not seem to be in this camp.
At that hearing, Carson stated that he plans to go on a listening
tour across the country and at HUD to learn what is working and what is
not. And he promised to surround himself with pragmatic, bipartisan,
senior advisers.
He said: ``I will surround myself with people who have a passion for
improving the agency, not breaking down its programs.''
In many cases, Dr. Carson moderated or reversed controversial
positions he had taken previously.
I will discuss a few of the commitments Dr. Carson made during our
committee process.
Lead Paint Poisoning. Dr. Carson promised to work to end the scourge
of lead poisoning that threatens the health and futures of too many
children in Ohio and across the country.
There is a growing realization that safe, affordable housing is a
platform for good health.
Whether that is healthy housing that protects kids from lead and
asthma-inducing mold, accessible units that help seniors safely age in
place and avoid expensive institutional care, or housing that enables
people with disabilities to live in the community.
As Dr. Carson said in his written statement: ``There is a strong
connection between housing and health . . . Housing (and housing
discrimination) is a ``social determinant'' of health . . . These
problems occur across America--in cities as well as suburbs and rural
areas . . . We cannot have social mobility without a strong healthy
foundation in the home.''
When Dr. Carson and I met privately, we discussed the tragic effects
of lead in Ohio and nationwide. He knows--from a medical perspective--
the terrible price that children and society pay for the legacy of lead
in water, industrial settings, and, all-too-often, deteriorating paint
in their homes.
While we have rightly focused on lead in water in Flint, MI, and
Sebring, OH,
[[Page S1519]]
the most prevalent source of childhood lead poisoning is lead-based
paint in homes built before the federal government stepped in to
prohibit its use in 1978.
Approximately 23 million older homes have significant lead paint
hazards, 3.6 million of which house children under six who are most
susceptible to the effects of lead paint poisoning. This is a great
challenge in states like mine that have a lot of older homes.
The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that that there are nearly 70
census tracks in Cuyahoga County, where I live, where as many as 1 in 3
children are likely poisoned because of the age and condition of the
housing stock.
This is a tragedy not just for these kids and families, but for
society. We all absorb the increased costs of medical care, education,
criminal justice, and lost economic potential that stem from childhood
lead poisoning.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Dr. Carson to address
the avoidable tragedy of childhood lead paint poisoning.
Fair Housing. Dr. Carson pledged to uphold the nation's fair housing
laws, which includes the requirement that HUD's grantees affirmatively
further fair housing.
At the hearing, Dr. Carson was clear about his support for the Fair
Housing Act, stating:
I think the Fair Housing [Act] in 1968 was one of the best pieces of
legislation we had. It was modified 1988. LBJ said no one could
possibly question this, I agree with him.
I asked Dr. Carson about a 2015 Washington Times Op-Ed in which he
objected to HUD's rule implementing the Fair Housing Act's
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing provision, likening it to a
failed socialist experiment.
The rule, which implements a requirement of the Fair Housing Act, was
adopted after a two-year public comment period and responds to GAO
criticism of HUD's previous guidance in this area.
Carson stated that his op-ed had been ``distorted by many people.''
He went on to say that he has no problem with ``affirmative action or .
. . integration'' but that he does have a problem with people dictating
policy when they don't know the area when we have ``local HUD officials
. . . who can assess what the problems are in their area and, working
with local officials, can come up with better solutions.''
The fair housing rule is such a locally driven conversation, because
it requires HUD grantees to analyze their own situations and develop
locally driven plans to address their fair housing challenges.
Finally, Dr. Carson stated in writing that he would enforce the Fair
Housing Act and support HUD's 2015 rule.
If Dr. Carson were to reverse the fair housing rule, it would violate
his commitments at the hearing and in writing.
LGBTQ Housing Rights. During the Committee's process, I sought
information on Dr. Carson's views of the housing rights of LGBTQ
individuals.
In the past, Dr. Carson has made troubling comments about LGBTQ
people that raised questions about whether LGBTQ people should enjoy
the same rights as everyone else.
Dr. Carson's views in this area are important because the HUD
Secretary oversees the housing rights of all Americans, including LGBTQ
people. LGBTQ people face housing discrimination, bullying, and an
alarmingly high incidence of youth homelessness.
In his written statement, Dr. Carson clearly stated that he wants to
improve the lives of all families and communities ``no matter their
race, creed, color, or orientation.''
In light of his previous statements, my colleague and I asked further
questions.
I asked Dr. Carson whether he believes that HUD has a duty to take
actions that promote equal access to housing opportunities for LGBTQ
people. In response, he stated that he believes that ``all Americans .
. . should be protected by the law,'' but went on to say that no one
gets ``extra rights.''
To clarify his meaning, I asked whether he could think of any
instances where protecting equal access to housing opportunities for
LGBTQ people would mean providing them ``extra rights.''
His response was ``I cannot.''
I also asked whether he believes that HUD provides ``extra rights''
to LGBTQ people that need to be withdrawn.
His response was ``I do not.''
In other statements, Dr. Carson also clearly pledged to protect the
LGBTQ community from discrimination and to continue to support and
enforce HUD's equal access rules.
These rules ensure that all individuals have equal access to the
Department's programs ``without regard to actual or perceived sexual
orientation, gender identity or marital status'' and in accordance with
their gender identity.
If Dr. Carson is confirmed, any actions that he or the agency take to
discriminate against or limit the housing rights of LGBTQ individuals
and families would be contrary to his statements to me and the
Committee.
Rental Assistance. Dr. Carson promised to be an advocate for HUD
rental assistance.
During the hearing, Dr. Carson backed away from his previous position
calling for 10 percent across-the-board cuts to Federal programs as a
budget-cutting measure.
At our hearing, Dr. Carson noted that he had revised his position to
1 percent across-the board cuts as a way to achieve budget savings.
While I do not subscribe to this policy, it shows moderation of Dr.
Carson's previous position.
With respect to HUD programs, he recognized the value of HUD rental
assistance programs in meeting the needs of the lowest income
individuals, stating:
When it comes to deep affordability, though, removing all
regulatory barriers won't get you there. It comes down to
subsidy. . . . I think we can all agree that we will all make
sure housing is a key consideration in every appropriations
bill . . . If confirmed I will be a vocal advocate internally
for funding, but prioritization will continue to occur in
this Administration as it did in the last.
Dr. Carson also recognized the value of the important safety net
provided by HUD programs, stating that ``the rental assistance program
is essential'' and that ``safety net programs are important. I would
never . . . advocate abolishing them without having an alternative
route for people to follow.''
Ending Homelessness. In 2010, Opening Doors, the Federal Strategic
Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness, set out goals to end homelessness
for veterans, the chronically homeless, families, children, and youth
and all other homelessness.
Through a combination of bipartisan federal investments in
appropriate housing solutions particularly permanent supportive housing
for the chronically homeless and HUD-VASH vouchers for veterans and
improved practices at the federal and local levels, we have made real
progress toward these goals. Since 2010, such investments have helped
reduce chronic homelessness by 27 percent and veterans' homelessness by
47 percent.
Yet, more remains to be done.
According to HUD's ``2015 Annual Homeless Assessment Report'' to
Congress, approximately 549,928 people were homeless on a given night
in January 2016. Nearly 195,000 of the homeless on this night were in
families including at least one child.
Stating that ``No one can argue with the goal of ending
homelessness,'' Dr. Carson said he intends to build on the progress we
have made toward ending homelessness. He also said he will ``call for
continued investment to end homelessness for veterans, the chronically
homeless, and children and families.''
Dr. Carson also praised the United States Interagency Council on
Homelessness, which coordinates Federal efforts to efficiently and
effectively combat homelessness and helps facilitate local communities'
coordinated efforts.
Housing and Infrastructure. The President's promised $1 trillion
investment in infrastructure is one of the pillars of the President's
Plan for Urban Renewal. This is an area where I have said I would like
to work with the new administration.
Our grandparents built an infrastructure for us that was the envy of
the world and became the foundation of our economy for years to come.
But after decades of neglect, we need to reinvest.
My colleagues in the Democratic caucus and I are taking the President
up on his call for a $1 trillion investment in American infrastructure.
[[Page S1520]]
To jump-start the conversation about the President's promise, we
announced ``A Blueprint to Rebuild America's Infrastructure.''
This blueprint talks about ways we can invest in American
infrastructure to improve the Nation's transportation, water, housing,
and community infrastructure while creating thousands of construction
and manufacturing jobs in Ohio and across the country.
Our blueprint includes $100 billion to rebuild our main streets and
communities, which is central to HUD's mission.
This includes ideas to address affordable housing challenges,
eliminate the blighted properties that bring down local property values
in neighborhoods, and remediate lead hazards that can set children back
for life and increase public costs.
We need to invest in the infrastructure of our communities.
I've talked about the need to address lead-based paint to prevent
childhood lead poisoning.
In communities across Ohio and the country, blighted properties are
holding our neighborhoods back. They reduce neighbors' property values,
reduce tax base necessary to support public services, and create crime
and safety threats.
A 2015 report from Policy Matters Ohio estimated Ohio alone would
need $750 million to address the State's residential demolition needs.
Our public housing alone needs an estimated $26 billion in repairs.
When we met, Dr. Carson said that he is supportive of investing in
our public housing infrastructure.
In questions following the hearing, I asked Dr. Carson whether he
would work with the President to ensure that there is a real
infrastructure package to address the needs of our urban and rural
communities and that it includes funding for preserving and creating
affordable housing.
In response, Dr. Carson responded by saying, ``I will absolutely
commit to advocating for the inclusion of housing in the President
Elect's infrastructure package.''
I look forward to working with Dr. Carson to ensure that the
administration supports these job-creating investments in our housing
and other infrastructure.
Support Despite Reservations. As I stated at the outset, Dr. Carson
is not the nominee that I would have chosen to lead HUD.
I do not agree with all of his positions.
For example, Dr. Carson wants to help people increase their incomes
so that they can become self-sufficient. I also believe we should do
everything we can to help families escape poverty and find good,
middle-class jobs that can sustain a family.
However, Dr. Carson seems to believe that this can be done without
raising the minimum wage and without the Labor Department's overtime
rule that would help 100,000 workers in my state get the pay they
deserve. He believes incomes will rise just by creating the right
``environment.''
I believe that the Federal Government should stand on the side of
workers rather than advancing a billionaire agenda.
But despite my reservations and my disagreements with some of his
positions, I am voting to confirm him, based on the commitments he made
to the committee that I discussed here today.
The National Low Income Housing Coalition, or NLIHC, is a leading
national organization advocating for safe, affordable housing for low-
income people, including the residents of HUD-assisted housing.
NLIHC recently circulated a statement that reads:
Despite our initial concerns about Carson's lack of
experience with and knowledge of the HUD programs that he
would oversee, NLIHC does not oppose his nomination:
As demonstrated in his Senate confirmation hearing, Carson
has clearly taken the time to begin to understand and come to
appreciate the importance of HUD's programs.
Once confirmed, NLIHC is committed to working with Dr.
Carson to ensure that the lowest income people in America
have decent, affordable and accessible homes.
In the coming years, I will do everything in my power to hold him to
his promises and to advocate for HUD's important work.
I Hope the Administration Helps Him Succeed. Even if Dr. Carson and I
shared the exact same views, I would be concerned about what the next
few years bodes for HUD and our communities.
On January 23, the Trump administration adopted a hiring freeze and
called for a reduction in the Federal workforce.
HUD already experienced the greatest percentage drop in career
employees across the government from 2005 through 2014, and now HUD
faces the highest percentage career employees eligible to retire by
2019.
According to HUD's FY 2017 budget justifications, ``This retirement
wave can cause a loss of leadership and institutional knowledge at all
levels.''
Such a loss could also cause a failure to ensure that the Department
is upholding its duties to taxpayers by ensuring the quality of
federally-assisted housing, fair housing enforcement, and overseeing
FHA lending programs, for examples.
Dr. Carson says he wants to learn from and be on the side of HUD's
career staff. Let's hope the administration gives him sufficient
staffing to accomplish his mission.
I am also very concerned about HUD's budget going forward.
The Senate recently confirmed Mick Mulvaney, an ideologue who
threatened to default on our debt and wants to gut our retirement
safety net, to lead the President's Office of Management and Budget.
There have been reports that the administration has been considering
using Heritage Foundation budget blueprints as the basis for its budget
proposals.
Heritage has proposed budget outlines that would literally zero out
the HUD rental assistance programs and the Community Development Block
Grant Program.
We are also hearing reports that the Trump administration is making
plans to cut nondefense discretionary programs by $54 billion in fiscal
year 2018--about a 10 percent cut--in order to fund increased defense
spending.
This cut would come on top of the sequestration-related cuts to
nondefense discretionary, or NDD, programs that will kick in in FY 2018
if we don't do something to stop them.
NDD programs at HUD have already absorbed cuts. Since 2010, funding
for public housing has fallen 21 percent, while funding for the HOME
program has fallen by more than 50 percent.
Sequestration cuts in FY 2013 reduced the number of housing vouchers
by more than 80,000. In recent years, Congress and local agencies have
been able to restore many of these lost vouchers, but further cutbacks
will reverse this trend.
At a time when our families are facing growing affordable housing
needs, the administration may be considering cuts that would devastate
our housing safety net and leave families, seniors, formerly homeless
veterans, and communities reeling.
All of this is coming at the same time that they are repealing the
ACA and working to repeal rules that protect workers, consumers, and
retirees.
At our hearing, Dr. Carson himself walked away from previous comments
he had made in support of 10 percent across-the-board cuts.
At the nomination hearing, Dr. Carson stated:
I want to advocate for the HUD budget. . . . In the process
of doing a listening tour and in talking to the people who
were there already I want to put together a world-class plan
on housing in this country and then I want to come to you
with that world-class plan and I want to convince you all
that this is what we need to do.
I hope that the administration and those setting budget priorities
here in Congress will give Dr. Carson and HUD the tools they need to
fulfill their mission.
If not, I hope my colleagues and citizens across the country will
work with me to ensure that we have a housing and community development
policy that meets the needs of all Americans.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Ernst). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tillis). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
[[Page S1521]]
____________________