[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]]

  

                          ____________________