[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 15048-15055]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT CONGRESS SHOULD PARTICIPATE IN AND SUPPORT 
 ACTIVITIES TO PROVIDE DECENT HOMES FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES

  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend 
the rules and concur in the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 
43) expressing the sense of Congress that Congress should participate 
in and support activities to provide decent homes for the people of the 
United States.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            S. Con. Res. 43

       Whereas the United States promotes and encourages the 
     creation and revitalization of sustainable and strong 
     neighborhoods in partnership with States, cities, and local 
     communities;
       Whereas the United States promotes and encourages the 
     creation and revitalization of sustainable and strong 
     neighborhoods in partnership with States, cities, and local 
     communities and in conjunction with the independent and 
     collective actions of private citizens and organizations;
       Whereas establishing a housing infrastructure strengthens 
     neighborhoods and local economies and nurtures the families 
     who reside in them;
       Whereas an integral element of a strong community is a 
     sufficient supply of affordable housing;
       Whereas affordable housing may be provided in traditional 
     and nontraditional forms, including apartment buildings, 
     transitional and temporary homes, condominiums, cooperatives, 
     and single family homes;
       Whereas for many families a home is not merely shelter, but 
     also provides an opportunity for growth, prosperity, and 
     security;
       Whereas homeownership is a cornerstone of the national 
     economy because it spurs the production and sale of goods and 
     services, generates new jobs, encourages savings and 
     investment, promotes economic and civic responsibility, and 
     enhances the financial security of all people in the United 
     States;
       Whereas although the United States is the first nation in 
     the world to make owning a home a reality for a vast majority 
     of its families, \1/3\ of the families in the United States 
     are not homeowners;
       Whereas a disproportionate percentage of families in the 
     United States that are not homeowners are low-income 
     families;
       Whereas 74.2 percent of Caucasian Americans own their own 
     homes, only 47.1 percent of African Americans, 47.2 percent 
     of Hispanic Americans, and 55.8 percent of Asian Americans 
     and other races are homeowners;
       Whereas the community building activities of neighborhood-
     based nonprofit organizations empower individuals to improve 
     their lives and make communities safer and healthier for 
     families;

[[Page 15049]]

       Whereas one of the best known nonprofit housing 
     organizations is Habitat for Humanity, which builds simple 
     but adequate housing for less fortunate families and 
     symbolizes the self-help approach to homeownership;
       Whereas Habitat for Humanity is organized in all 50 States 
     with 1,655 local affiliates and its own section 501(c)(3) 
     Federal tax-exempt status and locally elected completely 
     voluntary board of directors;
       Whereas Habitat for Humanity has built nearly 150,000 
     houses worldwide and endeavors to complete another 50,000 
     homes by the year 2005;
       Whereas Habitat for Humanity provides opportunities for 
     people from every segment of society to volunteer to help 
     make the American dream a reality for families who otherwise 
     would not own a home; and
       Whereas the month of June has been designated as ``National 
     Homeownership Month'': Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) everyone in the United States should have a decent home 
     in which to live;
       (2) Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     should demonstrate the importance of volunteerism;
       (3) during the years of the 108th and 109th sessions of 
     Congress, Members of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, Habitat for Humanity, and contributing 
     organizations, should sponsor and construct 2 homes in the 
     Washington, D.C., metro area each as part of the ``Congress 
     Building America'' program;
       (4) each Congress Building America house should be 
     constructed primarily by Members of the Senate and the House 
     of Representatives, their families and staffs, and the staffs 
     of sponsoring organizations working with local volunteers 
     involving and symbolizing the partnership of the public, 
     private, and nonprofit sectors of society;
       (5) each Congress Building America house should be 
     constructed with the participation of the family that will 
     own the home;
       (6) in the future, Members of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, their families, and their staff should 
     participate in similar house building activities in their own 
     States as part of National Homeownership Month; and
       (7) these occasions should be used to emphasize and focus 
     on the importance of providing decent homes for all of the 
     people in the United States.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) and the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Frank) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. 
Miller).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to 
revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this 
legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I rise in strong support of this resolution expressing support for 
Congress Building America and for increased affordable home ownership 
opportunities.
  This country is home to people of many different origins, but 
everyone seems to have the same dream, to own their own home. This 
dream means many things: Independence, financial security, geographic 
stability, the ability to accumulate personal wealth, a place to raise 
a family, or simply a place to go after a long day's work and find 
peace.
  As a homebuilder for over 30 years, I enjoyed watching many people 
achieve this dream. One could always see the excitement and 
anticipation in the face of a home buyer. The Congress Building America 
program will offer every Member of Congress this opportunity to 
experience how the dream of homeownership builds hope in their 
communities and across the Nation.
  I feel very strongly about this issue, because homeownership is the 
key to personal wealth in our country. When someone buys a home, they 
purchase an asset which will grow over time.
  I started the Building a Better America Caucus, BABAC, when I arrived 
in Congress 4\1/2\ years ago, because I thought it was important to 
provide a forum for us to start addressing issues that impact 
homeownership. One of the objectives of BABAC is to help cultivate an 
environment where more Americans turn the dream of homeownership into 
reality.
  When I first started my business, I had an old van that used more oil 
than gas and a cardboard box which held every tool I owned. I started 
small. Over 30 years, my business grew, but with each passing year, I 
saw the impact of government on the housing industry. With each year 
came government laws and regulations making it harder to build homes. 
The red tape kept increasing costs. In business, these costs are passed 
on to consumers. Homes kept getting more expensive.
  It is very important that Congress start talking about how the 
government is impacting home prices. In some parts of the country, my 
district in southern California is one of them, the heavy burden of 
Federal, State and local mandates is creating a generation of people 
who cannot afford to live in the communities where they work and grew 
up. I call these people the new homeless.
  Exactly who are these new homeless? In my district, it might be a 
couple. The husband is a firefighter and the wife is a teacher. They 
have a good job and they make a good living, but the combined income 
does not enable them to purchase a median priced home in southern 
California which costs over $300,000 today. This is a national problem, 
and Congress must work expeditiously to address it.
  I encourage all my colleagues to become active members of BABAC so we 
can do something about the housing affordable crisis in this country.
  BABAC provides Members a forum where we can discuss ways Congress can 
increase homeownership in America. The Congress Building America 
program provides Members the opportunity to personally help make 
homeownership a reality for a family in their district.

                              {time}  1245

  The Congress Building America program will give every Member of 
Congress a chance to express their commitment to affordable 
homeownership by picking up a hammer and nails and building alongside 
Habitat for Humanity families to make the American Dream of 
homeownership a reality.
  The goal of this resolution is to encourage Members of Congress to 
participate in Congress Building America events with Habitat homeowner 
families and local Habitat affiliates in their districts or States 
during the 108th and 109th Congress. This new initiative is a 
partnership program between Habitat for Humanity International, the 
United States Congress, the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, and national corporate sponsors.
  I urge each Member to support this resolution and to personally join 
with the Habitat for Humanity affiliates in their districts to help 
low-income families realize the American Dream of homeownership.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, this resolution is really record-setting. I have not 
in all my years here seen so much wind up and so little pitch. This 
goes on quite eloquently and quite accurately about the importance of 
homeownership, and it talks about the need for affordable housing. It 
says, ``Whereas an integral element of a strong community is a 
sufficient supply of affordable housing.'' It says, on the next page, 
``Whereas affordable housing may be provided in traditional and 
nontraditional forms.'' It talks a very good game about the importance 
of housing, and particularly affordable housing; and it delivers 
virtually nothing.
  I have been lamenting for some time the opposition of my Republican 
colleagues to a housing production program in this country. In many 
parts of this country you will not get affordable housing, as we define 
that, that is housing for lower-income working people, middle-income 
people in some areas, unless there is some element of subsidy. We are 
not talking about the Federal Government simply building

[[Page 15050]]

the housing. We are talking about a whole range of cooperative 
programs, many of them private-public cooperations. But it is clearly 
the case that unless the Federal Government contributes something, you 
will not get affordable housing.
  Now, my Republican colleagues have been strongly against most 
production programs, but I see now they have come up with one. It is in 
this resolution, which I am going to vote for, because I am all in 
favor of good wishes. I think we should all, at all times, be in favor 
of things that we should be in favor of. And this resolution is clearly 
in favor of a lot of things that we should be in favor of. It just does 
not do anything about them. Does not make them worse. And it does have 
a production program.
  I call Members' attention to page 3, paragraph 3. It says, ``During 
the years of the 108th and 109th sessions of Congress, Members of the 
Senate and the House should sponsor and construct two homes in the 
Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.''
  Now, the legislative draftsmanship is perhaps not perfect. I will 
read that as being two homes each. I assume this does not mean that we 
should all of us build two homes. And I hope not, because there are 
people here that I would not want to be near them when they had a 
hammer or a saw or a drill. So I would not want to have to be in a 
joint effort to build some of these homes.
  So we are talking about two homes each for 4 years. Now, there are 
535 Members of Congress. Two homes apiece would be 1,070 homes a year 
for 4 years. So we now have the affordable housing program of the 
Republican Party for production: 4,280 homes over the next 4 years in 
the metropolitan Washington area, D.C. and Fairfax County, although 
they probably would not get that many, Alexandria, Arlington, parts of 
Montgomery and maybe more in Prince George's.
  Now, 4,280 houses is better than nothing, although I have to say I am 
willing to do my part; and I have to say this, we are not often 
sufficiently modest around here, and each of us is supposed to build 
two houses, but, Madam Speaker, I would not want to live in a house I 
built. There are some things I think I am good at, some things I am not 
so good at. The notion of all of us building houses is an interesting 
one.
  Actually, this is motivated both by a desire to do affordable 
housing, but it also carries out the Republican approach to unions. 
Because their entire production program would be built by 
overwhelmingly nonunion labor. There are a couple of Members here who 
are members of unions, although it is rarely the building trades. My 
colleague from Boston, the gentleman from Massachusetts, was an iron 
worker; but he can only do so much. And I do not know how many of the 
houses would be made out of iron or structural steel or whatever 
anyway.
  So here they have a housing production program, 4,280 houses for the 
entirety of America, built almost exclusively by nonunion labor, 
without a penny of Federal Government contribution. Unless we built 
them during work hours. I suppose if we built them during working 
hours, when we were getting paid, it would be some Federal 
contribution. I assume the position is that we do not.
  Now, I guess I am a little ambivalent about the notion of unleashing 
every Member of the House and the Senate to build two houses. I know 
you cannot comment on Senators, I understand that, Madam Speaker; but I 
think you can comment on past Senators, and I guess I can say that I am 
pleased Strom Thurmond will no longer be covered by this. It is a lucky 
thing we did not pass this last year, because Strom Thurmond would have 
been charged with building two houses somewhere, and I would want to 
live in those even less than the ones I would build.
  But the problem is not so much with what it says, but with what it 
does not say. We have not for some time had a program in this country 
to have Federal resources go for housing production. And in the absence 
of a housing production program, families will have a hard time getting 
affordable housing. We have some programs that help. We have the 
programs that help build housing for the elderly and for the disabled. 
We have the low-income tax credit, which does a good job; but it is 
limited. We have the section 8 voucher program which works well in a 
lot of areas, but the section 8 program does not contribute to 
production, particularly when we have rulings now that say you can only 
use a voucher 1 year at a time. No one can build a house on a year-by-
year commitment.
  So I am all in favor of the goals of this resolution. I just wish it 
did something other than asking this workforce to go out and build a 
couple of houses a year to carry it out. We have a terrible crisis in 
this country with regard to affordable housing. And let me just say, 
Madam Speaker, that one of the arguments we have when some of us talk 
about the need for the Federal Government to participate in doing 
things that are important for the quality of our lives, we are told we 
should not worry about it, the private economy will take care of it.
  The private economy does a great deal. The private economy supplies 
many of our needs, and a private sector is something we should all work 
for. But there are some things it will not do. And with the very 
prosperity of the 1990s, which was so important in helping people 
achieve so many goals, for many people it made the housing situation 
worse. Because prosperity is obviously not uniformly distributed. Under 
the policies now in power, it is even less uniformly distributed than 
ever, as a conscious choice. But even at its best, prosperity will be 
uneven.
  And many people in this country, in the greater Boston area, in the 
area around San Francisco, in Chicago, in many of our great 
metropolitan areas people whose incomes were somewhat fixed, many of 
them public employees, teachers, firefighters, police officers, and 
social workers, and public works people, people on relatively fixed 
incomes found themselves worse off in the housing market because 
prosperity drove up the value of many properties, and some people 
benefited enormously, and some were left behind.
  We are told, well, a rising tide will lift all boats. But if you are 
too poor to afford a boat, the rising tide will go over your head and 
drown you. And that happened to many people. The very prosperity of the 
1990s that were so welcome nationally exacerbated the housing crisis.
  That does not mean the government building all the housing is the 
answer. It does mean that a sensible, well-funded production program, 
where the government contributes along with the private sector an 
element of subsidy so that new housing can be built in many parts of 
the country, is the only way this resolution will be more than just 
empty rhetoric.
  So at this point we only have this resolution. But we will later in 
the year have a chance to address this, I hope. I hope the committee 
which brought this out, the Committee on Financial Services, which has 
jurisdiction over housing, will be allowed by the leadership of this 
House to formulate a sensible production program and bring it forward. 
And if we do, we may be able to rescue this resolution from the charge 
of being just empty rhetoric.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the author of this resolution.
  Mr. WALSH. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for 
yielding me this time, and I thank the House for considering Senate 
Concurrent Resolution 43.
  Just to depart briefly from my prepared comments, I listened to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts rail against this legislation. It is just 
absolute proof that no good deed goes unpunished. This is a good idea. 
This is an idea that is very successful. It is an idea that gives 
individuals the opportunity to volunteer to help their neighbors to 
build a home. I suspect even if he may be a ham-handed carpenter that 
with a good foreman on the job he could learn how to pound nails.
  But the point really is this is not about mass-production housing. It 
is

[[Page 15051]]

about creating homeownership. Earlier this week, I had the privilege of 
joining a handful of my neighbors at the home of Nyoka Williams, a 
participant in the Syracuse Neighborhood Initiative. The Syracuse 
Neighborhood Initiative is a city-wide effort to expand homeownership 
opportunities and improve quality of life in Syracuse, my hometown.
  We gathered to celebrate the success of the Mini-Grant program, which 
provides city families with grants and loans to improve their owner-
occupied homes. At the ceremony, Ms. Williams reflected on her own 
hard-fought struggle to purchase a home. This program creates 
homeowners.
  Now, not everybody in this country can afford to own a home, but we 
ought to be doing everything we can to make that possible, and this 
program goes a long way.
  With Syracuse Neighborhood Initiative's assistance and her hard work, 
her previously vacant home is now a showcase on the block. And after 
years of renting substandard apartments, she is thrilled to be able to 
take care of her aging mother and entertain her multiple grandchildren 
in her very own home. Ms. Williams told me that homeownership has not 
only provided her with a quality place to live and to spend time with 
her family, but has given her a renewed sense of pride in herself and a 
new level of confidence that she can meet any challenge.
  And I can tell you that Ms. Williams wears that sense of pride and 
accomplishment in a big beautiful smile whenever she talks about her 
good fortune and her very own home.
  Madam Speaker, for many years now, Habitat for Humanity has been 
working to offer the same level of accomplishment and that sense of 
pride to thousands of families the world over. By making homeownership 
affordable and accessible, Habitat has coordinated the construction of 
thousands of new homes across the United States, relying upon a great 
deal of donated goods and utilizing a volunteer labor force.
  Now, those volunteers can be labor union members or nonlabor union 
members. The good news is it does not matter. If they are willing to 
donate their time and hammer, or carry some lumber, or lay some 
concrete, God bless them. Nobody is going to tell them they cannot do 
it.
  This program has made 50,000 Americans homeowners. I am proud to be a 
veteran of previous Habitat builds back home in Syracuse, in my home 
town and here in Washington, where I worked with Members of the House 
and Senate on two different houses in the Washington, D.C. area. Some 
of us were more handy than others, but the good news is we worked 
together. Even in Belfast, Northern Ireland, people of both communities 
came together, and the Habitat house build provided a vehicle to bring 
people together. And it does that here too.
  It is our hope that every Member of Congress will build a house, all 
535 of us, in their districts, through this program. Habitat for 
Humanity provides affordable quality homes for those currently 
struggling to achieve the dream of homeownership. There are millions of 
Americans who could become homeowners if we helped them through this 
program and the many other programs provided through the housing 
agency, through HUD. They support renewed investment efforts in 
America's cities, and they allow for a better quality of life for all 
involved.
  I urge my colleagues to support S. Con. Res. 43 and encourage their 
active involvement in the Congress Building America program in the 
108th and 109th sessions of Congress. Prideful smiles like Ms. 
Williams' demonstrate just how rewarding homeownership efforts like 
Habitat for Humanity really are.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  I notice on page 4 it says each Congress Building America house 
should be constructed primarily by Members of the Senate and House, 
their families and staff. Now, presumably, if we do this, it is 
voluntarily. But if we pass a bill like this and our staffs do it, it 
might not be voluntary. We might need an interpretation from you, Madam 
Speaker, under the bill you have been sponsoring. If our staffs show up 
to build housing and they have to work overtime, would we pay them 
overtime or would they get comp time?
  So I think we will have to have further interpretation when our 
staffs report for home building, which some of them probably did not 
sign up for.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. 
Sanders), a very active leader in the fight for affordable housing in 
our committee.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. SANDERS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time and applaud the gentleman for all of the work he has done on 
affordable housing for this country.
  Today we are considering legislation which encourages Members of 
Congress ``to participate in and support activities to provide decent 
homes for the people of the United States.''
  I have no problem with this legislation. It would be very nice if 
Members of Congress worked together to build a few hundred units of 
affordable housing. The problem is that in the United States of America 
today, we have a housing crisis, and we do not need a few hundred units 
of new housing, we need hundreds of thousands of units of new housing. 
It is not acceptable for people to say it is so nice, we are 
volunteering our efforts.
  Madam Speaker, we have children sleeping out in the street all over 
America. We have working families working 40 hours a week living in 
their cars, and Members of Congress building a few hundred housing 
units might make for good press releases and photos in newspapers, but 
it does nothing to address the housing crisis in this country.
  While the affordable housing crisis in this country deepens, 
President Bush's proposed housing budget is 63 percent less than it was 
in 1976 during the last year of the Ford administration. While more 
than 3 million Americans will experience homelessness this year, 
including 1.3 million children, President Bush proposes to eliminate a 
$574 million a year program to revitalize public housing and recently 
refused to fully fund public housing operating expenses. While 4.9 
million American families pay more than 50 percent of their limited 
incomes on housing, President Bush has proposed to block grant the 
Federal section 8 rental assistance program which would raise rents and 
jeopardize rental assistance for tens of thousands of families.
  While President Bush says he supports expanding homeownership, the 
reality is that his initiatives have not produced a single home buyer 
in 2.5 years, and since the President took office, housing foreclosures 
have increased by 39 percent and home loan delinquencies have increased 
by 26 percent.
  Last year the Bush administration cared so much about affordable 
housing that they worked to defeat legislation that I introduced to 
provide the tools necessary to construct, rehabilitate and preserve at 
least 1.5 million affordable housing rental units over the last decade 
through a national affordable housing trust fund.
  Madam Speaker, we are not going to give up. Just a few months ago, I 
reduced the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund, a proposal that 
would not only provide real solutions to the affordable housing crisis, 
but would also lead to the creation of some 1.8 million new jobs and 
nearly $50 billion in wages. This legislation currently has 200 
tripartisan cosponsors, including 11 Republicans.
  This bill currently has 200 tri-partisan co-sponsors, including 11 
Republicans, and has been endorsed by over 4,000 groups representing 
labor unions, business leaders, religious organizations, environmental 
groups, bankers and affordable housing advocates.
  At a time when 4.9 million American families are paying more than 50 
percent of their limited incomes on housing and at least 800,000 
people, including 200,000 children, are homeless on any given night, 
the federal government has a responsibility to correct this crisis.
  If the Republican leadership and the Bush administration truly wanted 
to ``participate in and support activities to provide decent homes for 
the people of the United States'' they would join me in supporting a 
National Affordable Housing Trust Fund and get this bill signed into 
law as soon as possible.

[[Page 15052]]


  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I want to associate myself with 
the comments that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) and the 
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) have made. While I stand in strong 
support of this resolution, and it is a great resolution, great ideas 
about what need to be done, but in reality, we need to get serious 
about the business of doing it.
  The Congressional Black Caucus has a program called WOW, With 
Ownership Wealth, and in my congressional district, we have been going 
around promoting the purchase of homes by African Americans. We find 
that many people, once they reach the point where homeownership is in 
their mind, there is not the availability of homes that they can 
purchase. When we start talking about incomes of $25,000 and $30,000, 
people cannot purchase a $250,000 home. There must be affordable homes 
built.
  Just recently a study was done that the gentlewoman from Illinois 
(Mrs. Biggert) is associated with the organization, pointed out there 
are 850,000 individuals in the Chicago metropolitan area who live at or 
near the level of poverty. If these individuals are going to be able to 
purchase a home, not only must there be mortgage money available, but 
there also has to be the affordability of a house that they can buy.
  Madam Speaker, I support this resolution, strongly suggest that we 
find ways to implement the concepts of it and make real the idea that 
people can live in their house by the side of the road, and the only 
way we will do it is have affordable housing that they are able to 
purchase.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) who is the ranking member of 
the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity of the Committee 
on Financial Services, and a great leader in this field.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in respect for and in support of this 
resolution. Habitat for Humanity is a wonderful organization, with 
1,655 affiliates in all 50 States. Habitat for Humanity has built 
nearly 150,000 houses worldwide, and it has an ambitious goal of 
building another 50,000 homes by 2005. So I certainly support their 
efforts, and I am pleased the House and Senate staff and Members will 
join Habitat for Humanity in building a couple of homes right here in 
Washington, D.C.
  Yet, even as I congratulate Habitat for Humanity for all of its work, 
I believe that all of us need to take a broader look at the issues of 
affordable housing and housing policy generally. We are falling very 
short of where we need to be in order to make the goal of affordable 
housing a goal that is obtainable for all Americans. Much more work 
needs to be done.
  The unfortunate reality is that the Bush administration's 
homeownership record is one of feel-good rhetoric and photo 
opportunities, not one of substance. When it comes to creating 
affordable housing and helping to revitalize sustainable community 
development, the Bush administration is simply missing in action. Only 
47.1 percent of African American and Latino communities respectively 
are homeowners. Where is the administration's plan to improve 
percentages to those of other populations?
  We need to put a stop to predatory lending to vulnerable consumers. 
Where is the administration's plan to eliminate predatory lending to 
consumers who are new to the homeownership process? As Members know, 
predatory lending is the making of unethical and abusive mortgage loans 
that include excessive fees, inflated rates and such practices as 
making loans that the borrower cannot repay. The predatory lending 
industry has grown significantly over the past 10 years.
  The Federal Government has a responsibility to protect homeowners who 
are subject to predatory practices. Predatory lending affects borrowers 
of all races and income levels, but such lenders often target elderly 
homeowners and people of color. For example, borrowers 65 and older are 
3 times more likely to hold subprime mortgages than borrowers 35 years 
of age. Simply put, when it comes to housing, there is much more we 
need to be doing than just commending Habitat for Humanity for building 
some housing. For example, we need to adopt legislation that ensures 
that consumers will pay no penalties when prepaying all or part of a 
mortgage credit loan balance. We should be working to ensure that there 
is no financing of credit, life, disability or unemployment insurance 
on a single premium basis. We also need to protect anyone from 
knowingly engaging in the practice of flipping a mortgage loan or 
extension of credit.
  We also need policies and practices that will nullify any mortgage or 
loan contract that does not contain all the written terms of the 
contract or has blank spaces for such terms to be filled in after the 
contract is signed.
  Mr. Speaker, increasing the supply of affordable housing, protecting 
consumers from predatory lending and predatory mortgage servicing. This 
is the housing agenda we need to be pursuing. I urge the Bush 
administration to join us in this effort.
  I commend Habitat for Humanity for its tremendous work and urge all 
my Colleagues to support this Resolution.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to 
the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).
  Mr. WATT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlemen for yielding me this 
time to give me an opportunity to express myself on this resolution.
  We obviously are all supportive of the resolution dealing with 
Habitat for Humanity and encouraging our colleagues to participate in 
the effort here in the District of Columbia. We are supportive of 
anything that does decent and affordable housing for people in this 
country.
  Mr. Speaker, it is for that reason that we are so perplexed by the 
President's decision not to go forward with the Hope VI project by 
zeroing out Hope VI and saying that Hope VI has apparently served its 
purpose in this country.
  I just came from a meeting with a group of students, one of whom was 
Ms. Audrey Evans who is a student at North Carolina A&T State 
University, and without knowing I was coming here, she said I want to 
commend you on the Hope VI program. She said she was raised in public 
housing, and our commitment to Hope VI helped to change her life 
because putting public housing in communities and allowing her to be 
exposed to people around her who are interested in succeeding 
educationally and economically and personally is something that has 
meant so much to her.
  Throughout America, we have heard these stories about how successful 
Hope VI has been. On a bipartisan basis in our committee, just like 
both of these gentlemen have yielded me time, we are perplexed as to 
why such a successful program, which coincidentally was a Republican 
program instituted by Secretary Kemp when he was Secretary of Housing 
and Urban Development, how could we terminate such a program as this?
  We are supportive of this resolution, but we also want this 
administration to be committed to housing in general in this country.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  As I read this resolution, I really did think I was reading the 
fundamental arguments for the establishment of a national affordable 
housing trust fund which has been sponsored by over 200 members of this 
body. So I would like to read just a couple of whereas clauses which 
explain why I think this resolution sounds like the provisions of the 
National Housing Trust Fund.

[[Page 15053]]

  Whereas establishing a housing infrastructure strengthens 
neighborhoods and local economies and nurtures the families who reside 
in them; whereas homeownership is a cornerstone of the national economy 
because it spurs the production and sale of goods and services, 
generates new jobs, encourages savings and investment, promotes 
economic and civic responsibility and enhances the financial security 
of all people in the United States.
  That is some of what this resolution says. I fully support and 
appreciate the efforts of Habitat for Humanity and really agree that 
they should be applauded and supported. However, this resolution is 
just another vehicle for Republicans to talk about their nonexistent 
housing agenda. This Congress must allow us to debate and vote on 
significant housing legislation.
  My frustration with my Republican colleagues for failing to bring 
significant housing legislation to the floor and for ignoring the 
dismal housing and economic outlook in this country is really only 
compounded by the Republican attempts to clock weak homeowner 
initiatives by pretending to support the American dream of 
homeownership.
  While the nationwide homeownership rate is approaching 70 percent, 
the African American and Latino homeownership rates pale in comparison, 
to about 46 percent; and in the administration's Homeownership 
Downpayment Assistance Program, they would not even support foreclosure 
assistance to help these homeowners keep their homes and protect 
taxpayer investment.
  Of the 3.9 million low-income households to be considered working 
poor, over two-thirds pay 30 percent or more of their income for 
housing costs, with one-quarter paying over half their incomes. In 39 
States, 40 percent or more of renters cannot afford fair market for a 
2-bedroom unit, and that is why creating more affordable housing and 
homeownership should be our focus.

                              {time}  1315

  Consistently since the Bush administration has drafted budgets, they 
seem to negate the promise of homeownership, community investment, and 
fair, quality housing. This administration continues to cut the HUD 
budget and fight successful programs such as HOPE VI, section 8, the 
public housing drug elimination program and the creation of a national 
affordable housing production program.
  I will vote for this resolution; I support it, but I encourage the 
other side to bring some real housing bills to the floor very soon.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I enjoyed the one comment: ``This resolution is here so Republicans 
can just talk about affordable housing.'' The gentleman from 
Massachusetts and I, we do agree on one major issue: There is a huge 
shortage of affordable housing in this country. I believe we both have 
a passion in common to try to resolve this problem. Earlier this year, 
I brought a bill up before our committee on brownfields. Brownfields 
are contaminated sites within inner cities where the infrastructure is 
in place and the need for affordable housing is there. The gentleman 
from Massachusetts has worked hand in hand with me to bring this to the 
floor, but because of a lack of agreement on his side of the aisle, 
none to his blame, we are unable to do that because one Member wants to 
define brownfields using an EPA definition. The gentleman from 
Massachusetts and I realize that if you do that you eliminate petroleum 
sites which are 50 percent of the half million sites in this country. 
So he and I have worked to resolve something and others are giving lip 
service to this issue.
  There has been much talk about subsidies. We deal with section 8 
housing and the need for section 8 housing. We come to an agreement 
that there is a need for that. But in Los Angeles County, we had the 
housing authority here, I asked them the question of what is your 
occupancy rate in California, in L.A. County? They said, we are 97 
percent occupied. That means 3 percent of the units that are not 
occupied are under renovation. Basically, they are 100 percent full. 
They have no available section 8 housing for people to go to. We can 
increase section 8 vouchers causing more money to chase no product, and 
all it does is increase the cost of the product.
  But there have been things that have been said here today. We need 
subsidies which we do provide some. The President has come up with a 
great idea. He said, let us allow people to take section 8 vouchers, up 
to 12, and apply them as a down payment to buy a home. That is a great 
idea. I hope the appropriators this year will fund that program. What 
we are saying is people who have been locked into section 8 housing can 
now take the money they would have received in 12 months and put it as 
a down payment to buy a home, so 10 years, 15 or 20 years from now 
their payment is the same as it is today, not rising as it does in 
rental housing. We need to create homeownership rather than just create 
renters in this country.
  There has been a comment made about we need a housing production 
program. We have that in this program. It is called the Building 
Industry Association. But government does everything it can to stop 
builders from providing affordable homes in this country. We have so 
many mandates on builders. I remember 30 years ago when I entered the 
industry, you could go out within a matter of 2 months and make 
application on a tract map to build a tract of homes, whether it be 
five, 10 or 15; and in 60 days you had entitlements, yes or no. They 
had to do it because on day 59 you were approved by law. I talk to 
builders today that have been 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 years processing 
subdivisions trying to provide affordable housing for the people of 
this country and they cannot get through the process.
  I spend more time helping builders with Fish and Wildlife and Army 
Corps of Engineers issues. One thing I wish the other side of the aisle 
would agree to do and that is reform the Endangered Species Act. In 
Colton, California, there is one project that has 3,000 homes on 3,000 
acres. They are only wanting to develop about 300-and-something of 
those acres, but they happen to have a rat on that property. It is 
called the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. It is becoming extinct. People 
who love rats want to set aside habitat for these rats, but they always 
want to set the habitat aside on privately owned property. That means 
somebody who owns a piece of land, all of a sudden the government 
determines that they own habitat that this rat should live on. The 
problem with the San Bernardino kangaroo rat is it only lives in 
washes, which means every time it rains during the winter, the little 
critters drown and the reason they are becoming extinct is the little 
critters are too stupid to get out of the wash that they are drowning 
in and go somewhere else. So no matter what we do, those little 
critters year after year after year are going to continue to be less in 
population than they are today because they are too stupid to move out 
of a wash.
  There is another great one in California called the Delhi sand-loving 
fly. I remember years ago when our parents ran this country, we used to 
swat flies and poison rats. Now we set aside habitat for them on 
privately owned property. Something is wrong with this country. I think 
it is incumbent upon us to change it. It is nice to give lip service 
about affordable housing, and I believe many of my colleagues who spoke 
today are genuine about a passion; but this resolution allows Members 
of Congress to actually do something besides give lip service, lean 
over and pound some nails, finish some concrete, hang some dry wall, 
put some roofing material on, put some plumbing in, run finish on 
electrical, paint, hang doors, run casing and base.
  We can actually do something besides talk about it. Yes, it is a 
small gesture; but if you look at the problems we have caused because 
of the stupid laws and regulations we have placed on the building 
industry today, anything we do, even if it is small, will help. If we 
are really talking about helping people get into affordable housing, 
let us do

[[Page 15054]]

something genuine about it. More government is not going to solve 
anything. Yes, more government has created a problem and some believe 
that government money now should resolve that problem and that is 
wrong.
  If we would just step back at the Federal, State and local level and 
say, how do we reduce the regulations placed upon the building industry 
so a person can go out and reasonably buy a piece of property and in a 
given span of time can build homes instead of 3, 4, 5, 10 years of 
process. When you take 3 years to get an entitlement, it is costing 
somebody a lot of money to buy the property and hold it and pay all 
these consultants to work on the property.
  In California, we require builders to go through title 24. That is 
energy efficiency, which means a home must be airtight, no air 
infiltration. They even limit it in most fireplaces you can put in that 
are man-made because they do not want air infiltration in a home. When 
you have water and no air infiltration, what do you get? Mold. One of 
the problems we are facing in this country is that insurance companies 
do not want to write policies because of mold. If we did not have the 
policies we have today dealing with energy efficiency, perhaps we would 
not have some of the mold problems we have in this country.
  When we talk about affordable housing, let us talk about it in 
reality. If you are going to have section 8 housing that is available, 
you have got to have an affordable move-up marketplace, and it is not 
there today. People in section 8 housing receiving government 
assistance cannot afford to move out of that house because there is not 
an affordable unit for them to move into. So if we really want to help 
people be able to get out of section 8 housing, to actually attain the 
rights that we believe they should have of homeownership and the luxury 
that goes along with that, with building assets and everything else, if 
we really want to do that, then let us look at the structure we have 
created. Let us pass a law that says any regulation at the State level 
or the city level that has any negative impact on the cost of housing 
must have a cost-benefit analysis and you must be able to determine 
that it is really beneficial to do that, not just something that makes 
people hug each other and feel good and pat each other on the back. Let 
us change the way we do business in this country.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I yield to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I just want to make sure I understand. 
The gentleman is proposing that we pass a Federal statute that would 
say that no local zoning regulation could go into effect?
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I take back my time. What I said is 
a cost-benefit analysis. If you can do something and determine that 
there is a benefit in the regulations you are placing on affordable 
housing, that is fine. But for us to sit here and say, oh, we need to 
have more government programs and more government funding and yet we do 
not get to the core problem of affordability, you have to get to the 
core problem of affordability. There is no difference from us saying, 
let us, the Federal Government, fund housing but you have got to have 
everybody in agreement we are even going to put it there.
  The problem you have with section 8 housing, and the gentleman from 
Massachusetts knows this to be a fact himself, is you go to many 
communities and you say you are going to build low-income housing and 
the whole community is in an uproar because they do not want it in 
their community because they start saying, you are going to have gang 
violence, you are going to have problems, you are going to have 
transients. They do not want it in their communities.
  I am not saying that it is bad; I am saying that is just a fact. It 
is this NIMBY, not in my backyard attitude. That is a problem we face 
in this country, unless you will change the laws to where a builder has 
a reasonable time to process a subdivision. Yes, let us look at the 
environmental impact that might be placed on the community of a 
project; let us look at the environment, if there are any species that 
are going to be harmed there. But let us do it in a reasonable span of 
time, not 3, 5, 10 years. I told the gentleman from Massachusetts of a 
project I owned for 12 years that I finally ended up selling to the 
city because nobody wanted it built, yet there was not a bit of flora 
or fauna that was in any way impacted, nor was there a species out 
there that was on the endangered species list. Let us look at the 
problem and let us work together to see that we are not overturning 
local rights, but let us work with the local communities.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. If the gentleman will yield further, I 
think the gentleman, however, is being inconsistent. I have been 
critical of the use of local zoning in many cases to block housing 
proposals, but I do want to be clear. These are local and State laws. 
The Endangered Species Act is Federal. But most of what the gentleman 
talked about are local and State laws, and I am asking the gentleman, 
is he proposing that at the Federal level we pass statutes that 
regulate and restrict and limit what form local zoning can take, saying 
that it has to have a cost-benefit analysis, et cetera? I might be 
interested in joining that, if that is what the gentleman is 
advocating.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Reclaiming my time, if we look 
prior to 1948, the tax revenues in this country generally went to 
cities. It started to change after 1948. The State started taking more 
and the Federal Government started taking more. About 1972, it got so 
bad that locals were being deprived of so much money they could no 
longer afford to put the streets and the sewers and the storm drains in 
necessary to build homes. Why? Because the Federal Government and the 
State government got greedy and started taking the money from the 
people who need it, the cities. What we have done is create a situation 
where now the tax dollars are not put in the infrastructure; the 
builder puts in the infrastructure. Plus he pays for all the local 
mitigation and impacts that the community might face in some fashion, 
even if it is a signal 5 miles down the road that might be impacted in 
some fashion because this tract of 80 people living in it might impact 
that intersection.
  But we have got to look at what government has done. Government has 
changed to such a degree that we have taken the money, become greedy; 
and now we do not want to address the problems we can address.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 43, which 
expresses the sense of Congress that this legislature should 
participate in and support activities to provide decent homes for the 
people of the United States.
  The goal of this resolution is to encourage members of Congress to 
participate in Congress Building America build events with Habitat 
homeowner families and local Habitat affiliates in their districts or 
states during the 108th and 109th Congress, and I urge each member's 
support of this resolution and to personally join with the Habitat for 
Humanity affiliates in their districts to help low-income families 
realize the American dream of homeownership.
  I urge my colleagues to endorse this resolution that will not only 
express the sense of Congress in support of increased affordable 
homeownership opportunities, but will result in the building of 
hundreds of new homes for low-income and minority families across the 
country.
  The fact that June is National Homeownership Month makes the 
scheduling of this concurrent resolution especially appropriate. For 
the vast majority of families, homeownership serves as an engine of 
social mobility and the path to prosperity. We are blessed to live in a 
country where every citizen--regardless of race, creed, color, or place 
of birth--has the opportunity to own a home of their own. And, new 
homeowners can create wealth for their families for generations to 
come, while also helping transform neighborhoods and communities.
  The home has long held a place of mythic stature in the hearts and 
minds of Americans, as many of this country's forebears considered 
homeownership a key component of a democratic society. Homeownership 
creates stakeholders within a community and inspires civic 
responsibility. It offers children a stable living environment that 
influences their personal development in many positive ways--including

[[Page 15055]]

improving their performance in school. Studies by housing experts show 
a clear link between an increase in homeownership and a decrease in 
crime rates.
  In the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity this year, I 
plan to continue working hard to explore new ways to put people on the 
path to homeownership, so they can realize its many benefits. The 
Financial Services Committee already marked-up three housing bills last 
month by voice vote: H.R. 23, The Tornado Shelters Act, H.R. 1614, the 
HOPE VI Program Reauthorization and Small Community Main Street 
Rejuvenation and Housing Action of 2003, and H.R. 1276, The American 
Dream Downpayment Act.
  The American Dream Downpayment Act, introduced by Katherine Harris of 
Florida, is a vital initiative in the creation of new homeowners. This 
bill would provide $200 million in grants to help homebuyers with the 
downpayment and closing costs. This has the potential of assisting 
40,000 families annually achieve the dream of homeownership and would 
make available subsidy assistance, averaging $5,000, to help low-
income, first-time home buying families.
  In addition to moving these important pieces of legislation, the 
Subcommittee is in the midst of holding a series of hearings examining 
the current operation and administration of the Section 8 Housing 
Choice voucher program, which provides rental assistance to more than 
1.8 million families. While the concept of the program remains sound, 
the program has often been criticized for its inefficiency. More than a 
billion dollars are recaptured from the program every year, despite 
long waiting lists for vouchers in many communities. The rising cost of 
the Section 8 program and some of the administrative concerns have 
caused many in congress and the Administration to conclude that the 
program is in need of reform. In the coming months, I look forward to 
hearing the different perspectives from our many distinguished 
witnesses as we continue to discuss ways to improve America's 
communities and strengthen housing opportunities for all citizens.
  Congress Building America will enable Members of Congress to express 
their commitment to affordable homeownership by picking up hammers and 
nails and building alongside Habitat for Humanity families to make the 
American dream of homeownership a reality. This initiative is a hands-
on approach to making affordable homeownership a reality, one family at 
a time, one community at a time.
  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. Con. Res. 43, which 
expresses the sense that Congress should participate in and support 
activities to provide decent homes for the people of the United States. 
I urge my colleagues to not only join me in supporting this resolution, 
but to also join the thousands of Americans who volunteer their time to 
provide for those less fortunate.
  This resolution calls upon Congress to support activities to provide 
decent homes for Americans and recognizes an organization that has been 
working towards improving housing conditions for over 27 years now. Of 
course, I'm talking about Habitat for Humanity, an organization that 
has built nearly 150,000 affordable houses for families worldwide and 
is planning to complete another 50,000 homes by 2005. In fact, Habitat 
for Humanity just dedicated two homes in my district in Mansfield, Ohio 
on Father's Day and more houses are being dedicated all over Ohio on an 
ongoing basis. Several local businesses and charitable organizations 
also help support the building of these homes. This kind of effort 
provides a great example of what we can accomplish when communities 
come together to assist their residents.
  The resolution outlines a plan for a new initiative called Congress 
Building America, which calls upon the Members of Congress to 
demonstrate the importance of volunteer work by working with Habitat 
for Humanity and other contributing organizations to construct homes 
across the nation. This simple, but adequate, housing for less 
fortunate families, symbolizes the self-help approach to homeownership. 
Under this model, homeowners contribute sweat equity toward their new 
home, building it alongside trained volunteers. The new homeowner then 
has the opportunity to buy the home with a no interest mortgage. The 
average cost of these homes is $53,000 with a monthly payment of around 
$266. In most cases, the payment is even lower than what they were 
paying for substandard rental units.
  Beyond the obvious benefit to the new homeowner, Habitat's work to 
provide safe, decent and affordable shelter for thousands of needy 
families adds to the national economy because it spurs the production 
and sale of goods and services, generates new jobs, encourages savings 
and investment, promotes economic and civic responsibility, and 
enhances the financial security of all Americans.
  One of the greatest attributes of organizations such as Habitat is 
that the benefits of service go both ways. Not only are families in 
need of housing receiving benefits, but volunteers often find their 
service extremely rewarding as well. It is great to see so many young 
people serving their fellow citizens by volunteering to help those less 
fortunate. Over 10,000 students have signed up to help Habitat for 
Humanity build houses through their Collegiate Challenge program 
breaking down barriers to homeownership and breaking down the 
stereotype of a typical college kid on spring break at the same time.
  Clearly, there is still much work to be done. We are focusing our 
efforts to increase the availability of affordable housing in 
communities across the country. Today we are here to reaffirm that 
commitment and recognize all the hard work that has already been done. 
I would therefore like to take this opportunity during National 
Homeownership Month to thank those organizations, such as Habitat for 
Humanity, that work to help families achieve the dream of 
homeownership.
  I would also like to commend the Housing Subcommittee, chaired by 
Representative Bob Ney, today for its hard work to break down the 
barriers to homeownership faced by too many Americans. By the end of 
this week the subcommittee will have held 11 hearings as part of its 
effort to pursue an aggressive legislative agenda. At the top of that 
list is the American Dream Downpayment Act which will provide $200 
million in grant funds assisting approximately 40,000 low-income 
families with down payment and closing costs on their first homes.
  I encourage my colleagues to join me in participating in the Congress 
Building America program and look forward to the many continued efforts 
which will build communities across the nation and help thousands of 
American families buy homes.
  Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for 
the passage of Senate Concurrent Resolution 43, the resolution that 
expresses the Congress's support for the Habitat For Humanity and the 
good work this great organization does for American families throughout 
the Nation.
  I am proud to say that this wonderful institution was born in 
Americus, GA, within the district that I am so privileged to represent. 
Since its inception, this model of compassion and commitment to 
humanity has spawned similar groups, and has changed the way many 
Americans view the problem of homelessness and derelict housing. At 
this very moment somewhere in America, a home is being built by the 
Habitat For Humanity. The number of volunteers now exceeds 200,000 and 
is growing. More than 100,000 homes have been built and renovated, and 
more are being completed across the country at a rate of 1,000 per 
month. But we can do even more.
  This resolution encourages Members of Congress to participate in 
``Congress Building America'' events with local Habitat For Humanity 
affiliates in their home districts that will continue and increase the 
homebuilding effort all across America.
  Mr. Speaker, Habitat For Humanity works. What seemed like a dream to 
those who had the vision in Americus so many years ago, is now becoming 
a reality. Decent housing for every American--thanks to Habitat For 
Humanity, this is an idea whose time has come.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Isakson). The time of the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) has expired.
  The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Gary G. Miller) that the House suspend the rules and 
concur in the Senate concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 43.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the 
yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________