[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 8963-8964]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    THREATS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE SECTION 8 VOUCHER PROGRAM

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I express my extreme disappointment

[[Page 8964]]

with the administration's recent announcement on Fiscal Year 2004 
Section 8 voucher renewals that threatens to end a long standing 
commitment to fully fund all Section 8 vouchers in use. Coupled with 
its budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2005 that would slash funding for 
Section 8, the Bush administration has given the Nation's communities 
ample reason to be concerned about the future of the Housing Choice 
Voucher Program.
  The Section 8 voucher program has been the cornerstone of Federal 
housing policy for nearly 30 years. The program provides the Nation's 
most vulnerable families with vouchers to help them cover the cost of 
modest apartments and homes in the private market. It serves more than 
2 million families nationwide who are trying to make ends meet. In my 
home State of Vermont it helps nearly 6,000 households--more than 60 
percent of them are elderly or disabled members and 24 percent of them 
are working families.
  Unfortunately the administration has chosen to shortchange the 
program in a way that will almost guarantee that the poorest of 
families lose their support. They recently announced the intention to 
move from a funding formula based on the actual cost of vouchers to a 
model that calculates voucher costs based on last year's costs, pegged 
to a regional rent inflation index--which may or may not reflect local 
market conditions--and despite the fact that they may have access to 
more recent and accurate data on voucher costs.
  The new formula does not take into consideration potential changes in 
personal incomes, and it does not provide definitive safeguards for 
public housing authorities--PHAs--that have seen rising voucher costs 
over the last year or that will be unable to meet their obligations to 
voucher holders once this policy is enacted. What I find even more 
troubling is that HUD will apply this formula retroactively, leaving 
many public housing authorities shortchanged by millions of anticipated 
dollars.
  Without the necessary funds to support all vouchers they have issued, 
many PHAs are either going to have to scale back subsidies or revoke 
vouchers completely. Already we are seeing the effects. PHAs are 
starting to realize massive gaps in their budgets. They are considering 
course corrections to plug these holes and in some cases have stopped 
accepting additional applicants for the Section 8 waiting list. If the 
administration's policy is carried out, it will be the first time since 
1974 that the Federal Government walks away from our commitment to 
honor all authorized voucher contracts.
  This new policy goes against the intent and will of Congress. We made 
it clear in the Fiscal Year 2004 Omnibus Appropriations Bill that the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development--HUD--should do everything 
in their power to ensure that all vouchers were fully funded, and we 
gave HUD the resources and tools they needed to do so. The 
Appropriations Committee added more than $1 billion dollars to the 
administration's request for Section 8 vouchers, we gave HUD access to 
a central reserve fund to supplement voucher payments in the event that 
costs exceeded expectations, and the Senate passed sense of the Senate 
language reaffirming our commitment to the voucher program and to those 
that it serves. The intention of Congress could not have been clearer.
  As a member of the VA-HUD appropriations subcommittee, I am not 
without concern for the rising cost of the Section 8 program, and I 
understand the need to look for creative solutions to contain those 
costs. But this new funding formula is irresponsible and shortsighted. 
Simply serving fewer people, or people with higher incomes--the almost 
certain outcome of this approach--is the wrong response to the rising 
cost of Section 8. Instead, we should be looking at measures to reduce 
the cost of housing and to raise the average wage. We should look at 
policies which will enable families to afford a place to live without 
Federal assistance.
  This new ruling is contrary to the administration's own goal to 
eliminate chronic homelessness in 10 years and will put a strain on 
other support services such as homeless care providers who are already 
stretched beyond their means. If it is not reevaluated, it will leave 
thousands of families nationwide at risk of losing their housing. It 
lacks specificity needed for PHAs to accurately predict how they are 
going to be affected and leaves considerable discretion to the 
department of how to interpret renewals.
  This announcement fell on a housing community already reeling from 
the news that the administration wants to cut $1.6 billion dollars from 
the program in the next Fiscal Year and convert Section 8 into a block 
grant program. If this proposal goes through, an additional 250,000 
people could be faced with the loss of their housing assistance. My 
home State of Vermont would lose more than $4 million in anticipated 
funds and could be forced to cut nearly 740 low-income, elderly and 
disabled families out of the program.
  This is the wrong time to walk away from some of our Nation's most 
vulnerable populations. I find it outrageous that the President can 
stand behind policies that threaten the safety and wellbeing of 
thousands of American families while continuing to advocate for 
corporate tax cuts and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. There is 
a fiscal crisis in this county, of that I am sure. Our Federal debt 
continues to rise and the Federal treasury continues to shrink, but it 
is not caused by the modest assistance we give families on Section 8.
  This program has proven itself to be one of the most cost-effective 
housing programs. This was confirmed by two separate reports in 2002--
one by the General Accounting Office, and reinforced by the Millennial 
Housing Commission. It has been shown to have positive effects on 
families and children, many of whom are able to move out of high 
poverty areas to areas of lower poverty and lower crime rats and better 
schools. Studies have shown that it helps promote success in the 
workplace performance--by providing reliable housing while families are 
trying to get established, many of whom have moved off welfare.
  We cannot expect low-income families to improve their situations, 
hold steady jobs and move out of poverty if they do not have access to 
reliable, safe and affordable housing. We cannot expect the elderly and 
the disabled who are on meager fixed incomes to fend for themselves in 
rental markets that have spiraled out of the reach of even moderate-
income families. Section 8 provides temporary assistance to those who 
need it. It helps families avoid the choice between a roof over their 
heads or food on the table.
  Congress gave the HUD the resources they needed to fully fund all 
vouchers under contract, and I would expect them to use those 
resources. This is not the place to try and reap meager savings to make 
up for a Federal deficit caused by questionable tax cuts and 
irresponsible fiscal policies.
  I urge the administration to reevaluate this policy and to restore 
our commitment to the Section 8 program.

                          ____________________