[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 1084-1104]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         HOUSING OPPORTUNITY THROUGH MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2015


                             General Leave

  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and submit extraneous materials on the bill, H.R. 3700, to provide 
housing opportunities in the United States through modernization of 
various housing programs, and for other purposes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Carter of Georgia). Is there objection 
to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 594 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 3700.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Costello) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1437


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 3700) to provide housing opportunities in the United States 
through modernization of various housing programs, and for other 
purposes, with Mr. Costello of Pennsylvania in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) and the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Maxine Waters) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 3700, the 
Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, offered by my friend, 
Chairman Luetkemeyer of Missouri.
  I want to thank him for his leadership on this bill that he has 
worked on for many, many months. It represents a true bipartisan 
approach to housing reform.
  I also want to thank his fellow Missourian, the ranking member of the 
Housing Subcommittee, again, another gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Cleaver), for his input into this legislation and for his leadership on 
his side of the aisle as well.
  H.R. 3700 passed the Financial Services Committee with broad 
bipartisan support back in December. Again, it is designed to help 
promote greater efficiency in our existing housing assistance programs.
  In many different ways, Mr. Chairman, it modernizes a lot of outdated 
rules and regulations which, in some cases, have not even been updated 
in a generation. And so, in that respect, it takes the resources that 
we have and targets it to those who need it the most.
  So you will find provisions here dealing with Section 8 rental 
assistance, public housing, rural housing, homeless assistance, and FHA 
mortgage insurance for condominiums. It is a very broad bill, and, 
again, it enjoys bipartisan support.
  Let me talk a little bit about what H.R. 3700 doesn't do or what it 
is not. Few have been more critical about the poor focus of our HUD 
programs than I have been because, regardless of whatever their good 
intentions may be, the undeniable truth is current Federal housing 
policy remains fractured, remains costly, remains inefficient, and 
oftentimes does not help those who truly need it.
  In 2012, the GAO found that 20 different Federal Government entities 
administer over 160 different programs, tax expenditures, and other 
tools that support home ownership and rental housing.
  The Department of HUD has received approximately more than $1.6 
trillion in real dollars since it was born 50 years ago and today 
spends over $45 billion annually on at least 85 active programs, again, 
many of which have not been modernized or updated in a generation.
  And the results of all this?
  Well, all too often housing affordability remains a very real 
challenge for many Americans. Too many neighborhoods still suffer from 
blight and neglect with substandard housing options for low-income 
families.
  Most tellingly, the national poverty rate has remained essentially 
unchanged in the 50 years since HUD was first created. Mr. Chairman, we 
can do better.
  Now, we all know that the best housing program is a job, a career 
path, one with a future. We know that the best housing program is 
economic opportunity for all, boundless economic opportunity for all. 
But there are still some that need assistance.
  So that is not what this debate is about today. Today the debate is: 
What can we do on a bipartisan basis? Where can we come to agreement on 
current existing programs to try to make them work better for the poor 
and for our low-income people who need assistance through the HUD 
programs? What is it we can do to help move more people out of poverty 
to lives of self-sufficiency? How do we reform HUD's complex 
bureaucratic web of programs? How do we spread economic opportunity to 
all?
  Those should be what our goals are.
  H.R. 3700 addresses the question by finding many ways within HUD's 
bureaucracy to streamline the inspection protocol for rental assistance 
units, to simplify tenant income review so local housing officials can 
focus on housing, not data collection, and to target assistance, again, 
to households with the greatest need.
  For the first time, H.R. 3700 will state that any occupant of a 
public housing unit that exceeds the area median income for 2 
consecutive years either gives up their government subsidy or moves out 
of the unit. That provides more resources for those who deserve it.
  H.R. 3700 also addresses the problem of over-income occupants. It 
creates for the first time a financial asset test for public housing 
residents. Currently, there is only a one-time income test.
  Again, these are just two ways, Mr. Chairman, that we ensure that the 
resources that are devoted to these housing programs are targeted to 
those who are most in need.
  I could go on and on about the benefits of the bill. But let me just 
say that, with any great project, there are those who are always saying 
we could do more. And, yes, we could do more, and we are working faster 
to implement even more reforms.
  But today represents a start of a process, not the end of a process, 
a very ambitious project to transform how we deliver government housing 
assistance in America and help people graduate from Federal assistance 
to lives of self-sufficiency and financial independence.
  Again, I congratulate the gentleman from Missouri, the chairman of 
our Housing and Insurance Subcommittee, for his great leadership.
  I commend the ranking member of that committee as well for working on 
a bipartisan basis.
  I hope all Members will support H.R. 3700. It is a bipartisan first 
step in fixing a broken housing system that we have.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chair, I yield myself as much 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we are here today to discuss H.R. 3700, but I would 
like to start by saying how pleased I am that we are focusing on 
housing.
  This is the first major housing bill that the Financial Services 
Committee has considered in the past several Congresses, and I hope 
that we can spend a lot more time focusing on the dire housing needs of 
low-income families in America as we move forward.

                              {time}  1445

  Today, only one in four households in this country who are eligible 
to receive

[[Page 1085]]

housing assistance actually receive it, and there is a severe deficit 
of over 7 million rental units that are both affordable and available 
to extremely low-income Americans.
  Furthermore, according to HUD's most recent point-in-time count, 
there are nearly 600,000 Americans who are homeless in this country--a 
staggering number I find simply unconscionable. These statistics 
demonstrate that we must come together to make reforms to Federal 
housing programs, but also to commit new resources to tackle the 
extreme lack of affordable housing in this country.
  I spend a lot of time visiting and talking with housing and homeless 
services providers. Recently, I visited the Downtown Women's Center in 
Los Angeles and N Street Village here in D.C. These homeless service 
providers are helping women and families get off the streets and into 
safe, decent, affordable, and supportive housing. Organizations such as 
these are not just applying compassion, they are applying evidence-
based approaches to addressing homelessness in the most effective ways.
  H.R. 3700 is a step in the right direction because it directly 
responds to concerns that I have heard over and over again from these 
housing and homeless service providers about how Federal housing 
programs can better support their efforts.
  This bill would make several incremental changes across a number of 
Federal housing programs that will allow us to better serve low-income 
families in need of housing assistance while also relieving certain 
administrative burdens. These changes would affect public housing, 
section 8 Tenant and Project-Based Rental Assistance, the Federal 
Housing Administration, the Rural Housing Service, and HUD's 
homelessness programs, among others.
  Many of the provisions are commonsense reforms that are long overdue. 
For example, this bill includes the text of my bill, the Project-Based 
Voucher Improvement Act of 2015, which would increase flexibility for 
public housing authorities to develop new units of housing to serve 
vulnerable populations, including those who are homeless in this 
country. It would also help to create housing opportunities in areas 
where vouchers are difficult to use.
  Several national and local tenant advocacy organizations and 
affordable housing industry groups have expressed support for my bill. 
In addition, a number of other provisions in H.R. 3700 were included in 
previous section 8 reform bills that I have introduced. I am pleased 
that my Republican colleagues have expressed their support for these 
provisions that I have long advocated.
  At the markup of this bill, I raised a serious concern that I had 
with one of the provisions in H.R. 3700 because it would effectively 
raise rents for low-income families with children who are living in 
certain HUD-assisted housing. I voted against the bill in committee. 
Although I voted against the bill at the committee markup for this 
reason, I am very pleased to say that I have worked, and my staff has 
worked, with my Republican colleagues so that we could find some common 
ground, and they have indicated that they will support my amendment 
that I have offered to address this issue.
  I am encouraged that my Republican colleagues shared in my concerns 
and that we were able to reach a meaningful compromise on this issue.
  Mr. Chairman, that is why I am now urging my colleagues to vote 
``yes'' on H.R. 3700. It is high time we came together to pass a 
bipartisan housing bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer), the chairman of the Housing and Insurance 
Subcommittee of the Financial Services Committee. He happens to be the 
author of the bill.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman 
Hensarling, Ranking Member Waters, and especially my good friend from 
Missouri, the ranking member, Mr. Cleaver. We have had a labor of love 
with this bill, and it took two guys from the Show Me State to show 
them how to do it. We are excited about that, and I want to give a 
special shout-out to him.
  Mr. Chairman, when I took the gavel of the Financial Services 
Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance, I told my colleagues I wanted to 
work with them across party lines to make meaningful changes that 
benefit all Americans. H.R. 3700 represents a major step forward, one 
to reform a system that is in many instances outdated, duplicative, and 
burdensome.
  As a body, we should be committed to creating a more efficient 
government and greater opportunity for the American people and American 
businesses. H.R. 3700 helps us meet those commitments.
  This legislation promotes greater efficiency in housing assistance 
programs and modernizes outdated rules and regulations, which in some 
cases have not been updated in more than a generation. H.R. 3700 
streamlines the inspection protocol for rental assistance units, 
simplifies the income recertification policies for assisted households, 
clarifies homeless assistance program requirements, delegates rural 
housing loan approval authority, and provides targeted flexibility 
between public housing operating and capital funds.
  H.R. 3700 also gives State and local housing agencies and private 
owners enhanced flexibility in meeting key program objectives such as 
reducing homelessness, improving access to higher-opportunity 
neighborhoods, and addressing repair needs of public housing.
  The bill also, for the first time in over 30 years of public housing 
policy, provides a thoughtful limitation on public housing tenancy for 
over-income families. Importantly, this legislation also pays special 
attention to our homeless veterans and children aging out of foster 
care, two vulnerable communities that need our support today.
  H.R. 3700 does all of this and still manages to save the taxpayers 
money. CBO estimates that the underlying bill saves $311 million over 5 
years.
  I will be the first to point out that H.R. 3700 will not necessarily 
change the world. It won't overhaul HUD or the Rural Housing Service, 
end homelessness overnight, or meet the overwhelming need for 
affordable housing. But it is a significant step in the long journey to 
reforming a broken system.
  The majority of the provisions in this bill were agreed to years ago 
by Members of Congress, housing advocates, and industry groups. H.R. 
3700 is a set of solutions on which all parties, in Congress, industry, 
and advocacy, have agreed and can agree.
  Mr. Chairman, this legislation presents a bipartisan effort that has 
been drafted and debated over the past 6 months. I want to thank again 
Chairman Hensarling for his support and Ranking Member Waters for her 
work on the bill, which passed the Financial Services Committee in 
December by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 44-10.
  I also want to recognize my good friend, the ranking member, Mr. 
Cleaver from Missouri. Without his tireless efforts, this bill would be 
very difficult to have accomplished anything with.
  Housing policy isn't easy. It is emotional. It touches lives. It sets 
the stage for future generations. Because it is so important, it isn't 
always easy to find policies on which we all agree. With H.R. 3700, we 
have an opportunity to show the Nation that we are committed to working 
together, and with a diverse group of stakeholders, for the American 
people.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I 
urge the Senate to consider it without delay so we can break a status 
quo that benefits too few at the cost of too many.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to 
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver). He is the leading Democratic 
sponsor of this bill, a member of the Financial Services Committee, and 
the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.
  Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Chairman, I came to Congress, and because of my own 
experiences, I only had one ambition

[[Page 1086]]

other than being a Member of Congress, and it was to take leadership in 
the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance because, experientially, I 
thought I had experiences that might help. And secondly, having served 
as mayor, we dealt a lot with housing in Missouri's largest city. I had 
this opportunity. And I want to thank Ms. Waters for the opportunity to 
be the lead Democrat on the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee.
  I think it was fortunate, maybe even fortuitous, that two Missourians 
ended up working together, and we were able to, I think, do some things 
that probably might not have been done otherwise because I think we 
both have a spirit of working together, and it ended up in a good 
product. But that wouldn't have taken place without the chairman and 
the ranking member.
  I lived in 404-B Bailey public housing in Wichita Falls, Texas. I 
went by on Christmas, and I just parked there for a long time and 
looked at the kids running around playing, thinking I used to do that 
on that same little piece of dirt that we called a yard. I wondered 
about the kids who were in that unit. Will they eventually have the 
opportunities that I was blessed to have? Or would they suffer the fate 
of many others with whom I grew up?
  I thought in part we might be able to do some things here that will 
help the little boy I saw running around playing in front of the unit I 
once lived in with my mother, father, and three sisters. I think we 
have done this. These are probably the most sweeping changes in HUD 
regulations in a quarter of a century, perhaps ever; and what we have 
done is we have remodeled, or refashioned, or recast, or redesigned 
many of the programs impacting HUD.
  I do not disagree with Chairman Hensarling that we do have a great 
deal of redundancy in programs that we run with HUD and USDA. I do 
think at some point there is a need for us to get things molded a 
little bit better, but that is not going to take place I don't think 
any time soon.
  I support H.R. 3700 because I had the opportunity to understand what 
these changes mean. I also need to say before I go any further that I 
don't believe that compromise means capitulation. In fact, I don't 
think democracy can work without comity and compromise. I think they 
are inseparable parts of democracy. So there are parts of this bill 
that I am not as thrilled with, as other parts, but that is what 
happens in a democracy.
  Again, I cherish the opportunity to work with people who are willing 
to move and shake and move and shake and shake and move to get 
something to the floor.
  The bill will streamline the inspection and income review process for 
families living in section 8 units. We are making, in this legislation, 
some very badly needed changes to the project-based voucher program by 
allowing a public housing authority, PHA, to project-base up to 20 
percent of its authorized voucher allocation, rather than 20 percent of 
the voucher funding that we give. And then we give PHAs more 
flexibility with their funds by allowing them to transfer up to 20 
percent of their capital funds to the operating fund.
  Mr. Chairman, what this allows is for people who are on the ground, 
working with people, understanding where they need to have funds, the 
opportunity to move those funds around without violating any of the HUD 
regulations.
  It helps our foster children by expanding eligibility for the Family 
Unification Program from the current limit of 21 years of age to 24 
years of age, and it increases the length of stay from 18 months to a 
maximum of 36 months. It also--and I think this is important--expands 
the eligibility of individuals who will leave foster care within 90 
days.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer), who is the chair of the Subcommittee on 
Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
  Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Luetkemeyer 
and Ranking Member Cleaver for their work on this very important piece 
of legislation.
  I have been in the housing business probably for over 40-some-odd 
years. I have been involved in every aspect of it, from low-income 
housing, to rental housing, to new housing, to resale housing. One of 
the things that I have recognized over the years is what an important 
part housing is to the fabric of our country, how important housing is 
to families, and how people enter into the housing market in different 
ways. Certainly there are folks that go into market-based rental 
housing, and then there are folks that aren't quite ready to do that. 
Maybe they are getting started or have had a difficulty in their life, 
so lower-income housing provides an opportunity for them.
  I think the goal of the housing programs over the years is to provide 
low-income housing as a stepping stone and not a permanent residence. 
One of the things I like about H.R. 3700 is that it encourages that 
process. It has been brought up in a number of these programs, and over 
the years sometimes a good idea spreads around. We have spent a lot of 
time probably creating new housing programs and probably spent a lot of 
time increasing the funding for housing programs, but in many cases 
maybe we didn't stop and do the review and make sure that the programs 
that we had put in place were efficient in delivering the services that 
needed to be delivered and helping those families accomplish the goal 
of moving through the housing cycle.

                              {time}  1500

  So one of the things that I like about this bill is that these 
families that have--in fact, the goal has been to increase their 
livelihood, and they have gotten better jobs and their income has 
increased. It is time, then, for those folks to move on. Because what 
we know is--and those statistics have been, I think, brought out 
today--we have got a number of people in the waiting line to get into 
some of this housing to better their lives. It is not fair that people 
whose incomes have far surpassed incomes that it takes to qualify to 
live in them should continue to do that.
  So affluent families must pay market rental rates or they have got to 
leave the public housing arena. Higher asset families must leave public 
housing. That is a normal cause. That is not cruel. That is just the 
way that these programs were designed to work.
  The other thing, though, is we have a responsibility not only to the 
families and individuals around our country, but we have a 
responsibility to the United States of America. One of the things that 
I think is important about this piece of legislation is it doesn't 
really mess with mandatory spending but is, according to CBO, going to 
save $300 million over 5 years.
  What that points out--and this is done really without cutting any of 
the programs, but just cutting some efficiencies in those programs to 
make sure that those programs are being administered appropriately--is, 
if there are some regulatory things that are keeping people from 
operating some of these public housing facilities in a way that 
maximizes the benefit, then we give them some flexibility to do that by 
reducing some duplicative regulatory processes and, more importantly, 
empowering the local entities and the local operators of this public 
housing to be more innovative and creative.
  As I have had an opportunity to visit some of our public housing 
facilities in my district, the 19th Congressional District, and sit 
down with a lot of those administrators, what they tell me is: Randy, 
if we could have more flexibility, we know how to deliver this service 
much more efficiently than we have today. But in many cases, the 
Federal regulation is inhibiting their ability to be able to implement 
some of those things.
  I want to commend the two gentlemen from Missouri for their 
outstanding work. Yes, we could probably do more, but the good thing is 
we got started. I think we are off to a good start, so I encourage my 
colleagues to support H.R. 3700.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to 
the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), the ranking member of the

[[Page 1087]]

Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee of the Committee on Financial 
Services.
  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I thank Ranking Member Waters for yielding.
  I rise in support of H.R. 3700, as amended by Ranking Member Waters.
  This is what you call regular order, folks. This bill came out of 
committee with a significant flaw that would have had a very negative 
impact on families and children and the ability of low-income people to 
deduct childcare expenses. If it were not fixed, it would have 
effectively raised rent on thousands of low-income families with 
children.
  I just want to commend my colleagues, Ms. Waters and Mr. Cleaver--Ms. 
Waters in particular--for really catching this flaw. But I also want to 
commend the Republicans who, instead of just taking their position as 
being in the majority and saying ``we don't have to listen to you,'' 
continued to engage with us to fix this. Literally, the math did not 
work out.
  I can tell you as once a single parent and as a grandmother, I know 
about the budget-busting cost of child care. I also know how central 
housing policy and access to child care is critical to positive social 
outcomes for children.
  So often we demand that poor people, and especially women, pull 
themselves up by their bootstraps. We have programs that are designed 
to help them. But then what we do is we put program features in place 
that really cancel out the benefits of these programs.
  But this bill, H.R. 3700, as amended by the ranking member, 
eliminates the unintended consequences for poor people who are raising 
children. Ranking Member Waters and subcommittee Ranking Member Cleaver 
have both been powerful advocates for affordable housing on the 
Financial Services Committee. I am so pleased to join them in fighting 
for these changes.
  H.R. 3700 is supported by the National Association of Realtors, the 
National Alliance to End Homelessness, and the Center on Budget and 
Policy Priorities, among the over two dozen groups supporting it.
  I urge adoption of the legislation, as amended by Ms. Waters.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce), the vice chairman of the Financial 
Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee.
  Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  About 5 years ago, I was in Roswell, New Mexico, at a meeting with 
veteran constituents. We were talking about policies and things like 
that. After about an hour, suddenly one gentleman overlooked in the 
whole group blurted out, ``I am living in a rat hole.'' It just caught 
us all by surprise. We dismantled the discussion there, and we went 
immediately to look at his house. Over the next 2 years, that community 
gathered money and businesses came together. They tore down the man's 
house and rebuilt it.
  The problem is that not everyone out there can get access to 
communities and local businesses to help them through the problems, so 
we have the housing programs which are set up. Unfortunately, they are 
mired in bureaucratic red tape. We soak up the dollars that should be 
helping people with administrative burdens that make no sense, with 
duplicative requirements to go through the processes.
  I commend both sides of the aisle, Mr. Luetkemeyer and Ms. Maxine 
Waters of California, for pushing this reform because it will allow us 
to direct the money to where it should be going.
  Many times we think that we disagree with each other about policies. 
The truth is there is not significant disagreement that we should be 
helping those at the lowest income levels to raise themselves up. It is 
through their progression towards prosperity and towards just making 
ends meet that we get rid of some of the deepest problems in our social 
cost of the government. It is not that we disagree; it is that 
sometimes we get trapped and that that program doesn't work very well 
so we want to cut funds.
  I really think that this is a very important step today where we are 
trying to modernize the systems that are delivering help to those that 
need it the most in the belief that the human spirit will actually take 
those steps to make their own way out once we help them stabilize.
  Again, just thanks for the work on both sides of the aisle.
  I urge support of H.R. 3700.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to 
the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell), a member of the Financial 
Services Committee.
  Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 
3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, as amended by 
Ranking Member Waters.
  While not a perfect bill, H.R. 3700 has been made considerably better 
by the amendment offered by Ranking Member Waters. There are other 
amendments that I would love to see, including my own, but I must tell 
you that this bill does represent true bipartisanship. It is a major 
bipartisan step towards helping preserve our scarce housing resources 
while expanding housing opportunities and homeownership opportunities.
  More specifically, this legislation makes critical changes that would 
help improve and expand the Section 502 Guaranteed Rural Housing Loan 
Program. This program helps provide low- and moderate-income households 
with homeownership opportunities in rural areas, like the Seventh 
Congressional District of Alabama, which I am so proud to represent.
  The sad reality is that too often, rural America faces severe 
barriers and obstacles to obtaining quality and affordable housing. 
This is largely due to the limited access to affordable mortgage 
credit.
  The Section 502 Guaranteed Rural Housing Loan Program is designed to 
target rural residents who have a steady low or moderate income yet are 
unable to obtain adequate housing through conventional financing. 
Essentially, this program encourages private lenders to extend credit 
to responsible and creditworthy borrowers in rural America.
  H.R. 3700 would help the Department of Agriculture improve and expand 
the Section 502 Guaranteed Rural Housing Loan Program by delegating 
loan approval authority to certain participating lenders. This is 
similar to the authority that the Secretary of the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development currently has for Federal Housing 
Administration's programs, and this legislative proposal was included 
in the President's FY 2016 budget.
  This is a commonsense and pragmatic measure that will help improve 
the efficiency of an important rural housing program so that it can 
reach even more rural families. It is critically important that we 
continue to provide the necessary tools and incentives to help ensure 
all Americans are able to realize their dream of homeownership.
  I want to commend my colleague from Missouri. I especially want to 
commend my colleague Congressman Cleaver for his tireless leadership on 
this effort. I want to thank the chairman and ranking member for their 
efforts.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 3700.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger).
  Mr. PITTENGER. I thank Chairman Luetkemeyer for his leadership on 
this bill, and I appreciate deeply the support and leadership of 
Congressman Cleaver.
  Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of H.R. 3700, the Housing 
Opportunity Through Modernization Act, which contains provisions that 
expand housing opportunities while protecting American taxpayers.
  This bipartisan legislation provides commonsense efforts for 
streamlining and reducing regulatory burdens for organizations working 
with HUD.
  This bill looks to correct many wrongs within our housing system 
while also simplifying certification processes and providing permanent 
authority for direct endorsement for approved lenders to approve rural 
housing service loans.

[[Page 1088]]

  Mr. Chairman, condominiums are often the first step on the housing 
ladder for first-time homeowners. They also can be the most affordable 
and desirable option for single people, young families, and those 
looking to downsize. Unfortunately, current FHA regulations prevent 
buyers from purchasing condos. H.R. 3700 eases restrictions, allowing 
more opportunity for homeownership.
  This bill reins in duplicative and overly burdensome regulations, 
which not only create a slower process, but also increase government 
workload all without affecting any changes to direct spending.
  Mr. Chairman, housing assistance should be solely for those who need 
it most of all, and this bill takes aim at ensuring this. For the first 
time in 80 years, this legislation provides limitations on public 
housing tenancy for over-income families.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), a member of the 
Appropriations Committee and someone who has been focused on dealing 
with poverty.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank our ranking member, Congresswoman 
Waters, for leading and also for her tremendous leadership on the 
Financial Services Committee as our ranking member. She has been 
phenomenal in terms of making sure that our legislation is bipartisan. 
Also, I remember serving on the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance 
for many, many years with Congresswoman Waters, and she constantly 
worked to make sure that people had access to affordable, accessible, 
clean, and safe housing. She has not wavered on that agenda. So I thank 
her very much.
  The need for affordable housing has never been greater. That is why I 
am very happy to be here today to support the Housing Opportunity 
Through Modernization Act of 2015. This bill would make critical 
improvements to our Nation's public and assisted housing programs, and 
takes steps to ensure that low-income communities have access to safe 
and affordable housing.
  Now, let me just tell you, in my district in Oakland, California, 
rents have risen faster than anywhere else in the Nation. In fact, if 
the average Oakland renter had to move tomorrow, they would be spending 
a staggering 70 percent of their income on housing--70 percent of their 
income. That is outrageous. My constituents, like many constituents 
around the country, can't afford this, so this is a crisis.

                              {time}  1515

  This bill takes steps to address this issue by protecting voucher 
holders from losing their subsidies when fair market rents drop, which 
is something that recently had a major impact on my community. 
Thankfully, with the help of Congresswoman Waters and our Secretary of 
HUD, we were able to navigate the agency's redtape to find a solution 
so the tenants could keep their assistance and stay in their homes.
  I support this bill and the critical amendments offered by 
Congresswoman Waters and Congressmen Price and Aderholt.
  It is also important that we update the formula that is used to 
distribute funds under the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS 
to reflect the changing nature of the HIV/AIDS epidemic and to ensure 
those communities in greatest need receive critical HOPWA funds. This 
is one issue that Congresswoman Waters has been working on for many, 
many years to make sure these funds are targeted to the people and to 
the communities who need it the most.
  The bill allows for homeownership for those whose American Dream of 
such has been shattered. Thank goodness, in this bill, we now have 
provisions that will allow that dream to be fulfilled.
  I thank Congressman Cleaver as well as our majority and minority 
members for this bill.
  From just a very parochial point of view, in my district, I have to 
say how badly needed this bill is, as gentrification is a big issue. My 
constituents constantly ask me what the Federal Government can do, and 
this is a major step in that direction.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr).
  Mr. BARR. I thank the chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3700, which is a 
modest but important first step to improving Federal housing policy 
through several commonsense reforms.
  For the first time in HUD's 50-year history, there will now be a 
flexible formula directing over-income families to pay greater shares 
of their subsidized rents or to move out of public housing. Incomes and 
assets will be reevaluated to target assistance to those who are truly 
in need.
  There are wait lists across the country for scarce public housing 
resources and Section 8 vouchers. I have listened to homeless advocates 
and to my constituents at the Lexington Housing Authority in Kentucky 
about the waiting lists that exist in my own district. A 2015 HUD audit 
found that 25,000 families had incomes too high to qualify for 
assistance; yet the families remained in taxpayer subsidized housing. 
Some of those families actually derived income from renting other 
residential properties that they, themselves, owned. One family 
highlighted in the report had a combined income of $498,000.
  Policy failures such as these not only waste taxpayer dollars, but, 
more importantly, they hurt those in need who might otherwise have 
roofs over their heads. I hope this bipartisan initiative is a down 
payment on the further reform of Federal housing programs.
  Several of my colleagues and I are developing an empowerment agenda 
to holistically reform Federal assistance programs from housing to 
nutrition to workforce development. We start with the recognition that 
the Federal Government now runs more than 80 different antipoverty 
programs at an annual cost of nearly $1 trillion; yet, after 50 years 
of this strategy, the poverty rate has barely budged from where it was 
in 1965. The goal is to assist Americans to achieve their God-given 
potential and to restore the American Dream to where the condition of 
one's birth does not determine the outcome of one's life.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle and with members of this subcommittee in leveraging the 
empowerment agenda to craft additional reforms to Federal housing 
policies, which will improve outcomes by recognizing that poor 
Americans are not liabilities to be managed by some remote bureaucracy 
in Washington but who are untapped assets who can achieve the American 
Dream.
  I congratulate Chairman Luetkemeyer and Ranking Member Cleaver for 
their work on this bill.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3700, and I invite my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join in additional efforts to 
reform HUD and to more effectively combat poverty.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. DeSaulnier).
  Mr. DeSAULNIER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, with this bill, we have an opportunity to address an 
inequity with how the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
treats condominiums, particularly in senior communities.
  Across the country and in my district in the Bay Area, condo 
communities have been missing out on access to mortgages due to an 
unnecessarily restrictive rule. The rule's intent is good, but, in 
practice, it unduly harms seniors, families, and communities.
  One community in my district in the East Bay of the Bay Area, 
Rossmoor, is home to thousands of seniors, many of whom need access to 
HUD-backed mortgages to enhance their financial security. I am pleased 
that this bill is a step in the right direction to allow these 
residents and residents in other condo communities around the country 
to benefit from the same mortgage rules that are available to other 
homeowners.
  I appreciate the hard work done by the chairman and ranking member of

[[Page 1089]]

the subcommittee on this important issue, and I look forward to working 
with them to continue to protect these deserving communities.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Rothfus), one of our 
young and up-and-coming members of the Financial Services Committee.
  Mr. ROTHFUS. I thank the chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, for decades, the Federal Government has spent over $1.6 
trillion in an attempt to accomplish the laudable goal of ensuring that 
all Americans have access to affordable, decent housing.
  I have visited many affordable housing sites during my time in 
Congress to listen to the concerns of residents, managers, and 
community leaders. In fact, just 2 weeks ago, I visited a public 
housing facility that is managed by the Housing Authority of Beaver 
County. These meetings and visits have underscored the importance of 
our housing assistance programs. If administered correctly, these 
efforts can be truly transformative for hardworking Americans. I have 
met many Pennsylvanians who have improved their lives and who have 
brightened their families' futures thanks, in part, to targeted Federal 
housing assistance provided to them in their time of need.
  However, there are also cases in which outdated rules, waste, fraud, 
abuse, and general inefficiency have made it difficult to direct 
resources to those who need them the most. There are also instances in 
which housing assistance programs have failed to help people lift 
themselves out of poverty. Members of both parties recognize this 
reality and have worked together to identify areas for improvement. 
H.R. 3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, is a 
bipartisan, commonsense bill that addresses many of these issues.
  Among other things, this legislation makes it easier for tenants, 
owners, and investors to navigate rental assistance programs by 
reducing duplicative and inefficient regulations that make it harder to 
rent or to operate affordable housing. The Housing Opportunity Through 
Modernization Act also incorporates safeguards to prevent well-off 
families from using scarce public housing units. We can all agree that 
housing assistance programs should be reserved for those who need help 
the most. This legislation also provides flexibility to public housing 
agencies in using Federal funds to meet local needs more effectively.
  I am a proud cosponsor of this legislation, and I encourage my 
colleagues to support this bipartisan effort to improve Federal housing 
assistance. We owe it to the many Americans who rely on these programs 
to enact this legislation's reforms.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  This bill contains several provisions which I wholeheartedly support 
and would like to see passed into law.
  For example, this bill includes a few provisions that were taken 
straight from bills that I have authored, including the text of my 
Project-Based Voucher Improvement Act of 2015, which would increase the 
flexibility for public housing authorities to develop new units of 
housing to serve vulnerable populations, including those who are 
homeless in this country. It would also help to create housing 
opportunities in areas where vouchers are difficult to use.
  I introduced the Project-Based Voucher Improvement Act to address the 
severe lack of affordable housing, which is contributing to the 
epidemic of homelessness across the country. The Section 8 project-
based voucher program is a valuable tool to help preserve and create 
more affordable housing, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable 
populations. Essentially, it helps housing providers leverage outside 
financing in order to create and maintain affordable housing in their 
communities.
  My bill would help us maximize the effectiveness of this critical 
program by facilitating the ability of PHAs to enter into agreements 
with private and nonprofit owners and to partner with social service 
agencies to provide supportive housing. This will, ultimately, help 
provide stable housing for our most vulnerable populations.
  Gaining access to affordable housing is becoming harder and harder 
for far too many families. We are in the midst of a homeless crisis in 
my district and in many districts around the country, and we need more 
affordable housing to help get vulnerable populations off the streets. 
By making this Section 8 project-based voucher program easier to use, 
we could help to overcome this challenge.
  I hope that the information that has been shared by some of my 
colleagues has not been lost. I certainly hope that we all heard what 
Congresswoman Barbara Lee said about residents who are paying 70 
percent of their income for housing, and it has become commonplace 
around this country for our citizens to be paying 50 percent of their 
income for housing. This is totally unacceptable.
  I am very pleased that we are focusing on housing. I am very pleased 
as there are certain aspects of this bill that, I think, will be very 
beneficial to our residents and to our constituents throughout the 
country. I am hopeful that we will continue on this track and that this 
won't be the last housing effort that we make that comes out of the 
Financial Services Committee. I am very pleased to be a part of it.
  I am proud of all of the work that has gone into this legislation. I 
am very pleased that we were able to work out any differences that we 
may have had. I am very proud of Mr. Cleaver and of Mr. Luetkemeyer, as 
they are two gentlemen from Missouri, for getting together to do this 
bill. It might have helped a little bit that I am from Missouri also. I 
think this bill is something we can all be proud of.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams), one of our junior members of the 
committee but one of the senior Members with life experience who can 
bring a lot of good discussion to this debate we are having this 
afternoon.
  Mr. WILLIAMS. I thank the chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of H.R. 3700, the Housing 
Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015.
  Introduced by my good friend Chairman Luetkemeyer and my friend 
Congressman Cleaver, this bipartisan piece of legislation is the first 
step in many to help reform and modernize our outdated Federal housing 
system.
  Mr. Chairman, for too long, government red tape has made many of 
these housing programs inefficient and ineffective, hurting the very 
people they aim to support. If signed into law, H.R. 3700 would seek to 
change that, all the while saving taxpayer-invested money.
  First, as mentioned, the CBO projects this bill to be a cost saver. 
With the Federal deficit reaching almost $19 trillion, the savings in 
discretionary spending are a direct result of allowing local housing 
officials and agencies to better manage their programs. Like most 
Federal programs, inefficient regulations exist that often balloon 
overall costs.
  Additionally, as previously mentioned, for the first time in 80 years 
of public housing policy, this legislation restricts the use of already 
scarce public housing units to those who actually need them by 
establishing an earnings cap. Eliminating Federal subsidies for over-
income families has always been key to this discussion. While most wait 
lists for public housing stretch into the tens of thousands, families 
who should not receive subsidies, in fact, often do. Plain and simple, 
public housing should be reserved for those who are most in need.
  Finally, H.R. 3700 ensures that our veterans have fair access to HUD 
housing and homeless assistance programs. With nearly 50,000 homeless 
vets nationwide, we can and need to do more in this area.
  Mr. Chairman, as a member of the House Committee on Financial 
Services and of the House Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance, I 
thank Chairman Luetkemeyer for his leadership

[[Page 1090]]

on this issue over the last year, as addressing housing reform is 
something that is not without controversy.
  I urge my colleagues to support this measure.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time 
and am prepared to close.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1530

  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  I would like to close by again thanking my colleagues, Mr. Cleaver 
and Mr. Luetkemeyer, for their leadership in putting together a 
bipartisan affordable housing bill that addresses so many complicated 
issues in a responsible way and brings together so many different 
stakeholders in support of this bill.
  There is a very long list of organizations that support this bill 
that includes tenant advocacy groups, public housing authority industry 
groups, real estate industry groups, rural housing groups, as well as 
community development organizations.
  To name just a few, the supporters of this bill include the National 
Low Income Housing Coalition, the Center on Budget and Policy 
Priorities, the National Housing Trust, CSH, the Council of Large 
Public Housing Authorities, the National Association of Realtors, the 
Local Initiatives Support Corporation, Enterprise Community Partners, 
and many more.
  The enthusiastic support from such a broad and diverse coalition of 
organizations is indicative of the hard-fought compromises that are 
included in this bill. In fact, I do not know of a single organization 
that is opposing this bill.
  H.R. 3700 is made up of commonsense reforms that will make much-
needed improvements to our housing programs to make them work better 
for both public housing agencies and the tenants they serve.
  If this bill is enacted into law, it will make the first major 
reforms to HUD's primary rental assistance programs since 1998, and 
that is an achievement that we can all be proud of.
  So there is a lot at stake here. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' 
on this bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, can you tell me how much time I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Marchant). The gentleman from Missouri has 7\1/
2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chair, I apologize to the ranking member. I do 
have one additional speaker. If the gentlewoman is out of time, I am 
more than willing to allow the gentlewoman to have some of our time to 
be able to rebut in case there is something that is an issue.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 5\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Hampshire (Mr. Guinta).
  Mr. GUINTA. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to speak in support of H.R. 
3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act, sponsored by 
Representatives Luetkemeyer and Cleaver.
  This extremely bipartisan bill makes a number of critical reforms to 
our Federal housing programs. These programs will streamline processes 
and create much-needed efficiencies for government and, most 
importantly, our consumers.
  I am happy to see the bill moving so quickly because it will solve a 
number of problems low-income Americans continue to face in acquiring 
safe and affordable housing.
  This legislation would make commonsense changes to the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development in order to lighten administrative 
burdens for housing agencies and owners to assist low-income 
individuals and families to live in greater dignity.
  It is very encouraging to see the bipartisan work that has been done 
on this bill. I commend both Chairman Luetkemeyer and Ranking Member 
Cleaver of the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee. I thank Chairman 
Luetkemeyer for allowing me to speak on this bill.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3700.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I will just take these last few minutes that I have to say to those 
people who live in public housing that this is an important support 
effort of government to provide public housing for those who cannot 
afford market-rate housing.
  I have represented over the years many public housing projects in 
California. While I do not represent them all anymore, I still pay 
attention to public housing because I understand and know how very 
important it is to the lives of families and to the children who depend 
on having safe housing and affordable housing for them.
  I would simply like to say that oftentimes people who live in public 
housing have been demonized. There are folks who think, oh, they could 
do better if they wanted to. There are people who say that they don't 
want to remove themselves from public housing.
  I would like to have people know that many of the folks that I have 
known who live in public housing work every day for minimum wages. Many 
of them are trying very hard to be independent. Many of them would like 
to have job training. Many of them would like to have more support for 
childcare efforts. Many of them are working to get their GEDs. Many of 
them have returned to school.
  For the people who live in public housing, they don't need to feel 
that somehow they are getting something they don't deserve.
  I am proud of this government, and I am proud of this country that 
will provide a safety net for the least of these and safe public 
housing to those who cannot afford market-rate housing.
  I want our Congress to continue to see how we can do a better job 
even of providing safe and secure housing for those who cannot afford 
it.
  I want us to be able to provide additional support to those who live 
in public housing, for those who are saying to us: Help me with job 
training. Help me to ensure that my children can get the kind of 
support living in public housing that will give them access to a good 
education. Help us to have better health care so we can be better able 
to go out and take jobs to support our families. Help us to aspire to 
move upward and out, even. Help us to understand what is available to 
us out there. When we seek out help for our problems, don't look at us 
as if we are people who are not investing in ourselves, who are not 
relying on our own abilities. Simply see us as Americans who would like 
to do better. See us as Americans who unfortunately find ourselves in 
situations where we can't do better for now, but we are looking for the 
opportunity to do better and to have more and to enjoy everything that 
this country has to offer.
  So as we support this legislation today--and I support it--I am 
optimistic about the fact that this is going to make a lot of lives 
better, but I am also optimistic that this is really a beginning for 
how we can begin to not only give support, but involve tenants in how 
they can help to make decisions about the units that they are living in 
and how they can serve on the boards that oversee them, how they can be 
a part of government, helping us to understand how we can do a better 
job with the authority that they have given us.
  So I am very proud. I am very pleased. I thank Mr. Cleaver and Mr. 
Luetkemeyer. I thank Mr. Cleaver for telling his story about public 
housing. I want him to know that there are any number of Members in the 
Congress of the United States who have lived in public housing or their 
families, such as my family has lived in public housing.
  I want him to know I have watched public housing that has been very 
helpful. I have watched public housing that has provided safe, decent, 
and secure opportunities for the people who live there. But I have also 
watched public housing when it didn't work.

[[Page 1091]]

  The Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis, Missouri, was an example of what didn't 
work. I was in that city when it was torn down. The space that it 
occupied is still vacant in that city. It should be a space where we 
had additional public housing that would support the families who so 
desperately need it.
  So I don't take this bill lightly. I don't think about this as just 
another piece of legislation that we happen to get passed here in 
Congress, even with bipartisan support.
  I think of this as an important step and a statement, a statement 
that says both sides of the aisle understand housing, both sides of the 
aisle would like to continue to do the best job that they can do to 
provide safe and secure housing, and that we are not going to stand by 
and watch homelessness continue to grow.
  It was mentioned several times throughout this debate--maybe here 
today and when we were in committee--that, in Los Angeles County, 
homelessness has increased by 20 percent. People are sleeping on the 
sidewalks all the way up to city hall. We cannot abide that. We cannot 
stand by and watch that happen.
  While I am pointing to Los Angeles County, there are many areas all 
across this Nation where homelessness is shameful and unconscionable. I 
am very pleased and proud that we are sending a signal here today that 
we won't stand for it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to close with a few remarks here. It won't take very long.
  I think you can see that this is a very important and, also, very 
emotional issue for many, many people and it is extremely important for 
those folks who are in and around and utilize public housing.
  In putting this bill together, we tried to listen to all the 
different parties as well as both sides of the aisle and address all 
the concerns that everybody had. We have a few amendments to go here, 
but I think we are going to work through those pretty quickly.
  I think you can see from the support that we have seen on both sides 
of the aisle today, from the discussions we have had that we have come 
to an agreement on what is in the provisions of this bill.
  You have here a whole list of 30 different letters of support from 
different groups from around the country that represent all the 
different groups, from leased housing to housing authorities, to 
investment individuals, to Realtors, to you name it.
  We have yet to receive a single letter against this proposal. So I 
think you can see that we managed to find the right balance with the 
bill, to find the middle ground where we can all agree that we can 
accept the provisions that we have.
  In the bill, we have done things with flexibility that people within 
the different housing authorities have asked for who manage these 
things to be able to do things more efficiently, more effectively.
  We got rid of duplicative rules. We built the condos up so they could 
now be part of the program. We have cut the costs not by cutting 
programs, but by cutting out the waste and the duplicative rules and 
have given flexibility to those groups that need it to be able to do 
the job.
  Is this an end-all, be-all? No. We have a lot more to do. We 
recognize that. This is a good first step. We believe that we need to 
be empowering people and enabling people to be able to do better and 
help themselves. We believe that, when it comes to housing, it is not 
just a place to live, but people need to have a place to have a life.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chair, I have a question for the bill's managers 
regarding the project-based voucher provisions. The bill generally 
limits a public housing agency's use of voucher funds for project-based 
vouchers to 20 percent of the authorized voucher units for the agency, 
but contains an exception among others providing that units of project-
based assistance that are attached to units previously receiving 
another type of long-term subsidy provided by HUD will not count 
against this limitation.
  We have an exciting initiative in Boston that would replace our 75-
year-old Charlestown public housing development with a substantially 
larger, new construction mixed-income community on the same site. The 
public housing units are to be fully replaced with project-based 
vouchers. This will require a large commitment of project-based 
vouchers by the Boston Housing Authority, which would reduce the BHA's 
flexibility to commit project-based vouchers elsewhere as needed if the 
Charlestown commitment is not covered by the exception. Is it the 
intention of the bill's managers that the commitment of project-based 
vouchers to replace the former public housing units in a newly 
constructed development such as this would fall within the bill's 
exception for units attached to units previously receiving another type 
of long-term HUD subsidy?
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chair, Congressman Capuano has asked whether it 
is the intention of the bill's managers that the commitment of project-
based vouchers to replace the former public housing units in a newly 
constructed development such as one he described in Boston would fall 
within the bill's exception for units attached to units previously 
receiving another type of long-term HUD subsidy. The answer is yes. It 
is the managers' intention that the replacement units for the current 
public housing units would be covered by the bill's exception for units 
previously receiving long-term HUD assistance, and thus that commitment 
of project-based vouchers to such units would not count against the 20 
percent limitation.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairman Luetkemeyer and Ranking 
Member Cleaver for their leadership, commitment and effort to 
modernizing and improving Federal Housing programs for millions of 
Americans who are working their way up to economic empowerment and 
stability.
  I wish to thank Chairman Sessions, Ranking Member Slaughter, and the 
members of the Rules Committee.
  I acknowledge and appreciate the bipartisan efforts by my colleagues 
across the aisle to modernize and improve Federal housing programs as 
anticipated in H.R. 3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization 
Act of 2015.
  For instance, H.R. 3700 contains provisions that would modify core 
rental assistance programs such as the Housing Choice Vouchers, Public 
Housing, and Project-Based Rental Assistance, homelessness prevention 
and assistance programs, and Federal Housing Administration (FHA) 
mortgage insurance for condominiums.
  Additionally, H.R. 3700 amends the Rural Housing Service program in 
the Department of Agriculture.
  Some of its provisions would help streamline the administration of 
HUD programs.
  For instance, this legislation will facilitate income determination 
for tenants and housing quality inspections for assisted rental 
housing.
  Another provision of the bill seeks to expand flexibility between 
public housing operating and capital funds.
  The legislation seeks to provide additional flexibility to public 
housing agencies to conditionally approve housing voucher units with 
non-life threatening deficiencies in order to allow families immediate 
access.
  Although these many provisions of the legislation are commendable, we 
hope to see improvements in provisions that have been identified as 
potentially increasing administrative burden and have unintended 
consequences.
  We want to make sure that deductions for child care and medical 
expense deductions would not adversely impact the lowest income 
households.
  I share the Administration's concern with the delegation of the 
authority to grant exceptions to HUD requirements to the lenders 
approving projects under the Direct Endorsement Lender Review and 
Approval Process.
  Another major issue appears to be that the delegation of authority 
does not appear to provide HUD with sufficient ability to set standards 
for exceptions and oversee their application and procedure.
  There are also concerns that other FHA requirements in the bill may 
create future difficulties for HUD in implementing timely and 
consistent program changes in response to market conditions.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues across the aisle as we 
are working to continue to improve the bill as it moves forward.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my profound 
disappointment in President Obama's recent decision to veto H.R. 3762, 
the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015. 
It is important to be clear and stand with my constituents in voting to 
override the President's veto of legislation that is a story of broken 
promises by President Obama and the Democrats who voted in favor of 
this legislation.

[[Page 1092]]

  I want to spend a few minutes describing just a few of the promises 
made during consideration of Obamacare which have sadly failed to come 
to fruition. First, Mr. Speaker, President Obama repeatedly told the 
American people that ``If you like your health care plan, you'll be 
able to keep it''. Sadly, in reality, it couldn't be further from the 
truth. More than 4.7 million people received cancellation notices in 
the fall of 2013, right before Obamacare went into effect. Politifact, 
no friend to conservatives, even went as far as labeling the 
President's promise the ``Lie of the Year.''
  Secondly, while Obamacare promised lower healthcare costs and lower 
premiums, this couldn't be further from the truth. First, on lower 
healthcare costs, according to CMS' own actuaries, overall spending on 
healthcare is expected to rise by $621 billion over 10 years due to the 
law, at an average of 5.8% per year. That's more than double our 
projected GDP growth, and a higher rate than before Obamacare. The 
story on premiums is no better. While President Obama promised lower 
premiums, as John Adams stated, ``facts are stubborn things''. The 
facts are that the average premium for a family plan has increased by 
$18,610 from 2009-2013, and the overall cost of premium increases have 
been over $1.2 trillion.
  Third, Mr. Speaker, Obamacare promised more choice, more competition, 
and lower costs. Well, unfortunately, that is just not the case in 
Oklahoma, like many other states across the country. In fact, fewer 
insurers offer fewer options at higher prices than when Obamacare was 
passed, over my objections. Obamacare is not the answer and the 
American people know that.
  Instead, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to co-sponsor the American Health 
Care Reform Act of 2015 (AHCA), which I support as an alternative to a 
government-managed health care law. This legislation would provide a 
number of market-driven solutions to ensure everyone seeking coverage 
will be able to obtain it. First, it expands federal support for state 
high risk pools. Unlike Obamacare, which created an already 
oversubscribed Federal high risk pool, AHCA returns those concerns to 
the states, provides the necessary funding to sustain them, and caps 
the premiums in those plans. Additionally, AHCA tax incentives to 
equalize the treatment of employer-sponsored coverage and those 
purchased in the private market. In addition to ensuring healthy 
competition across the market place, it also ensures that if one loses 
their job, they do not necessarily have to lose their health insurance. 
Third, AHCA would provide real competition among insurers, by allowing 
Americans to purchase health insurance products across state lines and 
by permitting small businesses to pool together to negotiate better 
rates. AHCA is the type of legislation needed to replace a bloated, 
government-run healthcare system which has left a trail of broken 
promises in its wake.
  I am pleased to vote to override the President's veto of H.R. 3762. 
While I know this vote will not be successful, I am pleased that the 
President has finally had to confront the issues that the American 
people have with his signature piece of legislation, the so-called 
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Unfortunately, Obamacare is 
none of these things. I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of 
overriding the President's veto.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
the Committee on Financial Services, printed in the bill, it shall be 
in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment 
under the 5-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 114-42. That amendment 
in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.
  The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as 
follows:

                               H.R. 3700

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Housing 
     Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.

        TITLE I--SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND PUBLIC HOUSING

Sec. 101. Inspection of dwelling units.
Sec. 102. Income reviews.
Sec. 103. Limitation on public housing tenancy for over-income 
              families.
Sec. 104. Limitation on eligibility for assistance based on assets.
Sec. 105. Units owned by public housing agencies.
Sec. 106. PHA project-based assistance.
Sec. 107. Establishment of fair market rent.
Sec. 108. Collection of utility data.
Sec. 109. Public housing Capital and Operating Funds.
Sec. 110. Family unification program for children aging out of foster 
              care.

                        TITLE II--RURAL HOUSING

Sec. 201. Delegation of guaranteed rural housing loan approval.

           TITLE III--FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR CONDOMINIUMS

Sec. 301. Modification of FHA requirements for mortgage insurance for 
              condominiums.

      TITLE IV--HOUSING REFORMS FOR THE HOMELESS AND FOR VETERANS

Sec. 401. Definition of geographic area for Continuum of Care Program.
Sec. 402. Inclusion of public housing agencies and local redevelopment 
              authorities in emergency solutions grants.
Sec. 403. Special assistant for Veterans Affairs in the Department of 
              Housing and Urban Development.
Sec. 404. Annual supplemental report on veterans homelessness.

                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 501. Inclusion of Disaster Housing Assistance Program in certain 
              fraud and abuse prevention measures.
Sec. 502. Energy efficiency requirements under Self-Help Homeownership 
              Opportunity program.
Sec. 503. Data exchange standardization for improved interoperability.

        TITLE I--SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND PUBLIC HOUSING

     SEC. 101. INSPECTION OF DWELLING UNITS.

       (a) In General.--Section 8(o)(8) of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(8)) is amended--
       (1) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(A) Initial inspection.--
       ``(i) In general.--For each dwelling unit for which a 
     housing assistance payment contract is established under this 
     subsection, the public housing agency (or other entity 
     pursuant to paragraph (11)) shall inspect the unit before any 
     assistance payment is made to determine whether the dwelling 
     unit meets the housing quality standards under subparagraph 
     (B), except as provided in clause (ii) or (iii) of this 
     subparagraph.
       ``(ii) Correction of non-life-threatening conditions.--In 
     the case of any dwelling unit that is determined, pursuant to 
     an inspection under clause (i), not to meet the housing 
     quality standards under subparagraph (B), assistance payments 
     may be made for the unit notwithstanding subparagraph (C) if 
     failure to meet such standards is a result only of non-life-
     threatening conditions, as such conditions are established by 
     the Secretary. A public housing agency making assistance 
     payments pursuant to this clause for a dwelling unit shall, 
     30 days after the beginning of the period for which such 
     payments are made, withhold any assistance payments for the 
     unit if any deficiency resulting in noncompliance with the 
     housing quality standards has not been corrected by such 
     time. The public housing agency shall recommence assistance 
     payments when such deficiency has been corrected, and may use 
     any payments withheld to make assistance payments relating to 
     the period during which payments were withheld.
       ``(iii) Use of alternative inspection method for interim 
     period.--In the case of any property that within the previous 
     24 months has met the requirements of an inspection that 
     qualifies as an alternative inspection method pursuant to 
     subparagraph (E), a public housing agency may authorize 
     occupancy before the inspection under clause (i) has been 
     completed, and may make assistance payments retroactive to 
     the beginning of the lease term after the unit has been 
     determined pursuant to an inspection under clause (i) to meet 
     the housing quality standards under subparagraph (B). This 
     clause may not be construed to exempt any dwelling unit from 
     compliance with the requirements of subparagraph (D).'';
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (G) as subparagraph (H); 
     and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (F) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(G) Enforcement of housing quality standards.--
       ``(i) Determination of noncompliance.--A dwelling unit that 
     is covered by a housing assistance payments contract under 
     this subsection shall be considered, for purposes of 
     subparagraphs (D) and (F), to be in noncompliance with the 
     housing quality standards under subparagraph (B) if--

       ``(I) the public housing agency or an inspector authorized 
     by the State or unit of local government determines upon 
     inspection of the unit that the unit fails to comply with 
     such standards;
       ``(II) the agency or inspector notifies the owner of the 
     unit in writing of such failure to comply; and
       ``(III) the failure to comply is not corrected--

       ``(aa) in the case of any such failure that is a result of 
     life-threatening conditions, within 24 hours after such 
     notice has been provided; and
       ``(bb) in the case of any such failure that is a result of 
     non-life-threatening conditions, within

[[Page 1093]]

     30 days after such notice has been provided or such other 
     reasonable longer period as the public housing agency may 
     establish.
       ``(ii) Withholding of assistance amounts during 
     correction.--The public housing agency may withhold 
     assistance amounts under this subsection with respect to a 
     dwelling unit for which a notice pursuant to clause (i)(II), 
     of failure to comply with housing quality standards under 
     subparagraph (B) as determined pursuant to an inspection 
     conducted under subparagraph (D) or (F), has been provided. 
     If the unit is brought into compliance with such housing 
     quality standards during the periods referred to in clause 
     (i)(III), the public housing agency shall recommence 
     assistance payments and may use any amounts withheld during 
     the correction period to make assistance payments relating to 
     the period during which payments were withheld.
       ``(iii) Abatement of assistance amounts.--The public 
     housing agency shall abate all of the assistance amounts 
     under this subsection with respect to a dwelling unit that is 
     determined, pursuant to clause (i) of this subparagraph, to 
     be in noncompliance with housing quality standards under 
     subparagraph (B). Upon completion of repairs by the public 
     housing agency or the owner sufficient so that the dwelling 
     unit complies with such housing quality standards, the agency 
     shall recommence payments under the housing assistance 
     payments contract to the owner of the dwelling unit.
       ``(iv) Notification.--If a public housing agency providing 
     assistance under this subsection abates rental assistance 
     payments pursuant to clause (iii) with respect to a dwelling 
     unit, the agency shall, upon commencement of such abatement--

       ``(I) notify the tenant and the owner of the dwelling unit 
     that--

       ``(aa) such abatement has commenced; and
       ``(bb) if the dwelling unit is not brought into compliance 
     with housing quality standards within 60 days after the 
     effective date of the determination of noncompliance under 
     clause (i) or such reasonable longer period as the agency may 
     establish, the tenant will have to move; and

       ``(II) issue the tenant the necessary forms to allow the 
     tenant to move to another dwelling unit and transfer the 
     rental assistance to that unit.

       ``(v) Protection of tenants.--An owner of a dwelling unit 
     may not terminate the tenancy of any tenant because of the 
     withholding or abatement of assistance pursuant to this 
     subparagraph. During the period that assistance is abated 
     pursuant to this subparagraph, the tenant may terminate the 
     tenancy by notifying the owner.
       ``(vi) Termination of lease or assistance payments 
     contract.--If assistance amounts under this section for a 
     dwelling unit are abated pursuant to clause (iii) and the 
     owner does not correct the noncompliance within 60 days after 
     the effective date of the determination of noncompliance 
     under clause (i), or such other reasonable longer period as 
     the public housing agency may establish, the agency shall 
     terminate the housing assistance payments contract for the 
     dwelling unit.
       ``(vii) Relocation.--

       ``(I) Lease of new unit.--The agency shall provide the 
     family residing in such a dwelling unit a period of 90 days 
     or such longer period as the public housing agency determines 
     is reasonably necessary to lease a new unit, beginning upon 
     termination of the contract, to lease a new residence with 
     tenant-based rental assistance under this section.
       ``(II) Availability of public housing units.--If the family 
     is unable to lease such a new residence during such period, 
     the public housing agency shall, at the option of the family, 
     provide such family a preference for occupancy in a dwelling 
     unit of public housing that is owned or operated by the 
     agency that first becomes available for occupancy after the 
     expiration of such period.
       ``(III) Assistance in finding unit.--The public housing 
     agency may provide assistance to the family in finding a new 
     residence, including use of up to two months of any 
     assistance amounts withheld or abated pursuant to clause (ii) 
     or (iii), respectively, for costs directly associated with 
     relocation of the family to a new residence, which shall 
     include security deposits as necessary and may include 
     reimbursements for reasonable moving expenses incurred by the 
     household, as established by the Secretary. The agency may 
     require that a family receiving assistance for a security 
     deposit shall remit, to the extent of such assistance, the 
     amount of any security deposit refunds made by the owner of 
     the dwelling unit for which the lease was terminated.

       ``(viii) Tenant-caused damages.--If a public housing agency 
     determines that any damage to a dwelling unit that results in 
     a failure of the dwelling unit to comply with housing quality 
     standards under subparagraph (B), other than any damage 
     resulting from ordinary use, was caused by the tenant, any 
     member of the tenant's household, or any guest or other 
     person under the tenant's control, the agency may waive the 
     applicability of this subparagraph, except that this clause 
     shall not exonerate a tenant from any liability otherwise 
     existing under applicable law for damages to the premises 
     caused by such tenant.
       ``(ix) Applicability.--This subparagraph shall apply to any 
     dwelling unit for which a housing assistance payments 
     contract is entered into or renewed after the date of the 
     effectiveness of the regulations implementing this 
     subparagraph.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall issue notice or regulations to implement 
     subsection (a) of this section and such subsection shall take 
     effect upon such issuance.

     SEC. 102. INCOME REVIEWS.

       (a) Income Reviews for Public Housing and Section 8 
     Programs.--Section 3 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437a) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the second sentence of paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``at least annually'' and inserting ``pursuant to paragraph 
     (6)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(6) Reviews of family income.--
       ``(A) Frequency.--Reviews of family income for purposes of 
     this section shall be made--
       ``(i) in the case of all families, upon the initial 
     provision of housing assistance for the family;
       ``(ii) annually thereafter, except as provided in paragraph 
     (1) with respect to fixed-income families;
       ``(iii) upon the request of the family, at any time the 
     income or deductions (under subsection (b)(5)) of the family 
     change by an amount that is estimated to result in a decrease 
     of 10 percent (or such lower amount as the Secretary may, by 
     notice, establish, or permit the public housing agency or 
     owner to establish) or more in annual adjusted income; and
       ``(iv) at any time the income or deductions (under 
     subsection (b)(5)) of the family change by an amount that is 
     estimated to result in an increase of 10 percent or more in 
     annual adjusted income, or such other amount as the Secretary 
     may by notice establish, except that any increase in the 
     earned income of a family shall not be considered for 
     purposes of this clause (except that earned income may be 
     considered if the increase corresponds to previous decreases 
     under clause (iii)), except that a public housing agency or 
     owner may elect not to conduct such review in the last three 
     months of a certification period.
       ``(B) In general.--Reviews of family income for purposes of 
     this section shall be subject to the provisions of section 
     904 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments 
     Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 3544).
       ``(7) Calculation of income.--
       ``(A) Use of current year income.--In determining family 
     income for initial occupancy or provision of housing 
     assistance pursuant to clause (i) of paragraph (6)(A) or 
     pursuant to reviews pursuant to clause (iii) or (iv) of such 
     paragraph, a public housing agency or owner shall use the 
     income of the family as estimated by the agency or owner for 
     the upcoming year.
       ``(B) Use of prior year income.--In determining family 
     income for annual reviews pursuant to paragraph (6)(A)(ii), a 
     public housing agency or owner shall, except as otherwise 
     provided in this paragraph and paragraph (1), use the income 
     of the family as determined by the agency or owner for the 
     preceding year, taking into consideration any redetermination 
     of income during such prior year pursuant to clause (iii) or 
     (iv) of paragraph (6)(A).
       ``(C) Other income.--In determining the income for any 
     family based on the prior year's income, with respect to 
     prior year calculations of income not subject to subparagraph 
     (B), a public housing agency or owner may make other 
     adjustments as it considers appropriate to reflect current 
     income.
       ``(D) Safe harbor.--A public housing agency or owner may, 
     to the extent such information is available to the public 
     housing agency or owner, determine the family's income prior 
     to the application of any deductions based on timely income 
     determinations made for purposes of other means-tested 
     Federal public assistance programs (including the program for 
     block grants to States for temporary assistance for needy 
     families under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act, 
     a program for Medicaid assistance under a State plan approved 
     under title XIX of the Social Security Act, and the 
     supplemental nutrition assistance program (as such term is 
     defined in section 3 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 
     U.S.C. 2012))). The Secretary shall, in consultation with 
     other appropriate Federal agencies, develop procedures to 
     enable public housing agencies and owners to have access to 
     such income determinations made by other means-tested Federal 
     programs that the Secretary determines to have comparable 
     reliability. Exchanges of such information shall be subject 
     to the same limitations and tenant protections provided under 
     section 904 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance 
     Act Amendments of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 3544) with respect to 
     information obtained under the requirements of section 303(i) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 503(i)).
       ``(E) PHA and owner compliance.--A public housing agency or 
     owner may not be considered to fail to comply with this 
     paragraph or paragraph (6) due solely to any de minimis 
     errors made by the agency or owner in calculating family 
     incomes.'';
       (2) by striking subsections (d) and (e); and
       (3) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (d).
       (b) Certification Regarding Hardship Exception to Minimum 
     Monthly Rent.--Not later than the expiration of the 6-month 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall submit 
     to the Congress a certification that the hardship and tenant 
     protection provisions in clause (i) of section 3(a)(3)(B) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437a(a)(3)(B)(i)) are being enforced at such

[[Page 1094]]

     time and that the Secretary will continue to provide due 
     consideration to the hardship circumstances of persons 
     assisted under relevant programs of this Act.
       (c) Income; Adjusted Income.--Section 3(b) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)) is amended by 
     striking paragraphs (4) and (5) and inserting the following 
     new paragraphs:
       ``(4) Income.--The term `income' means, with respect to a 
     family, income received from all sources by each member of 
     the household who is 18 years of age or older or is the head 
     of household or spouse of the head of the household, plus 
     unearned income by or on behalf of each dependent who is less 
     than 18 years of age, as determined in accordance with 
     criteria prescribed by the Secretary, in consultation with 
     the Secretary of Agriculture, subject to the following 
     requirements:
       ``(A) Included amounts.--Such term includes recurring gifts 
     and receipts, actual income from assets, and profit or loss 
     from a business.
       ``(B) Excluded amounts.--Such term does not include--
       ``(i) any imputed return on assets, except to the extent 
     that net family assets exceed $50,000, except that such 
     amount (as it may have been previously adjusted) shall be 
     adjusted for inflation annually by the Secretary in 
     accordance with an inflationary index selected by the 
     Secretary;
       ``(ii) any amounts that would be eligible for exclusion 
     under section 1613(a)(7) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1382b(a)(7));
       ``(iii) deferred disability benefits from the Department of 
     Veterans Affairs that are received in a lump sum amount or in 
     prospective monthly amounts;
       ``(iv) any expenses related to aid and attendance under 
     section 1521 of title 38, United States Code, to veterans who 
     are in need of regular aid and attendance; and
       ``(v) exclusions from income as established by the 
     Secretary by regulation or notice, or any amount required by 
     Federal law to be excluded from consideration as income.
       ``(C) Earned income of students.--Such term does not 
     include--
       ``(i) earned income, up to an amount as the Secretary may 
     by regulation establish, of any dependent earned during any 
     period that such dependent is attending school or vocational 
     training on a full-time basis; or
       ``(ii) any grant-in-aid or scholarship amounts related to 
     such attendance used--

       ``(I) for the cost of tuition or books; or
       ``(II) in such amounts as the Secretary may allow, for the 
     cost of room and board.

       ``(D) Educational savings accounts.--Income shall be 
     determined without regard to any amounts in or from, or any 
     benefits from, any Coverdell education savings account under 
     section 530 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or any 
     qualified tuition program under section 529 of such Code.
       ``(E) Recordkeeping.--The Secretary may not require a 
     public housing agency or owner to maintain records of any 
     amounts excluded from income pursuant to this subparagraph.
       ``(5) Adjusted income.--The term `adjusted income' means, 
     with respect to a family, the amount (as determined by the 
     public housing agency or owner) of the income of the members 
     of the family residing in a dwelling unit or the persons on a 
     lease, after any deductions from income as follows:
       ``(A) Elderly and disabled families.--$525 in the case of 
     any family that is an elderly family or a disabled family.
       ``(B) Dependents.--In the case of any family, $525 for each 
     member who--
       ``(i) is less than 18 years of age or attending school or 
     vocational training on a full-time basis; or
       ``(ii) is a person who is 18 years of age or older, resides 
     in the household, and is certified as disabled and unable to 
     work by the public housing agency of jurisdiction.
       ``(C) Child care.--The amount, if any, that exceeds 5 
     percent of annual family income that is used to pay for 
     unreimbursed child care expenses, which shall include child 
     care for preschool-age children, for before- and after-care 
     for children in school, and for other child care necessary to 
     enable a member of the family to be employed or further his 
     or her education.
       ``(D) Health and medical expenses.--The amount, if any, by 
     which 10 percent of annual family income is exceeded by the 
     sum of--
       ``(i) in the case of any elderly or disabled family, any 
     unreimbursed health and medical care expenses; and
       ``(ii) any unreimbursed reasonable attendant care and 
     auxiliary apparatus expenses for each handicapped member of 
     the family, if determined necessary by the public housing 
     agency or owner to enable any member of such family to be 
     employed.

      The Secretary shall, by regulation, provide hardship 
     exemptions to the requirements of this subparagraph and 
     subparagraph (C) for impacted families who demonstrate an 
     inability to pay calculated rents because of financial 
     hardship. Such regulations shall include a requirement to 
     notify tenants regarding any changes to the determination of 
     adjusted income pursuant to such subparagraphs based on the 
     determination of the family's claim of financial hardship 
     exemptions required by the preceding sentence. Such 
     regulations shall be promulgated in consultation with tenant 
     organizations, industry participants, and the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services, with an adequate comment period 
     provided for interested parties.
       ``(E) Permissive deductions.--Such additional deductions as 
     a public housing agency may, at its discretion, establish, 
     except that the Secretary shall establish procedures to 
     ensure that such deductions do not materially increase 
     Federal expenditures.

     The Secretary shall annually calculate the amounts of the 
     deductions under subparagraphs (A) and (B), as such amounts 
     may have been previously calculated, by applying an 
     inflationary factor as the Secretary shall, by regulation, 
     establish, except that the actual deduction determined for 
     each year shall be established by rounding such amount to the 
     next lowest multiple of $25.''.
       (d) Housing Choice Voucher Program.--Section 8(o) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(D), by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, except that a public housing 
     agency may establish a payment standard of not more than 120 
     percent of the fair market rent where necessary as a 
     reasonable accommodation for a person with a disability, 
     without approval of the Secretary. A public housing agency 
     may use a payment standard that is greater than 120 percent 
     of the fair market rent as a reasonable accommodation for a 
     person with a disability, but only with the approval of the 
     Secretary. In connection with the use of any increased 
     payment standard established or approved pursuant to either 
     of the preceding two sentences as a reasonable accommodation 
     for a person with a disability, the Secretary may not 
     establish additional requirements regarding the amount of 
     adjusted income paid by such person for rent''; and
       (2) in paragraph (5)--
       (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``Annual review'' 
     and inserting ``Reviews'';
       (B) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking ``the provisions of'' and inserting 
     ``paragraphs (1), (6), and (7) of section 3(a) and to''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and shall be conducted'' and all that 
     follows through the end of the subparagraph and inserting a 
     period; and
       (C) in subparagraph (B), by striking the second sentence.
       (e) Enhanced Voucher Program.--Section 8(t)(1)(D) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(t)(1)(D)) 
     is amended by striking ``income'' each place such term 
     appears and inserting ``annual adjusted income''.
       (f) Project-Based Housing.--Paragraph (3) of section 8(c) 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f(c)(3)) is amended by striking the last sentence.
       (g) Impact on Public Housing Revenues.--
       (1) Adjustments to operating formula.--If the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development determines that the application 
     of subsections (a) through (e) of this section results in a 
     material and disproportionate reduction in the rental income 
     of certain public housing agencies during the first year in 
     which such subsections are implemented, the Secretary may 
     make appropriate adjustments in the formula income for such 
     year of those agencies experiencing such a reduction.
       (2) HUD reports on revenue and cost impact.--In each of the 
     first two years after the first year in which subsections (a) 
     through (e) are implemented, the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development shall submit a report to Congress 
     identifying and calculating the impact of changes made by 
     such subsections and section 104 of this Act on the revenues 
     and costs of operating public housing units, the voucher 
     program for rental assistance under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, and the program under such 
     section 8 for project-based rental assistance. If such report 
     identifies a material reduction in the net income of public 
     housing agencies nationwide or a material increase in the 
     costs of funding the voucher program or the project-based 
     assistance program, the Secretary shall include in such 
     report recommendations for legislative changes to reduce or 
     eliminate such a reduction.
       (h) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall issue notice or regulations to implement 
     this section and this section shall take effect after such 
     issuance, except that this section may only take effect upon 
     the commencement of a calendar year.

     SEC. 103. LIMITATION ON PUBLIC HOUSING TENANCY FOR OVER-
                   INCOME FAMILIES.

       Subsection (a) of section 16 of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437n(a)) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Limitations on tenancy for over-income families.--
       ``(A) Limitations.--Except as provided in subparagraph (D), 
     in the case of any family residing in a dwelling unit of 
     public housing whose income for the most recent two 
     consecutive years, as determined pursuant to income reviews 
     conducted pursuant to section 3(a)(6), has exceeded the 
     applicable income limitation under subparagraph (C), the 
     public housing agency shall--
       ``(i) notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, 
     charge such family as monthly rent for the unit occupied by 
     such family an amount equal to the greater of--

       ``(I) the applicable fair market rental established under 
     section 8(c) for a dwelling unit in the same market area of 
     the same size; or
       ``(II) the amount of the monthly subsidy provided under 
     this Act for the dwelling unit, which shall include any 
     amounts from the Operating Fund and Capital Fund under 
     section 9 used for the unit, as determined by the agency in 
     accordance with regulations that the Secretary shall issue to 
     carry out this subclause; or

       ``(ii) terminate the tenancy of such family in public 
     housing not later than 6 months after the

[[Page 1095]]

     income determination described in subparagraph (A).
       ``(B) Notice.--In the case of any family residing in a 
     dwelling unit of public housing whose income for a year has 
     exceeded the applicable income limitation under subparagraph 
     (C), upon the conclusion of such year the public housing 
     agency shall provide written notice to such family of the 
     requirements under subparagraph (A).
       ``(C) Income limitation.--The income limitation under this 
     subparagraph shall be 120 percent of the median income for 
     the area, as determined by the Secretary with adjustments for 
     smaller and larger families, except that the Secretary may 
     establish income limitations higher or lower than 120 percent 
     of such median income on the basis of the Secretary's 
     findings that such variations are necessary because of 
     prevailing levels of construction costs, or unusually high or 
     low family incomes, vacancy rates, or rental costs.
       ``(D) Exception.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a 
     family occupying a dwelling unit in public housing pursuant 
     to paragraph (5) of section 3(a) (42 U.S.C. 1437a(a)(5)).
       ``(E) Reports on over-income families and waiting lists.--
     The Secretary shall require that each public housing agency 
     shall--
       ``(i) submit a report annually, in a format required by the 
     Secretary, that specifies--

       ``(I) the number of families residing, as of the end of the 
     year for which the report is submitted, in public housing 
     administered by the agency who had incomes exceeding the 
     applicable income limitation under subparagraph (C); and
       ``(II) the number of families, as of the end of such year, 
     on the waiting lists for admission to public housing projects 
     of the agency; and

       ``(ii) make the information reported pursuant to clause (i) 
     publicly available.''.

     SEC. 104. LIMITATION ON ELIGIBILITY FOR ASSISTANCE BASED ON 
                   ASSETS.

       Section 16 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437n) is amended by inserting after subsection (d) 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Eligibility for Assistance Based on Assets.--
       ``(1) Limitation on assets.--Subject to paragraph (3) and 
     notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a dwelling 
     unit assisted under this Act may not be rented and assistance 
     under this Act may not be provided, either initially or at 
     each recertification of family income, to any family--
       ``(A) whose net family assets exceed $100,000, as such 
     amount is adjusted annually by applying an inflationary 
     factor as the Secretary considers appropriate; or
       ``(B) who has a present ownership interest in, a legal 
     right to reside in, and the effective legal authority to 
     sell, real property that is suitable for occupancy by the 
     family as a residence, except that the prohibition under this 
     subparagraph shall not apply to--
       ``(i) any property for which the family is receiving 
     assistance under subsection (y) or (o)(12) of section 8 of 
     this Act;
       ``(ii) any person that is a victim of domestic violence; or
       ``(iii) any family that is offering such property for sale.
       ``(2) Net family assets.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     term `net family assets' means, for all members of the 
     household, the net cash value of all assets after deducting 
     reasonable costs that would be incurred in disposing of real 
     property, savings, stocks, bonds, and other forms of capital 
     investment. Such term does not include interests in Indian 
     trust land, equity in property for which the family is 
     receiving assistance under subsection (y) or (o)(12) of 
     section 8, equity accounts in homeownership programs of the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development, or Family Self 
     Sufficiency accounts.
       ``(B) Exclusions.--Such term does not include--
       ``(i) the value of personal property, except for items of 
     personal property of significant value, as the Secretary may 
     establish or the public housing agency may determine;
       ``(ii) the value of any retirement account;
       ``(iii) real property for which the family does not have 
     the effective legal authority necessary to sell such 
     property;
       ``(iv) any amounts recovered in any civil action or 
     settlement based on a claim of malpractice, negligence, or 
     other breach of duty owed to a member of the family and 
     arising out of law, that resulted in a member of the family 
     being disabled;
       ``(v) the value of any Coverdell education savings account 
     under section 530 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or any 
     qualified tuition program under section 529 of such Code; and
       ``(vi) such other exclusions as the Secretary may 
     establish.
       ``(C) Trust funds.--In cases in which a trust fund has been 
     established and the trust is not revocable by, or under the 
     control of, any member of the family or household, the value 
     of the trust fund shall not be considered an asset of a 
     family if the fund continues to be held in trust. Any income 
     distributed from the trust fund shall be considered income 
     for purposes of section 3(b) and any calculations of annual 
     family income, except in the case of medical expenses for a 
     minor.
       ``(3) Self-certification.--
       ``(A) Net family assets.--A public housing agency or owner 
     may determine the net assets of a family, for purposes of 
     this section, based on a certification by the family that the 
     net assets of such family do not exceed $50,000, as such 
     amount is adjusted annually by applying an inflationary 
     factor as the Secretary considers appropriate.
       ``(B) No current real property ownership.--A public housing 
     agency or owner may determine compliance with paragraph 
     (1)(B) based on a certification by the family that such 
     family does not have any current ownership interest in any 
     real property at the time the agency or owner reviews the 
     family's income.
       ``(C) Standardized forms.--The Secretary may develop 
     standardized forms for the certifications referred to in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B).
       ``(4) Compliance for public housing dwelling units.--When 
     recertifying family income with respect to families residing 
     in public housing dwelling units, a public housing agency 
     may, in the discretion of the agency and only pursuant to a 
     policy that is set forth in the public housing agency plan 
     under section 5A for the agency, choose not to enforce the 
     limitation under paragraph (1).
       ``(5) Enforcement.--When recertifying the income of a 
     family residing in a dwelling unit assisted under this Act, a 
     public housing agency or owner may choose not to enforce the 
     limitation under paragraph (1) or may establish exceptions to 
     such limitation based on eligibility criteria, but only 
     pursuant to a policy that is set forth in the public housing 
     agency plan under section 5A for the agency or under a policy 
     adopted by the owner. Eligibility criteria for establishing 
     exceptions may provide for separate treatment based on family 
     type and may be based on different factors, such as age, 
     disability, income, the ability of the family to find 
     suitable alternative housing, and whether supportive services 
     are being provided.
       ``(6) Authority to delay evictions.--In the case of a 
     family residing in a dwelling unit assisted under this Act 
     who does not comply with the limitation under paragraph (1), 
     the public housing agency or project owner may delay eviction 
     or termination of the family based on such noncompliance for 
     a period of not more than 6 months.''.

     SEC. 105. UNITS OWNED BY PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCIES.

       Paragraph (11) of section 8(o) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(11)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(11) Leasing of units owned by pha.--If'' 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(11) Leasing of units owned by pha.--
       ``(A) Inspections and rent determinations.--If''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) Units owned by pha.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the term `owned by a public housing agency' means, with 
     respect to a dwelling unit, that the dwelling unit is in a 
     project that is owned by such agency, by an entity wholly 
     controlled by such agency, or by a limited liability company 
     or limited partnership in which such agency (or an entity 
     wholly controlled by such agency) holds a controlling 
     interest in the managing member or general partner. A 
     dwelling unit shall not be deemed to be owned by a public 
     housing agency for purposes of this subsection because the 
     agency holds a fee interest as ground lessor in the property 
     on which the unit is situated, holds a security interest 
     under a mortgage or deed of trust on the unit, or holds a 
     non-controlling interest in an entity which owns the unit or 
     in the managing member or general partner of an entity which 
     owns the unit.''.

     SEC. 106. PHA PROJECT-BASED ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (13) of section 8(o) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``structure'' each place such term appears 
     and inserting ``project'';
       (2) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) Percentage limitation.--
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), a public housing 
     agency may use for project-based assistance under this 
     paragraph not more than 20 percent of the authorized units 
     for the agency.
       ``(ii) Exception.--A public housing agency may use up to an 
     additional 10 percent of the authorized units for the agency 
     for project-based assistance under this paragraph, to provide 
     units that house individuals and families that meet the 
     definition of homeless under section 103 of the McKinney-
     Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11302), that house 
     families with veterans, that provide supportive housing to 
     persons with disabilities or elderly persons, or that are 
     located in areas where vouchers under this subsection are 
     difficult to use, as specified in subparagraph (D)(ii)(II). 
     Any units of project-based assistance that are attached to 
     units previously subject to federally required rent 
     restrictions or receiving another type of long-term housing 
     subsidy provided by the Secretary shall not count toward the 
     percentage limitation under clause (i) of this subparagraph. 
     The Secretary may, by regulation, establish additional 
     categories for the exception under this clause.'';
       (3) by striking subparagraph (D) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) Income-mixing requirement.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), not 
     more than the greater of 25 dwelling units or 25 percent of 
     the dwelling units in any project may be assisted under a 
     housing assistance payment contract for project-based 
     assistance pursuant to this paragraph. For purposes of this 
     subparagraph, the term `project' means a single building, 
     multiple contiguous buildings, or multiple buildings on 
     contiguous parcels of land.

[[Page 1096]]

       ``(ii) Exceptions.--

       ``(I) Certain families.--The limitation under clause (i) 
     shall not apply to dwelling units assisted under a contract 
     that are exclusively made available to elderly families or to 
     households eligible for supportive services that are made 
     available to the assisted residents of the project, according 
     to standards for such services the Secretary may establish.
       ``(II) Certain areas.--With respect to areas in which 
     tenant-based vouchers for assistance under this subsection 
     are difficult to use, as determined by the Secretary, and 
     with respect to census tracts with a poverty rate of 20 
     percent or less, clause (i) shall be applied by substituting 
     `40 percent' for `25 percent', and the Secretary may, by 
     regulation, establish additional conditions.
       ``(III) Certain contracts.--The limitation under clause (i) 
     shall not apply with respect to contracts or renewal of 
     contracts under which a greater percentage of the dwelling 
     units in a project were assisted under a housing assistance 
     payment contract for project-based assistance pursuant to 
     this paragraph on the date of the enactment of the Housing 
     Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015.
       ``(IV) Certain properties.--Any units of project-based 
     assistance under this paragraph that are attached to units 
     previously subject to federally required rent restrictions or 
     receiving other project-based assistance provided by the 
     Secretary shall not count toward the percentage limitation 
     imposed by this subparagraph (D).

       ``(iii) Additional monitoring and oversight requirements.--
     The Secretary may establish additional requirements for 
     monitoring and oversight of projects in which more than 40 
     percent of the dwelling units are assisted under a housing 
     assistance payment contract for project-based assistance 
     pursuant to this paragraph.'';
       (4) by striking subparagraph (F) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(F) Contract term.--
       ``(i) Term.--A housing assistance payment contract pursuant 
     to this paragraph between a public housing agency and the 
     owner of a project may have a term of up to 20 years, subject 
     to--

       ``(I) the availability of sufficient appropriated funds for 
     the purpose of renewing expiring contracts for assistance 
     payments, as provided in appropriation Acts and in the 
     agency's annual contributions contract with the Secretary, 
     provided that in the event of insufficient appropriated 
     funds, payments due under contracts under this paragraph 
     shall take priority if other cost-saving measures that do not 
     require the termination of an existing contract are available 
     to the agency; and
       ``(II) compliance with the inspection requirements under 
     paragraph (8), except that the agency shall not be required 
     to make biennial inspections of each assisted unit in the 
     development.

       ``(ii) Addition of eligible units.--Subject to the 
     limitations of subparagraphs (B) and (D), the agency and the 
     owner may add eligible units within the same project to a 
     housing assistance payments contract at any time during the 
     term thereof without being subject to any additional 
     competitive selection procedures.
       ``(iii) Housing under construction or recently 
     constructed.--An agency may enter into a housing assistance 
     payments contract with an owner for any unit that does not 
     qualify as existing housing and is under construction or 
     recently has been constructed whether or not the agency has 
     executed an agreement to enter into a contract with the 
     owner, provided that the owner demonstrates compliance with 
     applicable requirements prior to execution of the housing 
     assistance payments contract. This clause shall not subject a 
     housing assistance payments contract for existing housing 
     under this paragraph to such requirements or otherwise limit 
     the extent to which a unit may be assisted as existing 
     housing.
       ``(iv) Additional conditions.--The contract may specify 
     additional conditions, including with respect to 
     continuation, termination, or expiration, and shall specify 
     that upon termination or expiration of the contract without 
     extension, each assisted family may elect to use its 
     assistance under this subsection to remain in the same 
     project if its unit complies with the inspection requirements 
     under paragraph (8), the rent for the unit is reasonable as 
     required by paragraph (10)(A), and the family pays its 
     required share of the rent and the amount, if any, by which 
     the unit rent (including the amount allowed for tenant-based 
     utilities) exceeds the applicable payment standard.'';
       (5) in subparagraph (G), by striking ``15 years'' and 
     inserting ``20 years'';
       (6) by striking subparagraph (I) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(I) Rent adjustments.--A housing assistance payments 
     contract pursuant to this paragraph entered into after the 
     date of the enactment of the Housing Opportunity Through 
     Modernization Act of 2015 shall provide for annual rent 
     adjustments upon the request of the owner, except that--
       ``(i) by agreement of the parties, a contract may allow a 
     public housing agency to adjust the rent for covered units 
     using an operating cost adjustment factor established by the 
     Secretary pursuant to section 524(c) of the Multifamily 
     Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (which 
     shall not result in a negative adjustment), in which case the 
     contract may require an additional adjustment, if requested, 
     up to the reasonable rent periodically during the term of the 
     contract, and shall require such an adjustment, if requested, 
     upon extension pursuant to subparagraph (G);
       ``(ii) the adjusted rent shall not exceed the maximum rent 
     permitted under subparagraph (H);
       ``(iii) the contract may provide that the maximum rent 
     permitted for a dwelling unit shall not be less than the 
     initial rent for the dwelling unit under the initial housing 
     assistance payments contract covering the units; and
       ``(iv) the provisions of subsection (c)(2)(C) shall not 
     apply.'';
       (7) in subparagraph (J)--
       (A) in the first sentence--
       (i) by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''; and
       (ii) by inserting before the period the following: ``or may 
     permit owners to select applicants from site-based waiting 
     lists as specified in this subparagraph'';
       (B) by striking the third sentence and inserting the 
     following: ``The agency or owner may establish preferences or 
     criteria for selection for a unit assisted under this 
     paragraph that are consistent with the public housing agency 
     plan for the agency approved under section 5A and that give 
     preference to families who qualify for voluntary services, 
     including disability-specific services, offered in 
     conjunction with assisted units.''; and
       (C) by striking the fifth and sixth sentences and inserting 
     the following: ``A public housing agency may establish and 
     utilize procedures for owner-maintained site-based waiting 
     lists, under which applicants may apply at, or otherwise 
     designate to the public housing agency, the project or 
     projects in which they seek to reside, except that all 
     eligible applicants on the waiting list of an agency for 
     assistance under this subsection shall be permitted to place 
     their names on such separate list, subject to policies and 
     procedures established by the Secretary. All such procedures 
     shall comply with title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 
     the Fair Housing Act, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act 
     of 1973, and other applicable civil rights laws. The owner or 
     manager of a project assisted under this paragraph shall not 
     admit any family to a dwelling unit assisted under a contract 
     pursuant to this paragraph other than a family referred by 
     the public housing agency from its waiting list, or a family 
     on a site-based waiting list that complies with the 
     requirements of this subparagraph. A public housing agency 
     shall disclose to each applicant all other options in the 
     selection of a project in which to reside that are provided 
     by the public housing agency and are available to the 
     applicant.'';
       (8) in subparagraph (M)(ii), by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``relating to funding other than 
     housing assistance payments''; and
       (9) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(N) Structure owned by agency.--A public housing agency 
     engaged in an initiative to improve, develop, or replace a 
     public housing property or site may attach assistance to an 
     existing, newly constructed, or rehabilitated structure in 
     which the agency has an ownership interest or which the 
     agency has control of without following a competitive 
     process, provided that the agency has notified the public of 
     its intent through its public housing agency plan and subject 
     to the limitations and requirements of this paragraph.
       ``(O) Special purpose vouchers.--A public housing agency 
     that administers vouchers authorized under subsection (o)(19) 
     or (x) of this section may provide such assistance in 
     accordance with the limitations and requirements of this 
     paragraph, without additional requirements for approval by 
     the Secretary.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall issue notice or regulations to implement 
     subsection (a) of this section and such subsection shall take 
     effect upon such issuance.

     SEC. 107. ESTABLISHMENT OF FAIR MARKET RENT.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 8(c) of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(c)(1)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(A)'' after the paragraph designation;
       (2) by striking the fourth, seventh, eighth, and ninth 
     sentences; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Fair market rentals for an area shall be published 
     not less than annually by the Secretary on the site of the 
     Department on the World Wide Web and in any other manner 
     specified by the Secretary. Notice that such fair market 
     rentals are being published shall be published in the Federal 
     Register, and such fair market rentals shall become effective 
     no earlier than 30 days after the date of such publication. 
     The Secretary shall establish a procedure for public housing 
     agencies and other interested parties to comment on such fair 
     market rentals and to request, within a time specified by the 
     Secretary, reevaluation of the fair market rentals in a 
     jurisdiction before such rentals become effective. The 
     Secretary shall cause to be published for comment in the 
     Federal Register notices of proposed material changes in the 
     methodology for estimating fair market rentals and notices 
     specifying the final decisions regarding such proposed 
     substantial methodological changes and responses to public 
     comments.''.
       (b) Payment Standard.--Subparagraph (B) of section 8(o)(1) 
     of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 
     1437f(o)(1)(B)) is amended by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, except that no public housing 
     agency shall be required as a result of a reduction in the 
     fair market rental to reduce the payment

[[Page 1097]]

     standard applied to a family continuing to reside in a unit 
     for which the family was receiving assistance under this 
     section at the time the fair market rental was reduced. The 
     Secretary shall allow public housing agencies to request 
     exception payment standards within fair market rental areas 
     subject to criteria and procedures established by the 
     Secretary''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect upon the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 108. COLLECTION OF UTILITY DATA.

       Section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f(o)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(20) Collection of utility data.--
       ``(A) Publication.--The Secretary shall, to the extent that 
     data can be collected cost effectively, regularly publish 
     such data regarding utility consumption and costs in local 
     areas as the Secretary determines will be useful for the 
     establishment of allowances for tenant-paid utilities for 
     families assisted under this subsection.
       ``(B) Use of data.--The Secretary shall provide such data 
     in a manner that--
       ``(i) avoids unnecessary administrative burdens for public 
     housing agencies and owners; and
       ``(ii) protects families in various unit sizes and building 
     types, and using various utilities, from high rent and 
     utility cost burdens relative to income.''.

     SEC. 109. PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL AND OPERATING FUNDS.

       (a) Capital Fund Replacement Reserves.--Section 9 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (j), by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(7) Treatment of replacement reserve.--The requirements 
     of this subsection shall not apply to funds held in 
     replacement reserves established pursuant to subsection 
     (n).''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(n) Establishment of Replacement Reserves.--
       ``(1) In general.--Public housing agencies shall be 
     permitted to establish a replacement reserve to fund any of 
     the capital activities listed in subsection (d)(1).
       ``(2) Source and amount of funds for replacement reserve.--
     At any time, a public housing agency may deposit funds from 
     such agency's Capital Fund into a replacement reserve, 
     subject to the following:
       ``(A) At the discretion of the Secretary, public housing 
     agencies may transfer and hold in a replacement reserve funds 
     originating from additional sources.
       ``(B) No minimum transfer of funds to a replacement reserve 
     shall be required.
       ``(C) At any time, a public housing agency may not hold in 
     a replacement reserve more than the amount the public housing 
     authority has determined necessary to satisfy the anticipated 
     capital needs of properties in its portfolio assisted under 
     this section, as outlined in its Capital Fund 5-Year Action 
     Plan, or a comparable plan, as determined by the Secretary.
       ``(D) The Secretary may establish, by regulation, a maximum 
     replacement reserve level or levels that are below amounts 
     determined under subparagraph (C), which may be based upon 
     the size of the portfolio assisted under this section or 
     other factors.
       ``(3) Transfer of operating funds.--In first establishing a 
     replacement reserve, the Secretary may allow public housing 
     agencies to transfer more than 20 percent of its operating 
     funds into its replacement reserve.
       ``(4) Expenditure.--Funds in a replacement reserve may be 
     used for purposes authorized by subsection (d)(1) and 
     contained in its Capital Fund 5-Year Action Plan.
       ``(5) Management and report.--The Secretary shall establish 
     appropriate accounting and reporting requirements to ensure 
     that public housing agencies are spending funds on eligible 
     projects and that funds in the replacement reserve are 
     connected to capital needs.''.
       (b) Flexibility of Operating Fund Amounts.--Paragraph (1) 
     of section 9(g) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437g(g)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(1)'' and all that follows through ``--
     Of'' and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Flexibility in use of funds.--
       ``(A) Flexibility for capital fund amounts.--Of''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) Flexibility for operating fund amounts.--Of any 
     amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2016 or any fiscal year 
     thereafter that are allocated for fiscal year 2016 or any 
     fiscal year thereafter from the Operating Fund for any public 
     housing agency, the agency may use not more than 20 percent 
     for activities that are eligible under subsection (d) for 
     assistance with amounts from the Capital Fund, but only if 
     the public housing plan under section 5A for the agency 
     provides for such use.''.

     SEC. 110. FAMILY UNIFICATION PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN AGING OUT 
                   OF FOSTER CARE.

       Section 8(x) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437f(x)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)(B)--
       (A) by striking ``18 months'' and inserting ``36 months'';
       (B) by striking ``21 years of age'' and inserting ``24 
     years of age''; and
       (C) by inserting after ``have left foster care'' the 
     following: ``, or will leave foster care within 90 days, in 
     accordance with a transition plan described in section 
     475(5)(H) of the Social Security Act, and is homeless or is 
     at risk of becoming homeless'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Coordination between public housing agencies and 
     public child welfare agencies.--The Secretary shall, not 
     later than the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on 
     the date of the enactment of the Housing Opportunity Through 
     Modernization Act of 2015 and after consultation with other 
     appropriate Federal agencies, issue guidance to improve 
     coordination between public housing agencies and public child 
     welfare agencies in carrying out the program under this 
     subsection, which shall provide guidance on--
       ``(A) identifying eligible recipients for assistance under 
     this subsection;
       ``(B) coordinating with other local youth and family 
     providers in the community and participating in the Continuum 
     of Care program established under subtitle C of title IV of 
     the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11381 
     et seq.);
       ``(C) implementing housing strategies to assist eligible 
     families and youth;
       ``(D) aligning system goals to improve outcomes for 
     families and youth and reducing lapses in housing for 
     families and youth; and
       ``(E) identifying resources that are available to eligible 
     families and youth to provide supportive services available 
     through parts B and E of title IV of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 621 et seq.; 670 et seq.) or that the head of 
     household of a family or youth may be entitled to receive 
     under section 477 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     677).''.

                        TITLE II--RURAL HOUSING

     SEC. 201. DELEGATION OF GUARANTEED RURAL HOUSING LOAN 
                   APPROVAL.

       Subsection (h) of section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949 
     (42 U.S.C. 1472(h)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(18) Delegation of approval.--The Secretary may delegate, 
     in part or in full, the Secretary's authority to approve and 
     execute binding Rural Housing Service loan guarantees 
     pursuant to this subsection to certain preferred lenders, in 
     accordance with standards established by the Secretary.''.

           TITLE III--FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR CONDOMINIUMS

     SEC. 301. MODIFICATION OF FHA REQUIREMENTS FOR MORTGAGE 
                   INSURANCE FOR CONDOMINIUMS.

       Section 203 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1709) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(y) Requirements for Mortgages for Condominiums.--
       ``(1) Project recertification requirements.--
     Notwithstanding any other law, regulation, or guideline of 
     the Secretary, including chapter 2.4 of the Condominium 
     Project Approval and Processing Guide of the FHA, the 
     Secretary shall streamline the project certification 
     requirements that are applicable to the insurance under this 
     section for mortgages for condominium projects so that 
     recertifications are substantially less burdensome than 
     certifications. The Secretary shall consider lengthening the 
     time between certifications for approved properties, and 
     allowing updating of information rather than resubmission.
       ``(2) Commercial space requirements.--Notwithstanding any 
     other law, regulation, or guideline of the Secretary, 
     including chapter 2.1.3 of the Condominium Project Approval 
     and Processing Guide of the FHA, in providing for exceptions 
     to the requirement for the insurance of a mortgage on a 
     condominium property under this section regarding the 
     percentage of the floor space of a condominium property that 
     may be used for nonresidential or commercial purposes, the 
     Secretary shall provide that--
       ``(A) any request for such an exception and the 
     determination of the disposition of such request may be made, 
     at the option of the requester, under the direct endorsement 
     lender review and approval process or under the HUD review 
     and approval process through the applicable field office of 
     the Department; and
       ``(B) in determining whether to allow such an exception for 
     a condominium property, factors relating to the economy for 
     the locality in which such project is located or specific to 
     project, including the total number of family units in the 
     project, shall be considered.

     Not later than the expiration of the 90-day period beginning 
     on the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary 
     shall issue regulations to implement this paragraph, which 
     shall include any standards, training requirements, and 
     remedies and penalties that the Secretary considers 
     appropriate.
       ``(3) Transfer fees.--Notwithstanding any other law, 
     regulation, or guideline of the Secretary, including chapter 
     1.8.8 of the Condominium Project Approval and Processing 
     Guide of the FHA and section 203.41 of the Secretary's 
     regulations (24 C.F.R. 203.41), existing standards of the 
     Federal Housing Finance Agency relating to encumbrances under 
     private transfer fee covenants shall apply to the insurance 
     of mortgages by the Secretary under this section to the same 
     extent and in the same manner that such standards apply to 
     the purchasing, investing in, and otherwise dealing in 
     mortgages by the Federal National Mortgage Association and 
     the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. If the provisions 
     of part 1228 of the Director of

[[Page 1098]]

     the Federal Housing Finance Agency's regulations (12 C.F.R. 
     part 1228) are amended or otherwise changed after the date of 
     the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development shall adopt any such amendments or changes 
     for purposes of this paragraph, unless the Secretary causes 
     to be published in the Federal Register a notice explaining 
     why the Secretary will disregard such amendments or changes 
     within 90 days after the effective date of such amendments or 
     changes.
       ``(4) Owner-occupancy requirement.--
       ``(A) Establishment of percentage requirement.--Not later 
     than the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the 
     date of the enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall, 
     by rule, notice, or mortgagee letter, issue guidance 
     regarding the percentage of units that must be occupied by 
     the owners as a principal residence or a secondary residence 
     (as such terms are defined by the Secretary), or must have 
     been sold to owners who intend to meet such occupancy 
     requirements, including justifications for the percentage 
     requirements, in order for a condominium project to be 
     acceptable to the Secretary for insurance under this section 
     of a mortgage within such condominium property.
       ``(B) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to issue the 
     guidance required under subparagraph (A) before the 
     expiration of the 90-day period specified in such clause, the 
     following provisions shall apply:
       ``(i) 35 percent requirement.--In order for a condominium 
     project to be acceptable to the Secretary for insurance under 
     this section, at least 35 percent of all family units 
     (including units not covered by FHA-insured mortgages) must 
     be occupied by the owners as a principal residence or a 
     secondary residence (as such terms are defined by the 
     Secretary), or must have been sold to owners who intend to 
     meet such occupancy requirement.
       ``(ii) Other considerations.--The Secretary may increase 
     the percentage applicable pursuant to clause (i) to a 
     condominium project on a project-by-project or regional 
     basis, and in determining such percentage for a project shall 
     consider factors relating to the economy for the locality in 
     which such project is located or specific to project, 
     including the total number of family units in the project.''.

      TITLE IV--HOUSING REFORMS FOR THE HOMELESS AND FOR VETERANS

     SEC. 401. DEFINITION OF GEOGRAPHIC AREA FOR CONTINUUM OF CARE 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Definition.--Subtitle C of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act is amended--
       (1) by redesignating sections 432 and 433 (42 U.S.C. 11387, 
     11388) as sections 433 and 434, respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after section 431 (42 U.S.C. 11386e) the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 432. GEOGRAPHIC AREAS.

       ``(a) Requirement to Define.--For purposes of this 
     subtitle, the term `geographic area' shall have such meaning 
     as the Secretary shall by notice provide.
       ``(b) Issuance of Notice.--Not later than the expiration of 
     the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
     the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015, 
     the Secretary shall issue a notice setting forth the 
     definition required by subsection (a).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     101(b) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 11301 note) is amended by striking the items relating 
     to sections 432 and 433 and inserting the following new 
     items:

``Sec. 432. Geographic areas.
``Sec. 433. Regulations.
``Sec. 434. Reports to Congress.''.

     SEC. 402. INCLUSION OF PUBLIC HOUSING AGENCIES AND LOCAL 
                   REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES IN EMERGENCY 
                   SOLUTIONS GRANTS.

       Section 414(c) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 11373(c)) is amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``, Public 
     Housing Agencies, and Local Redevelopment Authorities'' after 
     ``Organizations''; and
       (2) in the first sentence, by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``, to public housing agencies (as 
     defined under section 3(b)(6) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937), or to local redevelopment authorities (as 
     defined under State law)''.

     SEC. 403. SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR VETERANS AFFAIRS IN THE 
                   DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) Transfer of Position to Office of the Secretary.--
     Section 4 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 3533) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(h) Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs.--
       ``(1) Position.--There shall be in the Office of the 
     Secretary a Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs, who shall 
     report directly to the Secretary.
       ``(2) Appointment.--The Special Assistant for Veterans 
     Affairs shall be appointed based solely on merit and shall be 
     covered under the provisions of title 5, United States Code, 
     governing appointments in the competitive service.
       ``(3) Responsibilities.--The Special Assistant for Veterans 
     Affairs shall be responsible for--
       ``(A) ensuring veterans have fair access to housing and 
     homeless assistance under each program of the Department 
     providing either such assistance;
       ``(B) coordinating all programs and activities of the 
     Department relating to veterans;
       ``(C) serving as a liaison for the Department with the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, including establishing and 
     maintaining relationships with the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs;
       ``(D) serving as a liaison for the Department, and 
     establishing and maintaining relationships with the United 
     States Interagency Council on Homelessness and officials of 
     State, local, regional, and nongovernmental organizations 
     concerned with veterans;
       ``(E) providing information and advice regarding--
       ``(i) sponsoring housing projects for veterans assisted 
     under programs administered by the Department; or
       ``(ii) assisting veterans in obtaining housing or homeless 
     assistance under programs administered by the Department;
       ``(F) coordinating with the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs in carrying 
     out section 404 of the Housing Opportunity Through 
     Modernization Act of 2015; and
       ``(G) carrying out such other duties as may be assigned to 
     the Special Assistant by the Secretary or by law.''.
       (b) Transfer of Position in Office of Deputy Assistant 
     Secretary for Special Needs.--On the date that the initial 
     Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs is appointed pursuant 
     to section 4(h)(2) of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development Act, as added by subsection (a) of this section, 
     the position of Special Assistant for Veterans Programs in 
     the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special 
     Needs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall be terminated.

     SEC. 404. ANNUAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON VETERANS 
                   HOMELESSNESS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in 
     coordination with the United States Interagency Council on 
     Homelessness, shall submit annually to the Committees of the 
     Congress specified in subsection (b), together with the 
     annual reports required by such Secretaries under section 
     203(c)(1) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 11313(c)(1)), a supplemental report that includes the 
     following information with respect to the preceding year:
       (1) The same information, for such preceding year, that was 
     included with respect to 2010 in the report by the Secretary 
     of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of 
     Veterans Affairs entitled ``Veterans Homelessness: A 
     Supplemental Report to the 2010 Annual Homeless Assessment 
     Report to Congress''.
       (2) Information regarding the activities of the Department 
     of Housing and Urban Development relating to veterans during 
     such preceding year, as follows:
       (A) The number of veterans provided assistance under the 
     housing choice voucher program for Veterans Affairs supported 
     housing under section 8(o)(19) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(19)), the socioeconomic 
     characteristics of such homeless veterans, and the number, 
     types, and locations of entities contracted under such 
     section to administer the vouchers.
       (B) A summary description of the special considerations 
     made for veterans under public housing agency plans submitted 
     pursuant to section 5A of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437c-1) and under comprehensive housing 
     affordability strategies submitted pursuant to section 105 of 
     the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 
     U.S.C. 12705).
       (C) A description of the activities of the Special 
     Assistant for Veterans Affairs of the Department of Housing 
     and Urban Development.
       (D) A description of the efforts of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development and the other members of the 
     United States Interagency Council on Homelessness to 
     coordinate the delivery of housing and services to veterans.
       (E) The cost to the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development of administering the programs and activities 
     relating to veterans.
       (F) Any other information that the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
     consider relevant in assessing the programs and activities of 
     the Department of Housing and Urban Development relating to 
     veterans.
       (b) Committees.--The Committees of the Congress specified 
     in this subsection are as follows:
       (1) The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of 
     the Senate.
       (2) The Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate.
       (3) The Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.
       (4) The Committee on Financial Services of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (5) The Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (6) The Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives.

                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

     SEC. 501. INCLUSION OF DISASTER HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN 
                   CERTAIN FRAUD AND ABUSE PREVENTION MEASURES.

       The Disaster Housing Assistance Program administered by the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be 
     considered a ``program of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development'' under section 904 of the Stewart B. McKinney 
     Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 3544) 
     for the purpose of income verifications.

[[Page 1099]]



     SEC. 502. ENERGY EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS UNDER SELF-HELP 
                   HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM.

       Section 11 of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act 
     of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 12805 note) is amended by inserting after 
     subsection (f) the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Energy Efficiency Requirements.--The Secretary may 
     not require any dwelling developed using amounts from a grant 
     made under this section to meet any energy efficiency 
     standards other than the standards applicable at such time 
     pursuant to section 109 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12709) to housing specified 
     in subsection (a) of such section.''.

     SEC. 503. DATA EXCHANGE STANDARDIZATION FOR IMPROVED 
                   INTEROPERABILITY.

       (a) Data Exchange Standardization.--Title I of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 37. DATA EXCHANGE STANDARDS FOR IMPROVED 
                   INTEROPERABILITY.

       ``(a) Designation.--The Secretary shall, in consultation 
     with an interagency work group established by the Office of 
     Management and Budget, and considering State government 
     perspectives, designate data exchange standards to govern, 
     under this Act--
       ``(1) necessary categories of information that State 
     agencies operating related programs are required under 
     applicable law to electronically exchange with another State 
     agency; and
       ``(2) Federal reporting and data exchange required under 
     applicable law.
       ``(b) Requirements.--The data exchange standards required 
     by subsection (a) shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
       ``(1) incorporate a widely accepted, nonproprietary, 
     searchable, computer-readable format, such as the eXtensible 
     Markup Language;
       ``(2) contain interoperable standards developed and 
     maintained by intergovernmental partnerships, such as the 
     National Information Exchange Model;
       ``(3) incorporate interoperable standards developed and 
     maintained by Federal entities with authority over 
     contracting and financial assistance;
       ``(4) be consistent with and implement applicable 
     accounting principles;
       ``(5) be implemented in a manner that is cost- effective 
     and improves program efficiency and effectiveness; and
       ``(6) be capable of being continually upgraded as 
     necessary.
       ``(c) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section 
     requires a change to existing data exchange standards for 
     Federal reporting found to be effective and efficient.''.
       (b) Applicability.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall issue a proposed rule to carry out the 
     amendments made by subsection (a).
       (2) Requirements.--The rule shall--
       (A) identify federally required data exchanges;
       (B) include specification and timing of exchanges to be 
     standardized;
       (C) address the factors used in determining whether and 
     when to standardize data exchanges;
       (D) specify State implementation options; and
       (E) describe future milestones.

  The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a 
substitute shall be in order except those printed in House Report 114-
411. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in 
the report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered 
read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
of the question.


                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Buchanan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in House Report 114-411.
  Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 16, line 2, after ``develop'' insert ``electronic''.
       Page 16, line 4, strike ``income'' and insert ``benefit''.
       Page 16, after line 14, insert the following:
       ``(E) Electronic income verification.--The Secretary shall 
     develop a mechanism for disclosing information to a public 
     housing agency for the purpose of verifying the employment 
     and income of individuals and families in accordance with 
     section 453(j)(7)(E) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     653(j)(7)(E)), and shall ensure public housing agencies have 
     access to information contained in the `Do Not Pay' system 
     established by section 5 of the Improper Payments Elimination 
     and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-248; 126 
     Stat. 2392).''.
       Page 16, line 15, strike ``(E)'' and insert ``(F)''.
       Page 34, line 14, strike the closing quotation marks and 
     the last period.
       Page 34, after line 14, insert the following:
       ``(7) Verifying income.--
       ``(A) Beginning in fiscal year 2018, the Secretary shall 
     require public housing agencies to require each applicant 
     for, or recipient of, benefits under this Act to provide 
     authorization by the applicant or recipient (or by any other 
     person whose income or resources are material to the 
     determination of the eligibility of the applicant or 
     recipient for such benefits) for the public housing agency to 
     obtain (subject to the cost reimbursement requirements of 
     section 1115(a) of the Right to Financial Privacy Act) from 
     any financial institution (within the meaning of section 
     1101(1) of such Act) any financial record (within the meaning 
     of section 1101(2) of such Act) held by the institution with 
     respect to the applicant or recipient (or any such other 
     person) whenever the public housing agency determines the 
     record is needed in connection with a determination with 
     respect to such eligibility or the amount of such benefits.
       ``(B) Notwithstanding section 1104(a)(1) of the Right to 
     Financial Privacy Act, an authorization provided by an 
     applicant or recipient (or any other person whose income or 
     resources are material to the determination of the 
     eligibility of the applicant or recipient) pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) of this paragraph shall remain effective 
     until the earliest of--
       ``(i) the rendering of a final adverse decision on the 
     applicant's application for eligibility for benefits under 
     this Act;
       ``(ii) the cessation of the recipient's eligibility for 
     benefits under this Act; or
       ``(iii) the express revocation by the applicant or 
     recipient (or such other person referred to in subparagraph 
     (A)) of the authorization, in a written notification to the 
     Secretary.
       ``(C)(i) An authorization obtained by the public housing 
     agency pursuant to this paragraph shall be considered to meet 
     the requirements of the Right to Financial Privacy Act for 
     purposes of section 1103(a) of such Act, and need not be 
     furnished to the financial institution, notwithstanding 
     section 1104(a) of such Act.
       ``(ii) The certification requirements of section 1103(b) of 
     the Right to Financial Privacy Act shall not apply to 
     requests by the public housing agency pursuant to an 
     authorization provided under this clause.
       ``(iii) A request by the public housing agency pursuant to 
     an authorization provided under this clause is deemed to meet 
     the requirements of section 1104(a)(3) of the Right to 
     Financial Privacy Act and the flush language of section 1102 
     of such Act.
       ``(iv) The public housing agency shall inform any person 
     who provides authorization pursuant to this paragraph of the 
     duration and scope of the authorization.
       ``(D) If an applicant for, or recipient of, benefits under 
     this Act (or any such other person referred to in 
     subparagraph (A)) refuses to provide, or revokes, any 
     authorization made by the applicant or recipient for the 
     public housing agency to obtain from any financial 
     institution any financial record, the public housing agency 
     may, on that basis, determine that the applicant or recipient 
     is ineligible for benefits under this title.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Buchanan) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I would like to first thank the subcommittee chair of Financial 
Services, Mr. Luetkemeyer, for his leadership on such important issues.
  As chairman of the Human Resources Subcommittee of Ways and Means, I 
have the distinct privilege of overseeing a number of means-tested 
programs aimed at providing low-income individuals and families an 
opportunity to move up the economic ladder.
  There are a lot of lessons we have learned, and we should be using 
them to better serve recipients and taxpayers.
  In June of last year, the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development's Office of Inspector General found that the Federal 
Government paid public housing benefits to families with excessive 
income and assets when those benefits should have gone to low-income 
families in real need.
  This amendment builds on reforms made by the underlying bill. This 
amendment reduces that burden on families by using systems they are 
most likely already interacting with for other means-tested programs. 
It also improves accuracy for housing authorities and landlords, 
providing them with more timely and reliable information.

[[Page 1100]]



                              {time}  1545

  Ultimately, it ensures that those with assets well above the 
eligibility limits will not be using benefits directed to those 
Americans who need the most help.
  I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment and support 
the underlying bill.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in 
opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition 
to this amendment. I have concerns that there are a lot of unanswered 
questions regarding the new income verification system that is being 
proposed in this amendment, and I think it needs to be addressed.
  First, it appears that there would be a cost associated with this 
amendment. Housing authorities would have to spend some of their 
operating fund dollars to comply with the new requirements in this 
amendment, and that takes away from other important things that they 
must prioritize.
  It is important to note that the public housing operating fund and 
administrative fees are severely underfunded, so public housing 
authorities are already struggling to make ends meet. H.R. 3700 is 
intended to ease administrative burdens, but this amendment seems to be 
increasing burdens without any additional funding. In other words, it 
is an unfunded mandate.
  Secondly, it is unclear whether all housing authorities have the 
electronic infrastructure in place to securely maintain and protect 
residents' personal financial data, which could include bank account 
information, in a manner that is inconsistent with what current 
financial regulators have. If housing authorities need to upgrade their 
systems, that would also cost money that is not provided for in this 
amendment.
  Third, it is not clear how this amendment would work for residents 
who are unbanked. This amendment virtually ignores millions of 
Americans that are unbanked.
  Fourth, this amendment seems to be addressing a problem that doesn't 
exist because I have not seen any evidence that residents are currently 
not providing accurate information when applying for housing 
assistance.
  Lastly, H.R. 3700 already includes a provision to address over-income 
households in public housing to help ensure that taxpayers are not 
subsidizing these households. For every piece of legislation that we 
pass, it should be carefully considered, which is why we should not 
adopt this hasty amendment that has not been thoroughly studied by 
congressional staff or our housing groups, the administration, and 
carefully negotiated by both parties.
  Mr. Chairman and Members, let me just say this: We have a good bill 
here. We have gone a long way in dealing with whatever concerns either 
side may have. We have a compromise piece of legislation. We have a 
consensus piece of legislation. Let's not mess it up. We don't need 
this amendment. I would ask for a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer).
  Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to speak in support 
of the amendment.
  I believe the amendment reduces the burden on families for using 
solutions that already are likely to be in place with regards to 
interacting through other means testing programs. I think it improves 
the efficiency for public housing authorities and landlords, providing 
more accurate and timely eligibility information. It minimizes the risk 
of waste, fraud, and abuse of tax dollars and ensures limited resources 
are better targeted to families in need by requiring public housing 
agencies to access data used by other means tested programs or by 
assets.
  This amendment further strengthens the response to the 2015 inspector 
general's audit, which revealed individuals with substantial assets 
were receiving rental subsidies. This amendment builds on the progress 
made by the Committee on Financial Services to better target housing 
assistance to the needs of low-income individuals and families.
  The current system in determining eligibility for rental subsidies is 
burdensome to program recipients to report income that can vary as much 
as every week and time consuming for public housing agencies and 
landlords to collect and verify this information, unfair to taxpayers 
who expect tax dollars to be targeted to families most in need.
  I think you can see what I believe is an asset here from the 
standpoint it is going to streamline the system. It is going to save 
money. I think it makes it easier for the people to access, it is going 
to make it easier for the individuals who are working with those folks 
to be able to do a better job of getting and accumulating the 
information as quickly as possible to better ferret out the ones who 
need the help and ones who don't, and therefore do a good job of 
managing our taxpayer dollars.
  Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman and Members, I 
basically made an appeal to my Republican colleagues to reject this 
amendment. I basically talked about the fact that we have gone a long 
way toward reconciling our differences and that we don't need to 
endanger the bill at all with an amendment like this.
  I am not sure exactly what the gentleman is attempting to do. We 
already have systems in existence by which those who wish to live in 
public housing have to verify their income. I don't know what is being 
attempted here. If the attempt is to try and go to financial 
institutions and say to them, is it true that this person only has $5 
in their bank account or what have you? I am not sure that the housing 
authority would want to assume that additional responsibility and that 
additional cost, so I have to continue to oppose this amendment. 
Perhaps there is a better explanation than I have heard, but I have not 
heard a good explanation about why we should adopt it.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Chair, my understanding is PHAs asked for this, but 
let me just say my amendment will reduce the burdens on families by 
using solutions they are already interacting with through other means-
tested programs.
  I encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment and to 
support the underlying bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the 
gentleman talked about having talked with the public housing 
authorities because we did, too, and they had no idea what your bill 
is. They didn't know anything about it, they didn't understand why it 
was being done, so we have a difference of opinion, I suppose, about 
what the public housing authorities are saying.
  I am saying that based on our inquiries, they did not support your 
legislation because they didn't understand it. They didn't know it 
exists. They didn't know what it was all about.
  I would, again, ask for a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Buchanan).
  The amendment was agreed to.


       Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Maxine Waters of California

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in House Report 114-411.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at 
the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Strike line 17 on page 20 and all that follows through page 
     21, line 10, and insert the following:

[[Page 1101]]

       ``(B) Minors, students, and persons with disabilities.--
     $480 for each member of the family residing in the household 
     (other than the head of the household or his or her spouse) 
     who is less than 18 years of age or is attending school or 
     vocational training on a full-time basis, or who is 18 years 
     of age or older and is a person with disabilities.
       ``(C) Child care.--Any reasonable child care expenses 
     necessary to enable a member of the family to be employed or 
     to further his or her education.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Maxine Waters) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would 
remove the harmful provision in H.R. 3700 that would effectively raise 
rent for thousands of families with children who are living in HUD-
assisted housing by limiting the amount they can deduct from their 
income for childcare expenses. These are parents, particularly single 
parents, who are already struggling to pay for the cost of child care 
in order to work or to go to school.
  I believe we should not be crippling their ability to juggle these 
responsibilities. We should be supporting them. I believe that my 
Republican colleagues share my concerns. We simply did not have the 
data that we needed at the markup to truly understand how this 
provision would affect these households.
  As I mentioned in my opening statement, the Republicans have 
indicated that they will support this amendment, which will remove this 
harmful language and preserve the current law. This will ensure that 
families with children will not be burdened with a rent increase as a 
result of this bill.
  I would like to thank my colleagues across the aisle for working with 
me on this issue to find common ground.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, if nothing else, I would just like to 
throw the ranking member a curve ball and actually accept one of her 
amendments, just to show that minor miracles can still occur within the 
Halls of Congress and on the floor of the United States House of 
Representatives. Particularly after a very robust debate this morning 
on the budget views and estimates, this might be a welcome departure.
  Anyway, I am prepared to accept the ranking member's amendment. 
Again, as she said, H.R. 3700 will allow only families to deduct 
childcare expenses that exceed 5 percent. The ranking member's 
amendment would revert back to current law. I think that in this 
particular case there are some trade-offs to be made, and I am willing 
to accept this particular trade-off and work with the ranking member to 
forward the overall bill.
  I urge all Members to accept it and vote for it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the ranking member of 
the Committee on Small Business and a member of the Committee on 
Financial Services.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the 
gentlewoman from California's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, in New York City access to safe and affordable housing 
is a critical issue. Just in Brooklyn, the city's housing shortage has 
driven rents to over $2,500 a month for a 1-bedroom apartment. As a 
result, a majority of households spend more than 30 percent of their 
income on housing, making these individuals and families rent burdened.
  For this reason, the New York City Housing Authority, the Nation's 
largest public housing authority, provides a home to more than 4,000 
New Yorkers. Unfortunately, tens of thousands of families remain on 
waiting lists for units.
  Congress cannot dictate market rents, but we can change Federal 
programs empowering public housing authorities to address budgetary 
shortfalls, adapt to changing conditions, and better assist current and 
prospective tenants. That is why we provided the Secretary the ability 
to adjust the over-income threshold for public housing tenancy, to 
assist those tenants and families living in public housing where rents 
and incomes are well above average, like New York.
  While this bill makes several reforms like these to public housing 
and Section 8 rental assistance, many of which are bipartisan and have 
been discussed for years, I am concerned about the bill's impact on 
families with children.
  According to a recent study by the Center on Budget and Policy 
Priorities, H.R. 3700's changes to the childcare deduction could cost 
52,000 families with children to face a rent increase of $25 or more. 
More than half the families affected are extremely low income and would 
be hard pressed to afford such an increase. Mr. Chair, $25, $50, or $75 
might not sound like a lot of money for us, but for low-income families 
that have to struggle every day, this is a lot of money.
  While updating and improving our Nation's rental assistance and 
public housing programs are important goals--one I will continue 
fighting for--they cannot be accomplished on the backs of the Nation's 
children.
  I, therefore, urge adoption of the gentlewoman's amendment, which 
will strike the burdensome childcare deduction language.
  I am very impressed with the chairman today. I hope that from now on 
we can work in a bipartisan, humane way to address the issues of the 
shortage of housing in our Nation. I congratulate the ranking member.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I would simply thank 
all of the Members who have worked on this bill, and I thank all of the 
support that I am getting for this amendment.
  I want to thank the chairman. Despite the fact he had a rather 
difficult time on committee today, he conducted himself rather well, 
and I enjoyed working with him. I am very thankful that he is here to 
give support on this amendment and the leadership he has given.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Maxine Waters).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1600


            Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Poe of Texas). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 3 printed in House Report 114-411.
  Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 26, after line 3, insert the following new subsection:
       (h) Study on Impact on Elderly and Disabled Families of 
     Decreased Deductions in Income.--
       (1) Study.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall conduct a study to determine the impacts, on rents paid 
     by elderly and disabled individuals and families assisted 
     under the section 8 rental assistance and public housing 
     programs under the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437 et seq), of any decreases in the amounts of any 
     deductions from income (for purposes of section 3(b) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b))), as compared to such deductions 
     under such section 3(b) as in effect before the effectiveness 
     of this section, resulting from the amendments made by this 
     section.
       (2) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to the Congress a 
     report setting forth the results of the study conducted 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) not later than the expiration of 
     the 12-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (3) Effective date.--Notwithstanding subsection (h) of this 
     section, this subsection

[[Page 1102]]

     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentlewoman 
from Alabama (Ms. Sewell) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Alabama.
  Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my 
amendment to H.R. 3700.
  My amendment is commonsense and straightforward. It simply requires 
the Secretary of HUD to conduct a study to determine the impact of the 
decreased deductions on rent paid by elderly, disabled individuals, and 
families assisted under the Section 8 rental assistance and housing 
programs.
  Being able to assess quality, safe, and affordable housing is 
critically important to all Americans. The Section 8 voucher program 
and other rental assistance programs play a vital role in providing 
this type of housing for our Nation's most vulnerable citizens, 
including seniors, disabled persons, and low-income families. In fact, 
nearly all of the households currently under HUD rental assistance 
include children, the elderly, or disabled individuals.
  These rental assistance programs house over 10 million individuals in 
roughly 4.6 million rental units across the country. It is clear that 
these voucher and rental assistance programs continue to perform the 
task for which they were created, which is providing shelter for 
millions of Americans.
  In spite of its enormous success, the Section 8 voucher program, 
arguably, still suffers under the weight of too many inefficient and 
duplicative requirements that threaten the overall effectiveness of the 
program.
  As drafted, H.R. 3700 takes major bipartisan steps toward helping 
preserve our scarce housing resources while expanding housing 
availability. However, as we attempt to reform these programs, we must 
be mindful and ever diligent in ensuring that the proposed changes are 
beneficial to their overall implementation and that there are no 
negative, unintended consequences on the program's participants. To 
that end, my amendment allows us to gauge the effectiveness of some of 
the changes being made here today and their impact on the most 
vulnerable segments of our population: the elderly and disabled.
  We all know that no program is perfect. We must work together to 
strike a delicate balance and ensure programs are both workable and do 
what they intend to do without adverse impacts on those who are greatly 
benefited by them. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition, although I am not opposed.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentlewoman from Alabama for her 
amendment. It is a bipartisan amendment. She makes some good points. We 
are happy to accept it.
  As long as I am here, I would like to point out to the distinguished 
ranking member that anytime my side wins all the votes, I am not having 
a tough day. I am having a really good day.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. I thank the chairman for accepting my 
amendment. I think that all Americans win when we act in a bipartisan 
manner. I am really grateful for your assistance in making this 
legislation stronger.
  I want to thank the ranking member for her leadership on this bill, 
as well as my colleague, Representative Cleaver, for his leadership on 
this bill.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in House Report 114-411.


                Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Hinojosa

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 
printed in House Report 114-411.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 55, after line 24, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 202. GUARANTEED UNDERWRITING USER FEE.

       Section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Guaranteed Underwriting User Fee.--
       ``(1) Authority; maximum amount.--The Secretary may assess 
     and collect a fee for a lender to access the automated 
     underwriting systems of the Department in connection with 
     such lender's participation in the single family loan program 
     under this section and only in an amount necessary to cover 
     the costs of information technology enhancements, 
     improvements, maintenance, and development for automated 
     underwriting systems used in connection with the single 
     family loan program under this section, except that such fee 
     shall not exceed $50 per loan.
       ``(2) Crediting; availability.--Any amounts collected from 
     such fees shall be credited to the Rural Development Expense 
     Account as offsetting collections and shall remain available 
     until expended, in the amounts provided in appropriation 
     Acts, solely for expenses described in paragraph (1).''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, today I rise to offer an amendment to 
H.R. 3700, entitled, the Housing Opportunities Through Modernization 
Act of 2015.
  I want to thank Mr. Luetkemeyer for his hard work on this bill and 
for the bipartisan and collaborative way in which he went about this 
important housing reform. I also wish to thank the ranking member, Ms. 
Maxine Waters of California, for her hard work and for always looking 
out for those most needy in our society and for working to improve this 
bill.
  My amendment would authorize a nominal user fee on lenders accessing 
the underwriting systems for the Section 502 Single Family Housing 
Guaranteed Loan Program. This fee would not exceed $50 per loan and 
would enable the United States Department of Agriculture to make much-
needed upgrades to their automated underwriting system in order to 
match industry standards.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe that access to safe, decent, and affordable 
housing can transform lives. Federal programs like the Section 502 
Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program play a critical role in 
expanding home ownership and opportunity for our rural communities. 
This Federal program has helped over 2 million families build wealth 
through the equity in their home and encourages lenders to provide 
loans to those who cannot usually obtain conventional financing.
  Through this program, lenders are enabled and encouraged to serve 
borrowers they might typically reject without the guarantee, increasing 
borrowers' access to home ownership opportunities. We owe it to our 
rural communities to provide the Section 502 program with the resources 
it needs to modernize and to continue expanding home ownership and 
opportunity in our most underserved rural communities.
  The Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program relies on the 
Guaranteed Underwriting System for determining loan approvals quickly 
and accurately. Unfortunately, the current system is in need of 
substantial technological improvements in order to process risk 
requests more efficiently. Guaranteed Underwriting System development 
is necessary for sound portfolio risk management and will benefit USDA 
field staff, rural borrowers, and private sector lenders alike.

[[Page 1103]]

  My amendment will cover the cost of developing and maintaining the 
Guaranteed Underwriting System and enable the Single Family Housing 
Guaranteed Loan Program to be administered in a more effective manner, 
despite recent staffing reductions.
  The nominal fee authorized by my amendment will be used to enhance 
and maintain the Guaranteed Underwriting System and bring it into the 
21st century. It is expected that a fee ranging between $25 and $50 
will generate approximately $4 million a year, starting in 2018. The 
fee will support important program improvements, including the 
delegation of underwriting to preferred lenders.
  The fee will also develop the underwriting system's technological 
capabilities to current standards, including enhanced loan and lender 
oversight, metrics, and programmatic controls. This efficiency upgrade 
will allow USDA staff to allocate the necessary time and resources to 
the most complex underwriting decisions.
  Finally, Congress has long invested in making rural home ownership a 
reality. The Section 502 Single Family Housing Guaranteed Loan Program 
receives $24 billion a year and has helped millions of families reach 
the dream of home ownership.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment supports the USDA fiscal year 2016 budget 
request and is supported by prominent rural housing advocacy groups 
such as the National Rural Housing Coalition and the Housing Assistance 
Council. I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support 
this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment of 
the gentleman from Texas. I thank him for his leadership in this area 
of rural housing. I think it plays a role in helping develop a more 
modern and efficient management and underwriting system to assess 
mortgage credit risk, prevent foreclosures, and manage a billion-dollar 
portfolio.
  This is a bipartisan amendment and a bipartisan bill. We are happy to 
accept it. I urge Members to adopt it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Amendment No. 6 Offered by Ms. Meng

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 
printed in House Report 114-411.
  Ms. MENG. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 55, after line 11, add the following new section:

     SEC. 111. PUBLIC HOUSING HEATING GUIDELINES.

       Section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437g), as amended by the preceding provisions of this 
     Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(o) Public Housing Heating Guidelines.--The Secretary 
     shall publish model guidelines for minimum heating 
     requirements for public housing dwelling units operated by 
     public housing agencies receiving assistance under this 
     section.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594, the gentlewoman 
from New York (Ms. Meng) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Ms. MENG. Mr. Chair, this amendment would require HUD to publish 
model guidelines for minimum heating requirements for public housing 
units.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Chair, some public housing agencies across this 
country have struggled with the fundamental task of providing adequate 
housing and heating to low-income residents.
  Less than 2 months ago, the New York Daily News and Reuters published 
a series of articles about tenants at the Frederick Douglass Houses in 
New York City, complaining that they were without heat for several 
frigid evenings in a row.
  In response to these complaints, New York City public advocate 
Letitia James and Legal Services New York City filed a lawsuit on 
behalf of the tenants, and in their filing they quote a November 25 
email from Robert Knapp, head of the New York City Housing Authority's 
heating management services unit, stating:

       NYCHA official policy . . . is heat shut off between 10 
     p.m. and 5 a.m. when the outside temperatures are above 20 
     degrees. When the outside temperature falls below 20 degrees, 
     heat is given through the night.

  Frankly, this is appalling.
  Many Democratic Representatives from New York City agreed with me, 
and that is why we submitted a letter, led by my good friends and 
colleagues, Representatives Engel and Rangel, to the head of NYCHA, 
urging it to completely abandon the current heating policy. That letter 
was submitted to NYCHA--the largest housing agency in the country, 
overseeing more than 400,000 residents living in 2,500 buildings--more 
than a month ago, and we have yet to receive a response. That is why I 
have come to the floor today.
  While it is not in our authority to mandate what a building's heating 
requirements should be in any particular city across this vast country, 
clearly some help is needed. Apparently, some local agencies might need 
official guidance from HUD outlining the fact that it is a good idea to 
turn the heat on at night when the temperature outside is below 
freezing.
  I was hopeful things would not come to this point, but right now, in 
the middle of winter, when almost one in five public housing residents 
in my city are age 62 or older, and more than a quarter of them are 
children under the age of 18, I feel that this matter could ultimately 
be one of life or death.

                              {time}  1615

  We do not want to return to an age in which tenants of local public 
housing authorities are forced to revert to heating their homes with 
stoves.
  Many of us here are all too familiar with the unfortunate tragedies 
that occur as a result of that practice and the fires that can also 
occur when residents are forced to rely on individual space heaters.
  For not only the safety of public housing residents across America, 
but also their humanity, heating standards must be improved.
  It is my hope that this amendment today, which mandates that HUD 
produce model heating guidelines, will assist in this endeavor. It is 
also my hope that all of my colleagues will support this effort.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition to this amendment, although I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Chairman, I listened very carefully to the 
gentlewoman's comments on the floor. I am prepared to accept the 
amendment. She makes some reasonable arguments. I urge its adoption.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MENG. I thank the Chairman for his support.
  Mr. ENGEL. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. MENG. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me. 
I certainly support what she is trying to do.
  Last December it came to light that the New York City Housing 
Authority, NYCHA, has as recently as 2013 shut down boilers in public 
housing properties unless outside temperatures drop below 25 degrees. 
This forces residents to go without heat during the coldest months of 
the year.

[[Page 1104]]

  I grew up in affordable housing. I grew up in city housing. So I am 
particularly sensitive to everything that the New York City Housing 
Authority does.
  I was outraged by this revelation. More than 400,000 New Yorkers live 
in NYCHA buildings, and, what's more, more than half of these residents 
live below the poverty line.
  These New Yorkers, along with every American living in public 
housing, pay rent and, in return, depend on Housing Authority 
leadership to fulfill the very reasonable need, a safe and decent 
shelter.
  A practice that forces tenants to grapple with bitter temperatures 
just doesn't fail to meet that need, it is reckless and demeaning.
  Myself, Ms. Meng, and eight other members of the New York City 
delegation sent a letter to the New York City Housing Authority asking 
that they immediately issue guidance condemning this practice and make 
certain that none of their buildings continue to adhere to this 
outrageous policy.
  It is important, though, that no American living in public housing be 
forced to suffer through the winter months, and that is exactly what 
this amendment will prevent by requiring the Secretary of Housing and 
Urban Development to issue guidelines on minimum heating requirements.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this and ensure that public housing 
residents' health and safety are protected.
  I want to thank my colleague from New York (Ms. Meng) for partnering 
with me on this important issue, and I thank her for her leadership.
  Ms. MENG. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Meng).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Committee will rise informally.
  The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Woodall) assumed the chair.

                          ____________________