[House Report 115-809]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


115th Congress    }                                   {       Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                   {       115-809

======================================================================



 
       HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER MOBILITY DEMONSTRATION ACT OF 2018

                                _______
                                

 July 10, 2018.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Hensarling, from the Committee on Financial Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 5793]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Financial Services, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 5793) to authorize the Secretary of Housing and 
Urban Development to carry out a housing choice voucher 
mobility demonstration to encourage families receiving such 
voucher assistance to move to lower-poverty areas and expand 
access to opportunity areas, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 
do pass.

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    On May 15, 2018, Rep. Sean Duffy introduced H.R. 5793, the 
``Housing Choice Voucher Mobility Demonstration Act of 2018''. 
The bill would create a demonstration program in which the 
administration of housing choice vouchers would be designed to 
encourage movement to lower-poverty areas with expanded 
employment or educational opportunities. To ensure the 
demonstration has the greatest impact, H.R. 5793 would require 
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to award 
demonstration program funds on a competitive basis and 
prioritize regional collaborations among public housing 
agencies (PHAs) that have high concentrations of voucher 
holders in low-opportunity neighborhoods, a high-performing 
Family Self Sufficiency (FSS) program, or a strong regional 
collaboration including one or more small housing agencies, 
among other factors. Five years after implementation of the 
demonstration program, the HUD Secretary will submit a report 
to Congress that evaluates the effectiveness of the program.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program is the federal 
government's major program to assist very low-income families, 
the elderly, and persons with disabilities afford decent, safe, 
and sanitary housing in the private market. The HCV program is 
authorized under Section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act 
of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)) and is administered locally by 
approximately 2,200 PHAs.
    The HCV program partners with local PHAs and landlords to 
provide housing to our nation's neediest citizens. Of the 
families currently receiving HCV assistance, over half are 
either elderly or have a disabled head of household, and 75 
percent are extremely low-income with incomes at or below 30 
percent of the area median income. A unique aspect of the HCV 
program is that it is designed to work in partnership, rather 
than in competition, with the private rental market. HCV 
assistance is primarily tenant-based assistance, which means 
the assistance is not permanently tied to a particular unit or 
project, but rather to an individual family.
    The family is responsible for finding a suitable rental 
unit with an owner who is willing to participate in the 
program. The PHA pays a monthly housing assistance payment 
directly to the owner on behalf of the family. That payment 
helps cover the affordability gap between what very low-income 
families can afford to pay for rent, and the actual rent 
charged. The HCV program relies on this private sector 
partnership to effectively and efficiently provide affordable 
housing opportunities in the local community rather than depend 
on direct government intervention.
    The HCV program's design is to provide financial assistance 
to households to enable them to choose the housing and 
neighborhood that best suits their needs. Evidence underscores 
that low-income children whose families move from very poor 
neighborhoods to lower-poverty areas have higher earnings as 
adults--and are less likely to become single parents and more 
likely to attend college--than children that remain in less-
advantageous neighborhoods. Yet as currently administered, 
housing vouchers do not effectively enable families to access 
neighborhoods with greater opportunities that can help prevent 
intergenerational poverty.
    HUD contracts with about 2,200 PHAs to administer housing 
vouchers. These agencies administer as few as four and as many 
as 99,200 vouchers.\1\ Beyond consideration of population and 
housing need, differences in municipal and county governance as 
well as state politics have led to this great variation in 
PHAs' scale, as well as in their geographic coverage. The 
result is a complex network of program administration, where 
multiple agencies, both large and small, often administer 
vouchers in the same metro areas, sometime with overlapping 
jurisdictions. The complexity and redundancy of program 
administration is inefficient, increases program costs, makes 
federal oversight more difficult, and reduces housing 
opportunities for families.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Testimony of Barbara Sard, Center on Budget and Policy 
Priorities (CBPP), Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on 
Housing and Insurance, Hearing entitled, ``Housing Choice Voucher 
Program: An Oversight and Review of Legislative Proposals,'' April 17, 
2018, available at https://financialservices.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
hhrg-115-ba04-wstate-bsard-20180417.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In most metropolitan areas, one agency administers the HCV 
program in the central city and one or more different agencies 
serve suburban cities and towns. This pattern is the case in 97 
of the 100 largest metro areas, where 71 percent of households 
in the HCV program lived in 2015. In 35 of the 100 largest 
metro areas, voucher administration is divided among ten or 
more agencies. This is the case even in mid-size metro areas 
such as Providence, Rhode Island, and Albany, New York, each of 
which has at least 35 agencies administering the HCV 
program.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\CBPP analysis of HUD, 2015 Picture of Subsidized Households. In 
278 out of the 381 metro areas in the United States and territories, 
two or more PHAs administered HCV programs; a single agency served only 
a little more than one-fourth of metro areas. Sard and Thrope. 
(Appendix 3 has data for each of the largest 100 metro areas.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 5793, the Voucher Mobility Demonstration Act could 
help the voucher program reach its full potential in three 
ways: (1) it would encourage local housing agencies to form 
regional collaboratives to reduce barriers preventing families 
from moving to higher-opportunity areas. Such collaboratives 
also have potential to reduce long-run operating costs; (2) By 
providing the HUD Secretary with the authority to waive or 
specify alternative requirements for certain statutory 
provisions necessary to implement a regional plan, the bill 
could make regional operation of the HCV program more feasible; 
and, (3) It provides a framework for learning what types of 
mobility-related services are most cost-effective at increasing 
the share of HCV families with children living in higher-
opportunity areas.

                                HEARINGS

    The Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on 
Housing and Insurance held a hearing examining matters relating 
to H.R. 5793 on April 17, 2018.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    The Committee on Financial Services met in open session on 
May 22, 2018, and ordered H.R. 5793 to be reported favorably to 
the House by a recorded vote of 53 yeas to 0 nays (recorded 
vote no. FC-179), a quorum being present.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes 
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. The 
sole recorded vote was on a motion by Chairman Hensarling to 
report the bill favorably to the House. The motion was agreed 
to by a recorded vote of 53 yeas to 0 nays (Record vote no. FC-
179), a quorum being present.


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the findings and recommendations of 
the Committee based on oversight activities under clause 
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

                    PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee states that H.R. 5793 
authorizes the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to 
carry out a housing choice voucher mobility demonstration to 
encourage families receiving such voucher assistance to move to 
lower-poverty areas and expand access to opportunity areas.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee adopts as its 
own the estimate of new budget authority, entitlement 
authority, or tax expenditures or revenues contained in the 
cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974.

                 CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate 
provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, June 25, 2018.
Hon. Jeb Hensarling,
Chairman, Committee on Financial Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5793, the Housing 
Choice Voucher Mobility Demonstration Act of 2018.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Elizabeth 
Cove Delisle.
            Sincerely,
                                                Keith Hall,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 5793--Housing Choice Voucher Mobility Demonstration Act of 2018

    H.R. 5793 would allow the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development to establish a demonstration program to encourage 
participants in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program to 
move to areas with lower rates of poverty. Families with young 
children would have a higher priority for participation in the 
program. Households that participate in the demonstration could 
receive assistance such as counseling and payments for security 
deposits.
    H.R. 5793 does not specify the number of households that 
should participate in the demonstration nor does it authorize a 
funding level; consequently, the amount that would be spent on 
the program is uncertain. For purposes of this estimate, CBO 
assumes that the bill would authorize a one-time appropriation 
to be spent over a 5-year demonstration period. Using the 
amount allocated in H.R. 6072 (the Transportation, Housing and 
Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, as 
reported by the House Committee on Appropriations on June 12, 
2018) for that demonstration project, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5793 would cost about $50 million over the 
2019-2023 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary 
amounts.
    Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 5793 would not increase 
net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2029.
    H.R. 5793 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Elizabeth Cove 
Delisle. The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    This information is provided in accordance with section 423 
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
    The Committee has determined that the bill does not contain 
Federal mandates on the private sector. The Committee has 
determined that the bill does not impose a Federal 
intergovernmental mandate on State, local, or tribal 
governments.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of the section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

                         EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

    With respect to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee has carefully reviewed 
the provisions of the bill and states that the provisions of 
the bill do not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits within the meaning of the 
rule.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states that no 
provision of the bill establishes or reauthorizes: (1) a 
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of 
another Federal program; (2) a program included in any report 
from the Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant 
to section 21 of Public Law 111-139; or (3) a program related 
to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance, published pursuant to the Federal Program 
Information Act (Pub. L. No. 95-220, as amended by Pub. L. No. 
98-169).

                   DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULEMAKING

    Pursuant to section 3(i) of H. Res. 5, (115th Congress), 
the following statement is made concerning directed rule 
makings: The Committee estimates that the bill requires no 
directed rule makings within the meaning of such section.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    This section cites H.R. 5793 as the ``Housing Choice 
Voucher Mobility Demonstration Act of 2018.''

Section 2. Housing Choice Voucher Mobility Demonstration

    This section authorizes the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development (HUD) to create and execute a mobility 
demonstration program to enable public housing agencies to 
administer housing choice vouchers in a manner designed to 
encourage families receiving voucher assistance to move to 
lower-poverty areas and expand access to opportunity areas.
    The Secretary must establish competitive selection criteria 
for eligible public housing agencies to participate in the 
demonstration where such agencies serve areas with high 
concentrations of holders of rental assistance vouchers in 
poor, low-opportunity neighborhoods, among other selection 
factors. PHAs would be encouraged to create geographical 
consortia including small and large agencies with the goal of 
consolidating mobility focused operations.
    Each public housing agency applying to participate in the 
demonstration program must submit a Regional Housing Mobility 
Plan that: (1) identifies the public housing agencies that will 
participate under the Plan; (2) identifies any community-based 
organizations and non-profits that will participate under the 
Plan; (3) identifies any waivers requested for the execution of 
the Plan; (4) identifies any specific actions that public 
housing agencies will undertake to accomplish the goals of the 
demonstration; (5) specifies the criteria that the public 
housing agencies would use to identify opportunity areas; (6) 
provides for the establishment of priority and preferences for 
participating families; and, (7) complies with any other 
requirements established by the HUD Secretary.
    Public housing agencies may use their Section 8 
administrative fees and funding from private entities to 
provide mobility-related services in connection with the 
demonstration program.
    To allow public housing agencies to implement and 
administer their Regional Housing Mobility Plans, the HUD 
Secretary may waive certain provisions of the U.S. Housing Act 
of 1937 relating to terms of lease and mobility requirements, 
the agency's public housing plan, and the responsibility of a 
public housing agency to administer ported assistance.
    The Secretary shall provide additional authority for public 
housing agencies in a selected region to form a consortium that 
has a single housing choice voucher funding contract. The 
Secretary may implement the demonstration program by notice.
    Not later than five years after implementation of the 
regional housing mobility programs under the demonstration 
program, the HUD Secretary shall submit to Congress and publish 
in the Federal Register a report evaluating the effectiveness 
of the strategies pursued under the demonstration.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    H.R. 5793 does not repeal or amend any section of a 
statute. Therefore, the Office of Legislative Counsel did not 
prepare the report contemplated by Clause 3(e)(1)(B) of rule 
XIII of the House of Representatives.

                                  [all]