U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

40–434 PDF 2008

AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS OF

AMERICA’S LOW–INCOME VETERANS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

HOUSING AND COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITY

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

DECEMBER 5, 2007

Printed for the use of the Committee on Financial Services

Serial No. 110–82

(

(II)

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES 

BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, Chairman

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois 

NYDIA M. VELA ́ ZQUEZ, New York 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

JULIA CARSON, Indiana 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

DENNIS MOORE, Kansas 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

RUBE ́ N HINOJOSA, Texas 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

CAROLYN MCCARTHY, New York 

JOE BACA, California 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

BRAD MILLER, North Carolina 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

AL GREEN, Texas 

EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri 

MELISSA L. BEAN, Illinois 

GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin, 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire 

KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota 

RON KLEIN, Florida 

TIM MAHONEY, Florida 

CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

JOE DONNELLY, Indiana 

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida 

JIM MARSHALL, Georgia 

DAN BOREN, Oklahoma 

SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama 

RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana 

DEBORAH PRYCE, Ohio 

MICHAEL N. CASTLE, Delaware 

PETER T. KING, New York 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

RON PAUL, Texas 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

WALTER B. JONES, JR., North Carolina 

JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois 

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

TOM FEENEY, Florida 

JEB HENSARLING, Texas 

SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey 

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida 

J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

TOM PRICE, Georgia 

GEOFF DAVIS, Kentucky 

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina 

JOHN CAMPBELL, California 

ADAM PUTNAM, Florida 

MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota 

PETER J. ROSKAM, Illinois 

THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan 

KEVIN McCARTHY, California

JEANNE M. ROSLANOWICK, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III)

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITY

MAXINE WATERS, California, Chairwoman

NYDIA M. VELA ́ ZQUEZ, New York 

JULIA CARSON, Indiana 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri 

AL GREEN, Texas 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin, 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota 

CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

JOE DONNELLY, Indiana 

BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

STEVAN PEARCE, New Mexico 

PETER T. KING, New York 

JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois 

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

GEOFF DAVIS, Kentucky 

JOHN CAMPBELL, California 

THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan 

KEVIN McCARTHY, California 

(V)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on: 

December 5, 2007 ............................................................................................. 1

Appendix: 

December 5, 2007 ............................................................................................. 49

WITNESSES 

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2007

Basher, George, Chair, National Coalition for Homeless Veterans ..................... 29

Chamrin, Ronald F., Assistant Director, National Economic Commission, The 

American Legion .................................................................................................. 39

Dale, Karen M., Executive Vice President, Operations and Strategic Development, Volunteers of America ............................................................................... 32

DeSantis, Deborah, President and CEO, Corporation for Supportive Housing .. 36

Dougherty, Peter H., Director, Homeless Veterans Programs, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ..................................................................................... 11

Johnston, Mark, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Needs, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ......................................................... 9

Radcliff, Dwight, Chief Executive Officer, United States Veterans Initiative .... 34

Roman, Nan, President, National Alliance to End Homelessness ....................... 31

Weidman, Rick, Director, Government Affairs, Vietnam Veterans of America .. 37

Wood, David, Director, Financial Markets and Community Investment, US. 

Government Accountability Office ...................................................................... 12

APPENDIX 

Prepared statements: 

Basher, George .................................................................................................. 50

Chamrin, Ronald F. .......................................................................................... 57

Dale, Karen M. ................................................................................................. 68

DeSantis, Deborah ............................................................................................ 76

Johnston, Mark ................................................................................................. 84

Roman, Nan ...................................................................................................... 88

Wood, David G. ................................................................................................. 97

(1)

AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS OF 

AMERICA’S LOW–INCOME VETERANS 

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND

COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITY, COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES, Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:14 a.m., in room 

2128, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Maxine Waters [chairwoman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Waters, Velazquez, Cleaver, 

Green, Moore of Wisconsin, Sires, Ellison, Donnelly; Capito, 

Biggert, Shays, Garrett, and Neugebauer. 

Chairwoman WATERS. The Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity will come to order. We will be joined in a few 

minutes by Ms. Capito, and some other members if they can get 

away from the Floor and other committees that they’re serving on. 

Today’s hearing is on affordable housing needs of America’s low-income veterans. I think today’s hearing will continue the strong bipartisan work we’re doing in this subcommittee. Indeed, I may 

briefly turn over the gavel in order to speak on the House Floor 

on H.R. 2930, the Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly 

Act of 2007, a bill on which we held an informative hearing in early 

September and thereafter were able to work out differences in such 

a way that the bill has gone on the suspension calendar. 

Similarly, I expect that we will have bipartisan agreement on the 

basic principle that no man or woman who has served this country 

honorably in a time of war or peace should ever have to live in desperate poverty, or even worse, literally on the streets of our Nation. 

I’m looking forward to hearing from today’s witnesses about how 

we can do better by our poorest veterans, because the facts today 

are sobering, even tragic. 

It is simply disgraceful that as many as 200,000 veterans are 

homeless on any given night in America, meaning that one out of 

every four homeless individuals served in the military. Often I take 

pride when my home State of California leads the Nation in something. Not so here, where California has by far the greatest absolute number of homeless veterans, nearly 50,000 across the State. 

It also has the second highest rate of veterans homelessness in the 

country, with fully 21⁄4 of California’s veterans experiencing homelessness. 

Nearly as troubling is the tremendous number of veterans in the 

State who are at risk of homelessness due to excessive housing cost 

2

burdens; 3.4 percent of California’s veterans, over 73,000 individuals, pay more than half of their income in rent, and that is 

unsustainable for the long term. In my home City of Los Angeles, 

fully two-thirds of low-income veterans pay more for their housing 

than HUD deems supportable, ensuring a steady flow into an already overburdened homeless system. 

But I don’t want to leave the impression that the news is all bad. 

I know that we will hear today about effective HUD and VA programs to address the needs of homeless and low-income veterans. 

In particular, I look forward to hearing from witnesses about the 

potential to expand the availability of permanent supportive housing to complement the important transitional housing interventions 

that have characterized the VA funded response to veterans homelessness to date. 

Several of today’s witnesses testified before the subcommittee 

during our McKinney-Vento reauthorization hearings and described 

the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of permanent supportive 

housing for the chronic and disabled homeless. It seems clear to me 

that we need to target this intervention to homeless veterans who 

suffer from mental health and other disabilities while languishing 

on the streets or in shelters, living in their cars, or roughing it in 

the country’s backwoods. 

And we need to take the enterprise to a scale that can meet the 

tremendous need. This includes addressing the pent-up demand for 

permanent housing solutions among Vietnam-era veterans whom 

we must never forget, even as we prepare for what seems certain 

to be an overwhelming number of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans at risk of homelessness. 

Indeed, the first such veterans have already begun to appear on 

the streets and in shelters nationwide. And let me just mention, we 

cannot leave out the Desert Storm veterans as we take a look at 

those who still need much assistance to get into decent places to 

live. 

Notably, one of the earliest structured supportive housing initiatives was a joint HUD–VASH program in the early 1990’s in which 

local PHAs provided Section 8 vouchers and VA medical centers 

furnished case management and clinical services to participating 

veterans. 

Long-term evaluations of the HUD–VASH program have shown 

both improved housing and improved substance abuse outcomes 

among veterans who received the vouchers over those who did not. 

Veterans who received vouchers experienced fewer days of homelessness and more days housed than veterans who received intensive care, case management assistance, or standard care through 

VA homeless programs alone. 

Analysis also found that veterans with HUD–VASH vouchers 

had fewer days of alcohol use, fewer days in which they drank to 

intoxication, fewer days of drug use, and fewer days in institutions. 

Unfortunately, a relatively paltry number of additional HUD–

VASH vouchers have been authorized in recent years and none appropriated since Fiscal Year 1994. I am pleased that our friends on 

the HUD and VA appropriations committees have chosen to reverse 

this trend, providing for 7,500 vouchers and associated services 

funding in Fiscal Year 2008, HUD and VA conference reports, reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
3

spectively. I look forward to hearing the witnesses’ perspectives on 

that. 

Finally, I conclude by applauding subcommittee member Al 

Green for his legislative work in this area. He will now provide details on his two important bills, H.R. 3329, the Homes for Heroes 

Act of 2007, and H.R. 4161, the Veterans Homelessness Prevention 

Act of 2007. But suffice it to say that he has offered two critical 

starting points for the subcommittee to consider, not only for expanding the HUD–VASH program to the appropriate magnitude, 

but also for getting HUD into the permanent supportive housing 

development business where it needs to be, given tight rental markets in so many parts of the country where veterans homelessness 

is widespread. 

With that, I will recognize our ranking member, Congresswoman 

Capito, for her opening statement. 

Ms. CAPITO. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters, and I apologize for 

being a little tardy to the hearing. I look forward to this hearing, 

and I thank you for convening this important hearing entitled, ‘‘Affordable Housing Needs for America’s Low-Income Veterans.’’ 

As a Nation, we owe no greater debt than the one we owe to our 

veterans for their unwavering protection of our very freedom, providing suitable housing, affordable housing, and supportive services 

to these individuals should be the goal of all policymakers, and I 

believe it is our goal, our collective goal. This hearing represents 

an important opportunity for the committee to take a good look at 

the housing needs of our veterans. 

Recent studies have shown that a disproportionately large percentage of the overall homeless population is comprised of veterans, 

and that this percentage continues to grow. This growing trend not 

only raises questions about the adequacy of homeless shelters services available to veterans, but also about the availability of affordable housing for low-income veterans. 

The statistics on this subject are also not encouraging. The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates that as of September 2006, 

there were 24 million veterans living in the United States and 

Puerto Rico, and of this population, 196,000 are homeless on any 

given night, making up 19 percent of the total homeless population 

and one-third of the adult homeless population. There are numerous reasons for this overrepresentation of homeless veterans within 

the overall homeless population that could include mental health 

diagnosis, addictions to alcohol and other substances, and physical 

health problems. 

According to an August 2007 GAO study, low-income veteran 

households who rent their home are not faring much better. The 

GAO study found that 2.3 million veteran households that are lowincome renters, of that 2.3 million, 1.3 million experience housing 

affordability problems. In my own State of West Virginia, studies 

show that between 51 and 55 percent of veteran renters are low 

income. GAO also found that low-income veteran households are 

less likely to receive HUD rental assistance than other low-income 

households. 

I hope that through today’s hearing, we can gain a better understanding of the housing needs of our veterans. I thank all of the 

witnesses for their dedication to this issue and for their opporVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
4

tunity to enlighten us as a committee. Our Nation’s heroes deserve 

the very best that we have to offer, and I look forward to hearing 

the testimony. I yield back. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. We have gotten an 

agreement from the members on the subcommittee that Mr. Green, 

the author of the bills that we are focusing on today—who also has 

an important bill on the Floor—will go first with his opening statement, and then we will go to the other members and quickly get 

to the testimony. Hopefully, Mr. Green, you will be around for the 

question and answer period. 

But with that, I will recognize you for 5 minutes for your opening 

statement. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I greatly appreciate your convening this most important hearing. And Madam 

Chairwoman, if I may say so, you have truly been a friend of those 

who are living in the streets of life, whether they be veterans or 

whether they be persons without any portfolio at all, you have 

truly been a friend. 

I also would like to thank Ranking Member Capito for her efforts 

to assist and to be a part of making it possible for all persons to 

have a place to call home. The chairman of the full committee and 

the ranking member of the full committee, that would be Chairman 

Frank and Ranking Member Bachus, merit our expressions of appreciation as well. 

We have two bills on the Floor—the Homes for Heroes Act and 

the Veterans Homlessness Prevention Act—and when I say the 

Floor, I mean within this committee. Before I go to them, I’d like 

to make just a few comments. Some of what I will say has been 

said, but some things are so important that they bear repeating. 

Let me start by paraphrasing words from Father Dennis O’Brien. 

Father O’Brien reminds us that the ultimate protector of freedom 

is the soldier. He reminds us that it’s not the reporter who ultimately protects freedom of the press; it’s the soldier. It’s not the 

poet who protects freedom of speech; it’s the soldier. It’s not the activist who protects our freedom to demonstrate. He reminds us that 

the soldier who salutes the flag is the soldier who serves beneath 

the flag. It is the soldier’s body that is draped by the flag. And it 

is the soldier who allows the protestor to burn the flag. 

The soldier makes real our great American ideals, which is why 

we must demonstrate concern for our soldiers who are sleeping in 

the streets of life. We are blessed to be in the richest country in 

the world, a country where we have homes or houses for our cars. 

They’re called garages. And, however, as so many are sleeping in 

the suites of life, we have many who are sleeping in the streets of 

life. 

Approximately 800,000 persons on any given night will sleep in 

the streets of life. We can do better. Two hundred thousand of 

these homeless persons are veterans. Four hundred thousand veterans will sleep on the streets of life in the course of a year, 

400,000 different veterans. We can truly do better. 

In Texas, we have about 16,000 homeless veterans—2,500 in 

Houston alone. We have 1.5 million veterans who have incomes 

below the poverty level; 643,000 of these have incomes at 50 percent of the poverty level. We can do better. Vets are 11 percent of 

5

the population, and 25 percent of the homeless, depending on who’s 

counting. I’m not sure anyone really knows, but we do know that 

we have a significant number and we have too many. Someone 

might ask, how many is too many, Al Green? The answer is one—

one sleeping in the streets of life is too many. 

A report from the National Alliance to End Homelessness found 

that the lack of affordable housing is the primary cause of this concern that we bring to your attention today. More than 467,000 veterans are severely rent-burdened. That means that they are paying 

more than 50 percent of their income in rent, depending on who’s 

counting again. And 43 percent of these are receiving food stamps. 

Among the homeless veterans, half have mental illnesses. About 56 

percent are African American or Latino. Two-thirds of them suffer 

from alcohol or some sort of substance abuse. 

We must be do better, and this is why we’ve introduced H.R. 

3329, the Homes for Heroes Act, along with Representative Michael 

Michaud. I am so honored to have his assistance. He is a person 

who is chairing the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs. Let me get 

that title correct. The Veterans Affairs Health Subcommittee. I also 

am honored that Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and Representative Patrick Murphy, an Iraq veteran, have been of great assistance 

to us, and they are also sponsoring one of these pieces of legislation 

that I shall call to your attention. I’d like to thank their staffs, as 

well. 

But to H.R. 3329, this piece of legislation, the Homes for Heroes 

Act, would provide a special assistant for veterans affairs with 

HUD. We need someone in HUD who is looking out for vets. It establishes a $200 million assistance program for permanent supportive housing and services for low-income veterans. Someone has 

to help them as they move from the streets of life back into life as 

we know it. This is why we have a $1 million assistance program. 

It provides grants and assistance to these service providers who 

can help them make these transitions. And hopefully, we can have 

a holistic approach that will deal with more than just the homeless 

circumstance that we can see. There are oftentimes circumstances 

that we cannot see that must be addressed as well. 

The program will call for 20,000 vouchers annually for veterans, 

and an annual report to Congress on the needs of homeless veterans and the steps that HUD will be taking to address the needs 

of these veterans. 

May I have 30 seconds? Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And 

finally, in the second bill, this is a 2-year, $25 million pilot program 

that will provide for 10,000 vouchers for veterans annually for 2008 

and $750,000 in technical assistance. I just want to conclude with 

we can do better, we must do better. God Bless America, and thank 

God for the American soldier. 

I yield back. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. I will now recognize the gentleman from Connecticut, Congressman Shays, for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. SHAYS. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I thank our 

ranking member as well. Before Mr. Green leaves, I just want to 

tell him how much I admire his work on so many issues, and particularly this issue, and I look forward to co-sponsoring his bills. 

6

Madam Chairwoman, I requested, obviously along with others, a 

hearing examining the rising rates of homelessness among our Nation’s veterans after reviewing a recent analysis of census and Veterans Administration records conducted by the Alliance to End 

Homelessness, which concluded that veterans make up a disproportionate share of the homeless population. 

While veterans only represent 13 percent of the civilian population aged 18 and over, they account for 26 percent of our Nation’s 

homeless population. This is simply unacceptable. This disparity is 

especially concerning as our Nation’s troops in Iraq and Afghanistan return home. While the VA currently has over 19,000 transitional housing beds for homeless veterans, and has invested in new 

initiatives specifically targeting at-risk populations, various Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) and VA studies indicate 

that the VA still lacks the capacity to provide timely access to 

health services for veterans at risk for homelessness. 

Veterans are twice as likely to be chronically homeless compared 

to other Americans. Additional obstacles including mental healthrelated problems, weakened social networks, highly successful occupational demands, and nontransferability of skills to civilian jobs 

create the need for additional supportive services for this population. The National Alliance to End Homelessness found that 

nearly half-a-million of our Nation’s veterans are severely rent-burdened and devote more than 50 percent of their income to rent. 

Permanent supportive housing remains the number one unmet 

need of homeless veterans. Section 8 vouchers provided through 

HUD and VASH, a supportive housing program between Housing 

and Urban Development and Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing, 

are an effective means of getting veterans in housing, but funding 

increases to the program have only kept existing vouchers and not 

expanded program participation. 

While Federal funding for a variety of supportive services directed to our homeless veterans continues to increase, many homeless veterans remain underserved, and it may be that we need to 

develop better methods of informing our veterans about the programs to which they are entitled. 

The VA continues to support programs including healthcare for 

homeless veterans, domicile care of homeless veterans, compensated work therapy, and the grant and per diem program. 

Funding for the homeless veterans reintegration program, administered by the Department of Labor, has also steadily increased since 

1998. 

It also seems to me that the identification and expansion of successful local programs and community initiatives is also important. 

An estimated 5,000 veterans in my home State of Connecticut are 

homeless. A successful model that I hope we can expand upon is 

one undertaken by Homes for the Brave in Bridgeport, which has 

provided really excellent transitional housing and supportive services to our community’s homeless veterans for the past 7 years. 

We all care deeply about the well-being of our veterans. I look 

forward to hearing from our witnesses their recommendations for 

supporting this vulnerable population. And, again, thanks to you, 

Madam Chairwoman, and to Mr. Green, and to my ranking member. 

7

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. The gentlewoman 

from New York, Ms. Velazquez. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I will ask unanimous consent that my entire 

opening statement be included into the record. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Congressman 

Neugebauer. 

Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Well, thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I 

just want to echo what my other colleagues have said. It is important as we have an all-volunteer service in our country and we are 

making promises and representation to the men and women who 

are putting their lives on the line for our country, it is important 

for us to make sure that we keep our promises as well as to those 

who have served in the past. And so I look forward to discussing 

this issue. It is important. 

You know, I think making sure that our veterans have a safe 

and warm place to sleep, but more importantly also, make sure 

that the freedoms and the opportunities that they fought for, that 

they’re allowed to participate in. And so along with this initiative, 

making sure that we have job training and making sure that as 

our soldiers come back from war that we are able to integrate them 

back into the economy and to provide jobs and opportunity for 

them, because it is—probably they have a greater entitlement to be 

able to participate and enjoy the fruits, the freedoms, and the opportunities in America than just about any of us. 

So this is a very important hearing, and I look forward to our 

witnesses today and seeing what we can do to make sure that we 

do take care of America’s finest. I thank you. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. The gentleman 

from Missouri, Mr. Cleaver. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I don’t need the 

entire 5 minutes. I’d like to express my appreciation to you and to 

Ms. Capito for the hearing, and to my colleague, Al Green, for his 

vision in putting forth legislation to deal with what I consider to 

be one of the major problems facing us. 

I’ve had many veterans say to me that we seem to be supportive 

while they are in battle, but when they return, we seem to forget 

them. There are a potpourri of complaints they register, and one 

of them was very clear to me. As I mentioned before, in my district, 

we do a stand down in August of each year, and we average about 

600 veterans. I don’t even know how the communication gets out, 

but they all show up at Emanuel High School and we go through 

the whole process of providing a meal, shaves, haircuts, some medical attention, dental attention, and it is amazing that after this 

one Saturday, they return to, in many instances, the banks of the 

Missouri River where many of them stay. 

I represent, of course, Harry Truman’s district. This seat is 

Harry Truman’s in a large sense. And the 33rd President of our 

country was someone who understood what our veterans experienced when they return home, and so what he did at the end of 

World War II was to begin the process of providing housing for veterans. The first unit was actually in our district. It was called 

Ridgeway Heights. It was known previous to that as Boulevard Village. But at any rate, it provided housing for homeless veterans 

way back after World War II. We’ve not done enough since then. 

8

Today it’s a housing complex for veterans as well as other citizens. 

There are about 200 people who still live there at Ridgeway 

Heights. 

And I agree with our President, my leader in our congressional 

district, Harry Truman, that we need to take care of our veterans. 

I also believe that when you serve, you deserve, and that is exactly 

what I compliment my colleague for seeing, and I look forward to 

receiving the testimony of our witnesses and delving even deeper 

into this issue. 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. The gentleman 

from New Jersey, Mr. Sires. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for this important 

hearing. And I want to compliment my colleague, Congressman 

Green, for all his hard work and for always being there for the veterans. 

I just have a couple of statements. I served as a local mayor, and 

one of the problems that we had in this community was the housing that was built, apartments that were built for veterans after 

the war, it was turned over to the housing authority at one stretch. 

And HUD was supposed to manage the people who were there, collecting the rents and everything else. But one of the problems that 

we encountered was that the housing authority was not allowed to 

invest the money in repairing and maintaining the building. 

One of the things that I want to find out is if this policy is still 

there, because there are still houses that were built after the war, 

apartments, basically—I come from a very urban area—that are 

part of the housing authority. And somewhere along the line, these 

are veterans who are living there. And if we don’t allow some of 

the investments to make their life better, I think the policy needs 

to be reviewed. 

The other issue I think we have to look at is, before the veterans 

become homeless, what can we do to assist those families? Because 

I think that’s where some of the problems can be headed off. As 

they serve in this army, it puts a great deal of economic pressure 

on the families as they come back, they’re practically in debt because they just can’t do it economically. So I think a combination 

of both things, just before they come back, and if you could address 

that issue on the policy or look into it, I know that is disruptive, 

but that’s what I wanted to say. Thank you very much. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Next, I will recognize Mr. Donnelly. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I want to 

thank the ranking member and Mr. Green for your tremendous 

work in this area. I am blessed to be a member of both the Financial Services Committee and the Veterans Affairs Committee, so 

this is an issue of significant importance to me. 

Last week, I visited some of the homeless shelters in my district 

in order to see how we were dealing with the needs of our veterans 

and how we were appropriately taking care of them. This is not 

just another opportunity for the Congress to work on a program. 

This is an obligation that we as a country have to the people who 

have given us the very freedom that we have every day. And so it 

is critically important. 

9

We have to get this right. This is one of those things that we cannot take a chance on getting wrong, and so, Mr. Green, your work 

has been extraordinarily important to all of us, and we appreciate 

it. I look forward to being part of this. 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Mr. Ellison was here, and I think he left, 

so we will proceed with our first panel. I’d like to introduce our 

first witness panel. First, we have Mr. Mark Johnston, Deputy Assistance Secretary for Special Needs, U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development. 

Next, we have Mr. Pete Dougherty, Director, Homeless Veterans 

Programs, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. I want the members to be aware that due to the short notice VA received regarding 

this hearing, I’ve extended the deadline for submission of their 

written testimony for the record. Mr. Dougherty will provide oral 

testimony and will be available for questions. 

And finally, we have Mr. David Wood, Director, Financial Markets and Community Investment, U.S. Government Accountability 

Office. 

Thank you all for appearing before the subcommittee today, and 

without objection, your written statements will be made a part of 

the record. You will now be recognized for a 5-minute summary of 

your testimony. 

We will start with Mr. Johnston. 

STATEMENT OF MARK JOHNSTON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR SPECIAL NEEDS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters, Ranking Member Capito, and members of the subcommittee. I am pleased to be 

here today to represent Secretary Alfonso Jackson of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Secretary recognizes the moral responsibility HUD has to its veterans. This is especially true for those who have served our country who now sleep 

on the streets of this great Nation. 

The Department administers a variety of housing programs that 

can assist veterans. These include the Housing Choice Voucher program, the Public Housing program, the Community Development 

Block Grant program, and HOME Investment Partnerships. These 

programs, by statute, provide great flexibility so that communities 

can use these resources to meet their particular local needs, including the needs of their veterans. 

In addition to these programs, Congress has authorized a variety 

of targeted programs for special needs populations, including homeless persons. Unfortunately, veterans are well-represented in the 

homeless population. HUD is committed to serving homeless veterans and recognizes that Congress charges HUD to serve all 

homeless groups. HUD provides an array of housing and supportive 

services to all homeless groups, including homeless veterans. 

I’d like to take a moment to outline our activities that specifically 

relate to serving homeless veterans. In February of 2007, HUD 

competitively awarded a total of nearly $1.3 billion in homeless assistance. A record 5,288 projects were awarded funds. It’s important to note that veterans are eligible for all of our homeless assistVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
10

ance programs, and HUD emphasizes the importance of serving 

veterans in its grant application. 

A total of 205 applications were submitted wherein at least half 

of the program clients would be veterans. Of that number, 90 percent of these veteran-focused projects were successfully awarded 

funding. We awarded just over $41 million to these projects. In addition, we awarded funds to projects that will be serving a smaller 

share of homeless veterans, but serving veterans nonetheless. 

When you combine all projects serving veterans, targeted and nontargeted projects, we awarded funds to more than 1,420 projects for 

over $342 million. 

To underscore our continued commitment to serve homeless veterans, we have highlighted veterans in our annual planning and 

grantmaking process. In the grant application, for instance, we 

score applications on whether organizations that represent homeless veterans are at the planning table. Because of HUD’s emphasis, over 90 percent of all communities nationwide have homeless 

veteran representation. 

Many of those living on our streets in this country are unfortunately veterans. The Administration’s goal of ending chronic homelessness is helping to meet the needs of these veterans. Because 

the chronically homeless face many challenges, it’s imperative to 

involve many partners. HUD, the VA, the Department of Labor, 

the Department of Health and Human Services, and other agencies 

that make up the Interagency Council on Homelessness, have 

worked together to achieve the goal of ending chronic homelessness 

at the Federal level and work regularly with State and local partners. 

With a sustained effort since 2002, we are starting to see real results. HUD just recently announced an 11.5 percent reduction in 

chronic homelessness nationwide between 2005 and 2006. This is 

the first time since the Federal homelessness programs were created in 1987 that this country has seen a reduction of homelessness of any kind. We are currently reviewing the 2007 data to see 

if this is a trend, and we’ll be releasing that information in the 

next couple of months. 

To further illustrate HUD’s involvement in addressing the needs 

of veterans, I represent HUD on VA’s Secretarial Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans. In fact, I returned just yesterday, as 

did Mr. Dougherty, who oversees this committee, from a 2-day advisory committee meeting where we met with various Federal 

agencies to discuss the programs and how they can better meet the 

needs of homeless veterans. The Department also serves veterans 

by providing technical assistance. In one recent effort, we dedicated 

$350,000 to enhance assistance to providers serving homeless veterans, to update existing materials to help them, and to coordinate 

better with VA’s local planning process. 

In conclusion, I want to reiterate my and HUD’s desire and commitment to help our veterans, including those who are homeless. 

We will continue to work with our Federal, State, and local partners to do so. 

Madam Chairwoman, I would be glad to address any questions 

at the appropriate time. 

11

[The prepared statement of Mr. Johnston can be found on page 

84 of the appendix.] 

Chairwoman WATERS. Okay. Thank you very much. Next we will 

have Mr. Peter—what is the correct pronunciation of your name? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I pronounce it ‘‘Dougherty.’’ 

Chairwoman WATERS. Dougherty. I’ve heard three different pronunciations, including the one I first started off with. Thank you 

very much. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Ms. Waters, actually, we’ve had about 10 different ways to pronounce it in my career. 

STATEMENT OF PETER H. DOUGHERTY, DIRECTOR, HOMELESS VETERANS PROGRAMS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Chairwoman Waters, I’m very pleased to be 

here with you and the members of the subcommittee to discuss this 

very important issue. At the Department of Veterans Affairs, our 

mission is clear and consistent: to do all within our authority and 

ability to help those men and women readjust back successfully 

into civilian society after their military experience ends. This adjustment is difficult for many, particularly those who are homeless. 

The Department of Veterans Affairs administers a variety of programs, many of which you have already outlined, that help to reintegrate veterans back into mainstream society. We are the Nation’s largest single provider of healthcare. We provide healthcare 

to more than 5 million veterans each year, and we provide 

healthcare specifically to more than 100,000 veterans who are identified as being homeless. 

We’re second only to Social Security in the amount of economic 

benefits we provide to members of this society. We provide nearly 

3 million veterans and their families with benefits, $27 billion in 

compensation benefits and nearly 3 billion in pension benefits annually. 

Veterans who are homeless are far more likely to be eligible and 

receive benefits once identified and once they have claims that are 

brought to us. We have a single family home loan guarantee program that was originally started at the end of World War II, which 

was really designed to help get veterans into housing in ways that 

private sector non-veterans could not do. That program has been 

very successful over the years and has helped many of those lowincome veterans who are even marginally employed to get in without having to make downpayments. 

The Department’s mainstream programs that we provide are also 

supplemented by many homeless-specific programs. We provide 

more than 15,000 veterans transitional housing services in virtually every State in the union. We have over 8,500 units available 

today. We are already approved to have 12,000, and we will soon 

announce funding announcements that will add housing for those 

veterans. 

We also provide over 6,000 units of housing in our residential 

treatment program in VA-operated programs under our domiciliary 

care programs and other residential treatment programs. Madam 

Chairwoman, you’ve already mentioned the very successful HUD–

12

VASH program, and that provides nearly 2,000 veterans with a 

safe, decent place to stay. 

Our efforts to reduce homelessness are in fact having success. We 

are tracking numbers that indicate the number of veterans who are 

homeless is going down similar to what HUD has reported. While 

that is positive, as Mr. Green indicated, far too many veterans are 

homeless in America. 

You specifically referenced, and I will respond back about the 

HUD–VASH program. As you mentioned, the HUD–VASH program 

is a very successful program. The Appropriations Committee has at 

least agreed between the two Houses to support an increased number of HUD–VASH vouchers. That program is very, very successful 

in helping those veterans move forward. 

We would look forward to the opportunity to case manage additional vouchers. We’ve testified in favor of additional vouchers and 

think that the ability to manage what we think is the best housing 

by HUD and supportive services by the Department of Veterans Affairs is a very successful program. 

I also would be remiss if I did not mention that the Administration has put forth some legislative proposals, including one that 

would allow us to provide supportive services grants to veterans 

living in permanent housing. Senator Akaka has introduced that in 

the Senate as part of S. 2273. That legislation is pending and has 

not had any action yet. 

We look forward and have continued to be an active partner with 

our friends at HUD and the other Federal agencies, much of which 

we are happy to talk about here with you. We think this is an important issue, and as always, we’re willing to aid this committee’s 

effort in any effort to make housing more available for low-income 

veterans. 

Thank you. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. David Wood. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID G. WOOD, DIRECTOR, FINANCIAL MARKETS AND COMMUNITY INVESTMENT, US. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Mr. WOOD. Thank you, Chairwoman Waters. My statement today 

is based on a report that we issued in August 2007 in response to 

a congressional mandate. The conference report accompanying the 

Fiscal Year 2006 Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act directed GAO to report on housing assistance to low-income veterans. 

In consultation with the Committees on Appropriations in both 

Houses of Congress, we focused our work on veterans who rent 

their housing. We examined four topics: 

First, the income and demographic characteristics of veteran 

renter households, including the extent to which such households 

were facing rent affordability problems. 

Second, the extent to which the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development’s rental assistance programs recognize veteran 

status when determining eligibility. 

Third, the extent to which local housing agencies and private 

landlords that administer HUD’s programs offer a veterans’ prefVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
13

erence when selecting tenants. And finally, the extent to which veterans actually received rental assistance from HUD. 

To identify the characteristics of veteran rental households, we 

used data from the Census Bureau’s 2005 American Community 

Survey. Among other things, we found that in 2005, there were 

about 4.3 million veteran renter households nationwide, and just 

over half were considered low income; that is, their incomes were 

80 percent or less of their area’s median income. About half of 

those low-income veteran households, or about 1.3 million in total, 

had housing affordability problems. That is, their rental costs exceeded 30 percent of their household incomes. 

Compared with non-veteran renter households, veterans were 

somewhat less likely to be low income or to have a housing affordability problem. However, they were more likely to include a household member who was elderly, aged 62 or older, or who had a disability. In reviewing HUD’s major rental assistance programs, we 

found that they’re not required to take a household’s veteran status 

into account when determining eligibility. However, veterans can 

benefit from HUD’s programs as long as they meet the income restrictions and other eligibility criteria. 

The local housing agencies that administer HUD’s programs are 

authorized, but are not required, to offer preferences in selecting 

tenants. Such preferences may be offered to veterans or to others, 

such as the elderly, families with children, or homeless persons. 

Our contacts with many of the largest agencies revealed that most 

did not offer a preference for veterans. Specifically, of the 34 largest agencies that administer the public housing program, 14 offered 

a veterans preference. And 13 of the 40 largest agencies that administer the Housing Choice Voucher program did so. 

In addition, our work indicated that the private landlords participating in HUD’s project-based programs generally did not offer a 

veterans preference. To determine how many veterans were actually assisted by HUD, we matched data from the Department of 

Veterans Affairs with HUD’s data on program tenants. We found 

that at least 250,000 low-income veteran households were assisted 

by HUD’s programs in 2005. That was about 11 percent of all such 

households. 

However, as noted previously, veteran households were less likely to receive HUD rental assistance than their non-veteran counterparts. About 19 percent of the non-veteran households were assisted through HUD programs. Our discussions with local and Federal agency officials identified some potential reasons for this difference. These included variations in housing needs, infrequent use 

of veterans preferences, and requirements that direct some assistance to extremely low-income households. 

Chairwoman Waters, that concludes my prepared statement, and 

I’d be glad to respond to any questions that you or other members 

may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wood can be found on page 97 

of the appendix.] 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. We will now proceed with questions for panel one. Mr. Dougherty, I understand 

that permanent supportive housing providers who access HUD 

McKinney-Vento funds and other sources of services financing often 

14

use those funds to pay for their own staff or that of nonprofit partners to deliver services. By contrast, I understand that under the 

HUD–VASH initiative, VA staff themselves deliver services. 

Can you describe the pros and cons of each approach, and whether the VA currently has authority to increase the extent to which 

it contracts out the delivery of supportive services to homeless veterans and permanent supportive housing, or should have increased 

authority to do so? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Madam Chairwoman, the HUD–VASH program 

operates as you have indicated. We provide clinically trained VA 

employees who provide case management services to those veterans 

who are in permanent housing under the public housing authority. 

As you noted in your opening statement, the success of that program has been very good. Veterans who participate in that program get the benefit of direct access. 

When you’re working with these veterans, many of them have 

long-term and chronic health problems, and having a VA case manager who can work with the Department because they’re a Department employee, to help them access benefits and needed healthcare 

services, has been very, very beneficial. 

Now we don’t have any specific authority, as you know, having 

served on the House Veterans Affairs Committee as well. Permanent housing is a new concept for us. We, by statute, have not had 

the ability to do this in the past. We prefer not to be in the housing 

business. But we think the pilot program that I described briefly 

under S. 2273 would give us the ability to look at the other form 

of supportive housing—services grants to organizations that could 

provide supportive services to veterans in permanent housing. 

We think that would be successful, based upon what the community and through our CHALENG assessment meetings tell us, that 

there is a need for supportive services and permanent housing. It 

is a very heavy demand at this time. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Mr. Johnston, 

HUD’s homeless assistance programs clearly serve many veterans. 

How good are your providers at tracking the veteran status of program participants? In particular, I’m interested in how successful 

they are at capitalizing on opportunities to obtain income and other 

benefits for veteran clients. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Okay. We encourage the communities and the 

grantees to serve veterans in a couple of different ways. The first 

is, we give points in our competition for the continuum of care, 

which represents all of our competitive programs, and that represents about $1.3 billion. To the extent they include organizations 

that represent veterans at the planning table when the decisions 

are made for which projects will be funded, they get a higher score. 

As a result of that emphasis on the score and the competitive nature of our programs, we have a high level of participation. About 

90 percent of all communities in the Nation do have active veteran 

participation at the planning table. Moreover, when we collect information from each awarded grantee at the end of each year, what 

we call the annual progress report, we ask for specific information, 

such as veteran status for every client being served, as well as income. And we look at about eleven different income categories—

veterans’ benefits, SSI, SSDI, Medicaid, etc. 

15

So we have a pretty good handle within projects the extent to 

which they can increase their income, and we heartily encourage 

that increased income. In fact, they get a higher score for that as 

well. If they are able to engage veterans and non-veterans in getting into mainstream programs, we give them extra points in our 

competition. 

Chairwoman WATERS. So I suppose your answer is that you are 

doing everything that you can to make sure that veterans are getting their benefits and what they have, what they’re eligible for? 

Because as I understand it, there are homeless veterans who have 

not been able to negotiate the system and to get disability benefits 

and other benefits that they’re eligible for. Most of us in our offices 

receive many, many calls from veterans to assist them, and I have 

one person in my Los Angeles office who is totally dedicated to 

working with veterans. We have to work very, very hard to sometimes get them the disability benefits in particular that they are 

eligible for. And sometimes it takes us months in order to correct 

what we think are problems that have been made in the way the 

benefits are allocated. But I guess the bottom line is, do you think 

that your people are doing a good job with this? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Well, we could clearly always do better. One of 

the benefits of the program that this committee has authorized, the 

Supportive Housing program, which is our largest homeless program, is that it’s not just for housing. We spend about $435 million 

a year on services to address the very issue that you’ve raised. 

Most of that money for supportive services goes to case management, which helps clients go through the system and access those 

various Federal benefits and State and local benefits. 

So we can always do better, and we encourage increased access 

to the programs, and continuums that do a good job get a higher 

score and therefore get more funds. 

Chairwoman WATERS. All right. Thank you very much, and I 

think I’m going to ask my staff to assist me in making sure we understand how you can identify which veterans you have actually 

connected with their benefits so that perhaps they can get off the 

streets and not have to rely on our system. With that, Ms. Capito? 

Ms. CAPITO. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I have a question, 

a real life scenario. I have a veteran who returned from Iraq with 

very severe injuries, both physical and mental injuries—he’s 100 

percent disabled, I believe—and he is a single father now. When he 

came back, he went back to live with his parents, and he has asked 

for our assistance to try to help him get into a housing development or public housing situation. He said that what he has found 

is that his disability income exceeds any kind of help that he could 

possibly get. 

Do some of these vouchers take into consideration that people 

who have very high disabilities who may need additional help, can’t 

hold a job, and so should be able to qualify for these housing benefits? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Let me begin, and Pete may jump in as well in 

terms of HUD–VASH. The Section 8 program has a requirement 

that 30 percent of the person’s income would be contributed towards rent. And so if they have a very modest income, then their 

16

rent contribution will be very modest. If a person has no income, 

then they don’t contribute any. 

Ms. CAPITO. But is their retirement and disability from the VA 

considered income? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. It isn’t considered income. 

Ms. CAPITO. Yes. Okay. I’m sorry. Go ahead. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. If I could add onto that, one of the things that 

is in the appropriations act gives the Department of Veterans Affairs some significant authority—if passed, it would give us the 

ability to waive out some of those requirements. So if we said that 

veteran needed that kind of housing, they would be able to be 

placed in that housing. 

Ms. CAPITO. And that can be done through what mechanism? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Under the appropriations bill that has been 

agreed to between both Houses, it gives the Department of Veterans Affairs the ability, if we make the referral of that veteran for 

that kind of housing— 

Ms. CAPITO. From the VA? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. If the VA made the request, then that would 

basically trump the normal local housing authority requirements. 

Because income is in fact considered otherwise. 

Ms. CAPITO. Yes. That’s interesting. We also, in the State of West 

Virginia, have just opened a State veterans nursing home, which 

I think is another issue. I mean, I know there are different age 

groups that we’re looking at here, and certainly our older veterans 

are reaching a point where they’re not going to be able to stay in 

their own homes. They may need some assistance either that they 

haven’t needed in the past, and because of some injuries that they 

may have sustained as long ago as World War II, may need that 

additional assistance. 

Is this a growing problem or is this something that the VA—because I know there’s a shortage of beds that are specifically designated for veterans. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I’m not the technical expert. Actually, Mr. 

Basher, who will testify later, and is a State director of veterans 

affairs may be better to answer this than I am. But clearly, we look 

at the demographic trends. If you look at the Department of Veterans Affairs and you look at veterans generally, we’re about 20 

years ahead of the rest of the country when it comes to geriatrics 

and extended care needs. We have greatly expanded the number of 

nursing home State partnerships across the country as a result of 

that. 

Ms. CAPITO. All right. Thank you. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. As well as our own internal programs. 

Ms. CAPITO. Thank you. I would just like to say that I think our 

veterans are going to be best served when we have great coordination between agencies. And I think of course we’re seeing that in 

the panel today, the fact that you all were in a meeting yesterday, 

obviously talking about this very issue I think is a step in the right 

direction, and I think it’s something that we need to really reaffirm 

and more affirmatively work on so that we can maximize the resources for our veterans. 

Thank you. 

17

Mr. DOUGHERTY. You make a very good point. And if I might 

add, one of the things that the Department of Housing and Urban 

Development did is to try to make sure that the people being 

served were being identified, so that their accounting, if you will, 

is now better. And they’re using a methodology now that if we can 

sort of crack the nut with local authorities, we allow VA to better 

identify who is being served. 

In the City of New York, for example, if you’re coming into the 

New York emergency services shelters, names, dates of birth, and 

Social Security numbers are included. What our benefits offices are 

now able to do is to run that information from the City against VA 

benefits records. That gives us an opportunity to know there may 

be 40 homeless veterans living in a certain location where the opportunity to get them benefits and healthcare services exists in a 

way that it did not exist in the past. 

That coordination has been very helpful. I think it will be very 

helpful in the next few years in helping to make sure more of those 

veterans get access to healthcare and benefits from the VA. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Without objection, 

we’ll continue in the order that we first gave our opening statements, giving the author, Mr. Green, who must get to the Floor, 

an opportunity to raise questions now. We’ll recognize you, Mr. 

Green, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And thank you, 

witnesses, for your testimony. Let me start with Mr. Johnston. Mr. 

Johnston, sir, I see this as an opportunity for HUD and Congress 

to work together for the benefit of our veterans. I assume that you 

see a similar opportunity. Does HUD look favorably upon the position that we have articulated today? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. The Administration and therefore HUD does not 

yet have a position on either bill, so I’m not able to discuss them 

at great length in terms of the Administration’s position. I will observe that I think there are some very good elements in the bills. 

And let me just jump on one that there is a need for that and we 

have been addressing, and that is the special advisor who would 

be at HUD within the Office of the Secretary. 

We do have a special advisor on a full time veteran, who is a special advisor on homelessness and veteran issues across the Department. The person doesn’t report directly to the Secretary, but 

works directly with me on a regular basis. And I think there are 

some commonalities that perhaps we could even do better on that 

are included in your bill that we could even do administratively. 

Mr. GREEN. Let’s speak for just a moment about the vouchers. 

Mr. Dougherty indicated that additional vouchers would be welcome. Would HUD support additional Section 8 vouchers? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Traditionally, our position has been that HUD–

VASH was a very well-done demonstration, and I can speak from 

personal experience. I was at HUD back then when we developed 

it and I personally helped develop the HUD–VASH program with 

Paul Herrera and others at the VA. So to see this connection of 

HUD doing housing, and another agency such as the VA doing 

services, I think was a great example of what can happen. 

We, about a year after HUD–VASH started up, proposed— 

18

Mr. GREEN. Mr. Johnston, if I may, my time is very limited, and 

pardon me for saying this: no disrespect intended, but sometimes 

when folks finish, I don’t know whether they have said ‘‘yes’’ or 

‘‘no.’’ So I have to ask you: Could you kindly indicate whether 

HUD, yes or no, would welcome the additional vouchers that Congress would accord our veterans? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. To be honest, I can’t give you—I’d be glad to answer the question, but I really can’t give a simple yes or no answer 

to that question. Could I just take two sentences? 

Mr. GREEN. Of course. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. We created in 1992 the Shelter Plus Care program modeled on HUD–VASH. It’s our largest permanent housing 

program that targets disabled persons, including veterans. And 

that’s a wonderful program that HUD has been funded from the 

Congress for years on. 

Mr. GREEN. Well, I appreciate that, and I appreciate much of 

what you’ve said. But I’m detecting some hesitation and perhaps a 

degree of consternation in the way you are presenting this. It 

seems to me that the empirical evidence supports what we are 

talking about. It seems almost intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that this kind of assistance is needed. But I detect a 

little bit of pushback from HUD, and I’m being candid with you because it causes me some concern to think that HUD is going to 

have some pushback. 

Now one of the things that I’m concerned about also is whether 

HUD is going to—perhaps next week or next month or within the 

foreseeable future or before Congress can finish what we’re doing 

and try to work with HUD in a cooperative way—have some program that is going to address homeless veterans and the need for 

assistance that in some way would cause us not to be able to deliver as much as we can from Congress? Is there something on the 

horizon that HUD is about to do? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Well, our traditional approach, which continues 

today, is to use our mainstream housing programs, programs like 

Section 8, public housing, CDBG, and HOME— 

Mr. GREEN. Am I to take that as a yes? That you’re about to do 

something? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Well, I guess we’d—I guess my answer would be 

we’ve already done something, and that is we submitted a budget— 

Mr. GREEN. Well, you can tell me what the something is. But in 

Texas, when a person talks the way you’re talking, we say they are 

‘‘fixing to do something.’’ Are you fixing to do something? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Our approach is to give maximum flexibility to 

localities and let them make the call. 

Mr. GREEN. Sir, we’re talking about helping veterans. Can you 

kindly indicate if you’re about to do something? We all want to be 

on the same page. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Okay. 

Mr. GREEN. Are you fixing to do something? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. We do not have a specific proposal to create a 

brand new program for— 

Mr. GREEN. Are you developing a proposal in response to what 

we are proposing? 

19

Mr. JOHNSTON. We are reviewing within the Administration 

these two bills. 

Mr. GREEN. Well, I would hope that we can work together. My 

time is up. Madam Chairwoman, I sincerely hope that HUD will 

work with us so that we can work efficaciously for our veterans, 

and I yield back. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Next, we will recognize Mrs. Biggert from Illinois for questions. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I’m sorry that 

I missed the testimony, so I hope I don’t ask a question that has 

already been asked. 

One of the panelists later on has a recommendation that all veterans, when they’re exiting military service, should be assessed as 

to their housing status, and that the VA should have resources to 

assist veterans to access housing. I will start with Mr. Dougherty. 

Do you think that’s something that should be done or can be done? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. The Department of Veterans Affairs coordinates 

some with the Department of Defense and with the Department of 

Labor on transition assistance programs. The access and availability to healthcare services from the VA and other benefits, both 

employment and housing benefits are reviewed. 

I’m not aware that there is a determination made about how that 

person will specifically be housed once they leave military service. 

My experience would be that many people when they’re first looking at discharging may not have a good answer of that in their own 

mind. They may have a variety of options they think may have 

available to them that may or may not come to pass after that. 

I do think one of the things that we have said at the Department 

of Veterans Affairs consistently is that those veterans who are discharging, particularly who think they have a problem in their readjustment and may have some condition as a result of their military 

service, are encouraged to come forward. Quite frankly, when they 

do, we think that helps us to put them specifically in connection 

with both healthcare needs that they have as well as the benefits 

assistance that they need. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. Mr. Johnston, do you see the homeless 

veterans coming forward to you after they’ve been out of the services? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes. But the data suggests that it has often been 

10 years or more between when they leave the service and become 

homeless. So there are clearly a number of factors being affected 

there. When you look at the demographics of veterans and—the 

National Alliance report did a wonderful job, I think, in sort of 

summarizing a lot of the census data on this—relative to non-veterans, they do pretty well in a number of different areas, income, 

for instance, and unemployment, lower unemployment than nonveterans, and lower poverty rates than non-veterans. 

So there obviously must be some other reasons that veterans are 

disproportionately represented in the homeless population, and it 

certainly seems to be that post traumatic stress syndrome may be 

one of those factors that contributes to their homelessness, not immediately, but over time, and effects of substance abuse, mental 

health, and so forth, and then over time they, you know, more often 

than in the general population, fall into homelessness. 

20

Mrs. BIGGERT. You know, in one of the other hearings that we’ve 

had recently, we’ve been looking at a couple of bills and looking at 

the definition of homeless, and between whether it should be as 

probably now is the priority of the single person who is homeless 

versus the family with children. Do you think if the definition were 

changed that this would cut down on the number of homeless veterans who would be able to be served, or wouldn’t it make any difference? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Well, I attended one of those hearings recently, 

and the challenge is that HUD has about 160,000 beds for homeless people, and there are about 750,000 homeless people. We have 

far more homeless people than we have beds, so to expand the definition beyond 750,000 to something in the bill, for instance, which 

is in the range of 10 to 12 million, I don’t know what impact that 

would have on serving more people, given the number of beds that 

we have. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. My time has just about expired. I’ll 

yield back. Thank you. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Ms. Velazquez. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Mr. Dougherty, it has come to my attention that the Dow Fund, a not-for-profit organization based in New York City, received a veterans grant 

to open a shelter in the Brooklyn part of my district. I am fully 

supportive of compassionate and effective programs for veterans, 

but I have to say that the process through which this project has 

been handled with the community raises many questions. And this 

is not a NIMBY issue, it’s not a not-in-my-backyard issue. Can you 

describe the process and criteria used to rate different grant proposals? And do they include a community consultation component? 

Do you require grantees to engage the community during the planning process? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Our program is not a local community-driven 

process. It’s a national competition. The need in the community is 

one of the very serious factors that’s taken into consideration. I 

can’t tell you about the specifics without going back and looking, 

but I certainly would be happy to— 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Will you do that? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Absolutely. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Let me explain to you why. Yes, there is an astronomical increase in homelessness among veterans in New York 

City. But the same is true with low-income communities who have 

been forced out from their own communities. The community where 

this shelter is going to open has within five blocks two other shelters with 600 beds. For too long, the government in New York City 

neglected this community. We came together. We fought back, and 

there is a renaissance. What I’m asking is, go back and make it 

part of your rule that there must be community consultation. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, although we don’t have a community consultation, I think, in the phrase that you’re using, we do solicit that 

in the application process. It strengthens the application to show 

that there is community partnership and agreement for the program to go forward. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. In this case, it didn’t happen. Mr. Dougherty, 

given the fact that there are 162,000 soldiers in Iraq as of NovemVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
21

ber 24, 2007, and that we have not been able to solve veterans’ 

homelessness for the soldiers of wars dating back to World War II, 

how is the Department preparing for the imminent surge in service 

demand? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, we are doing a number of things differently than we did before. We make the availability to healthcare 

for veterans who come back from Iraq and Afghanistan much easier than it has ever been before for those veterans to access the 

healthcare system. 

I get asked these kinds of questions fairly often. We never had, 

with the Vietnam generation and thereafter, any vet centers. We 

didn’t have any place in the community where you could go talk 

to a combat veteran about the experience that you had and what 

has happened. We didn’t have any homeless programs within the 

Department of Veterans Affairs, and we didn’t have hundreds of 

community providers, some of whom are going to be represented in 

the next panel, who are out there helping to make us aware of the 

need. 

We aggressively outreach to any veteran, particularly those who 

have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think the different, as Mr. 

Johnston mentioned a few moments ago, is that historically we 

wouldn’t see many of these veterans for many, many years. Our 

thrust with the veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan 

is to see them early, to get them access to healthcare and benefits 

assistance now so that they can, in fact, do better. 

We have had over 400 veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan 

served in homeless specific programs already. What we can tell you 

is that many of them are doing better than all other veterans we 

see as far as getting back into independent living and getting a 

good job once again. That is our goal—to readjust all veterans back 

into society’s mainstream. 

So while I agree with you that it’s very, very sad to see any veteran who is homeless, particularly those who have gone voluntarily 

to serve their Nation, we’re hoping that we are going to catch many 

of these who have significant mental illness problems. That’s the 

most significant issue we found among this newest group of veterans. The mental illness issue is the most significant problem, 

particularly combat-related PTSD. That is the major source of the 

problem for many of them. Their readjustment back has been 

blocked by that. 

Coming in, getting treatment, and then getting on with their 

lives and getting back into independent housing and employment 

is significant. We think we’re not going to have a surge. We’re hoping that we’re going to do what good healthcare ought to be able 

to do, and that is to address the healthcare problem as it is emerging, and address it appropriately. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Mr. Shays. 

Mr. SHAYS. I thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I wrestle with 

what we do for our veterans like everyone else in Congress. It 

seems to me that we are concerned about their health, about their 

educational needs, about their housing needs, and I’d add into that, 

employment. 

22

When I was in the Peace Corps, when I came home, I was unemployed for 3 months. It was the most devastating thing I’ve ever 

gone through in my life, because I thought the whole world would 

be waiting, and I was looking for one particular kind of job, and 

it didn’t open up. But I was aware that my wife was aware that 

I didn’t have a job. I began to doubt my capabilities. It had tremendous impact on, frankly, my mental state. 

And I’m just wondering how much of this is job-related. In the 

presentation of the GAO, there is the background that about 80 

percent of veterans own their own homes; 80 percent own their 

own homes, a significantly higher percentage than was the case for 

non-veterans households. So, in one case of the homeless, veterans 

tend to be—there’s a greater rate of homelessness among veterans, 

but ironically, among those who own their own homes, there is a 

greater percent of veterans who own their own homes versus not. 

It’s the exact opposite. 

But then of those who rent, the 20 percent who rent, a good 

chunk of them, an estimated 2.3 million or about 53 percent, were 

low income. So what I’d like to do is just ask how much of the 

homeless problem is just veterans who come home who—and I 

have veterans who write me and they say, ‘‘I’m coming home. Can 

you help me find employment?’’ I find myself writing back and saying, ‘‘Well, what kind of job are you looking for and what kind of 

job do you think you would be qualified for?’’ And I get back an answer that tells me they’re really wrestling with it. They really don’t 

know. 

So the irony of this is, could we be dealing with the homeless 

problem in a way that’s less effective by focusing on housing, and 

could we be doing a better job of focusing in on helping them get 

jobs so they have income for a place and they have better self-esteem? That’s what I’m wrestling with. And I’d like to start backwards and start with you, Mr. Wood, and then we’ll go in the other 

direction. 

Mr. WOOD. The issue that you raised, I think, has been raised 

in the broader context of the recipients of low-income housing assistance as to whether the fundamental problem is housing or income, and I don’t know that it’s ever been definitively decided one 

way or the other. 

You are correct. The veterans that we looked at were more likely 

to be homeowners and in fact, even if you look at low-income veterans, the homeownership rate was about 68 percent, which is 

roughly the national average rate of homeownership for the population at large. So I don’t really have a definitive answer to you 

other than to say that certainly the income angle has been brought 

up before. 

Mr. SHAYS. And before I get to our other two witnesses, I’ll just 

add for emphasis, obviously we are dealing with post-traumatic 

stress disorder, but I’ll tell you this, if you’re unemployed, if you 

are on the edge with post-traumatic stress disorder, being unemployed is just going to add to that. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Mr. Shays, I think you’re absolutely right. In 

1994, Secretary Jesse Brown convened the first national summit on 

homelessness among veterans. After that summit ended, a group of 

experts got together, and the ultimate finding of that group of exVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
23

perts was that employment was the psychological barrier that 

made a veteran feel like they had worth— 

Mr. SHAYS. Unemployment. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. That having employment changed that position. 

Mr. SHAYS. Oh, I see. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Unemployment is a very debilitating condition. 

The people who serve in the Nation’s military are there, and particularly at this time, because they want to be there. They want to 

have a meaningful experience. They know what they do is important to our country and what they do is critical for the men and 

women they serve with. 

Not having a job when they come back is obviously very, very difficult for many of them to deal with. The ability to get employment 

is significant. Now as you’ve indicated, though, many of them have 

health-related problems, and what we’re trying to do is trying to 

shorten that gap so that the veteran who may not have a job and 

has health problems stays out of coming in and getting assistance 

from us in whatever form. 

Because if I have severe combat-related PTSD, I’m not going to 

be a very good employee. I’m not going to be there. And if I get 

housing immediately, and I don’t address the underlying 

healthcare issues, I’m not going to stay in that housing very long 

before I leave as well. So we comprehensively have to look at who 

that veteran is, what their needs are, and address them appropriately as quickly as possible. 

Mr. SHAYS. Thank you. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. I certainly agree that employment is critical. 

When we look at our individual grant applications and applications 

from an overall community to get HUD homeless funding, we have 

two primary performance measures. One is housing stability, obviously. We want people to be able to move into housing and stay 

there. And the second is employment, because we recognize they 

may not be eligible for other benefits or, frankly, more importantly, 

they want to get to work. 

And so we encourage that, and we support and fund job training, 

because it is critical. 

Mr. SHAYS. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Mr. Cleaver. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Can any of you 

give me the requested amount for veterans in the Fiscal Year 2008 

budget request? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. How much was requested? 

Mr. CLEAVER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. In the Department of Veterans Affairs budget, 

we provide most of the care through our healthcare system. We estimate about $1.6 billion for healthcare for homeless veterans. 

That’s about $100 million more than the previous year, and $287 

million in homeless-specific programs, which I believe was a $24 

million increase from last year. 

Mr. CLEAVER. What portion of it would go specifically for housing? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, we provide about $87 million to transitional housing providers, the 300-plus grantees who are operating 

24

transitional housing. So in that sense, that would be probably the 

more specific number. 

Mr. CLEAVER. But we don’t have—I mean, we can’t say, for example, that in the FY08 budget request, our goal is to provide 

housing for the homeless at a level of ‘‘X?’’ 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I’m not sure what the ‘‘X’’ is in— 

Mr. CLEAVER. Well, that’s what I’m asking for. Why? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. We would expect that we would, with the coming year’s budget, be able to provide transitional housing for 20,000 

homeless veterans in the grant and per diem program as well as 

probably 6,000 to 7,000 homeless veterans in residential treatment 

programs operated specifically by the VA. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Now the appropriators approved 7,500 vouchers 

last year. Did you support that, Mr. Johnston? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I don’t know that the Administration has taken 

a specific position on that appropriation. I have, in previous testimony before Congress, have been authorized to support additional 

vouchers for veterans underneath that program. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Does that mean you’re hoping that we can go higher than 7,500? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I didn’t say that, Mr.— 

Mr. CLEAVER. Well, you kind of said it. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. What I said is that when I— 

Mr. CLEAVER. I understand. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Before the Appropriations Committee came forward with their Act, I had spoken before authorizing committees 

before and had supported, on behalf of the Administration, additional vouchers specifically for homeless veterans. I did not have 

any specific number per se that had previously been approved. 

I can tell you that we hold community meetings that assessed 

what the need for that kind of housing is, and the community tells 

us we need more than 20,000 of those units. 

Mr. CLEAVER. So is it a stretch to assume that you and Mr. Johnston would support 20,000 vouchers? I’m not trying to start anything. I’m just trying to represent my constituents. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. The $75 million for the 7,500 vouchers that was 

inserted into the conference report is a funding level that exceeds 

HUD’s request. And— 

Mr. CLEAVER. I know it exceeds HUD’s request, which has been 

a problem we’ve had before, that HUD is not requesting more. And 

I’m not going to ask you whether or not you agree with the official 

request of HUD. Just like I’m not going to ask you any more 

whether or not you think we need 20,000 vouchers. I think that 

would not be nice of me to try to put you in a position— 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Thank you. 

Mr. CLEAVER. —of discomfort. And so I’m not going to ask you 

that. I think I have an answer. But my final question is, as you 

know, the subprime and secondary market crisis is just wreaking 

havoc all across the country, which means that there is no exemption to veterans. 

Is there anything that you would suggest we do, or that Mr. 

Green could perhaps add to his legislation, that would help us to 

deal with the veterans who are going to wake up when their reset 

goes sky high and find that they are homeless? 

25

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I’m not sure I can answer specifically about the 

subprime mortgage problem except that I do— 

Mr. CLEAVER. Well, I mean, with regard to veterans. 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I just received information yesterday at the 

meeting that Mr. Johnston and I attended from one of our Deputy 

Under Secretaries, and on the VA side, the VA home loan guarantee side, I can tell you that the numbers are very, very positive. 

The numbers of veterans who have potential foreclosure is way 

under that subprime number and the number of veterans who are 

in foreclosure is at historic lows. 

The problem is that obviously many veterans may not have used 

the VA home loan guarantee program and may still end up in that 

way. So I guess the— 

Mr. CLEAVER. That’s the whole point. That some of them have 

dipped into the subprime market trying to get approval of their 

mortgage. Is there anything that Mr. Green can add to his legislation to address that issue? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I’m not aware of anything. I’m not knowledgeable enough to answer that question 

Mr. CLEAVER. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Mr. Garrett. 

Mr. GARRETT. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you 

gentlemen for being here today and also for the work your Departments do. I think one of the most critically important issues that 

any member works on is services for veterans, so I appreciate what 

you do. 

Just to recap, Mr. Johnston, an earlier question was, are there 

any specific proposals that are coming down or out of the Department without a yes or a no, I would hope that your answer, if not 

specific to that point, is—and you need to tell me if I’m wrong with 

the assumption. I should never assume. That there is just a continual review, and Mr. Dougherty the same thing, that there is just 

a continual review of the situation on the ground with veterans, 

with veterans groups, with the housing situation to analyze it 

today, tomorrow, next week in perpetuity as far as whether we 

should be doing something, whether you should be coming back to 

us with additional requests or changes in the existing programs. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. That’s accurate. I certainly agree with you. And 

let me cite something that relates to the future. Just like this good 

committee, the Senate counterpart as well as HUD have proposed 

to greatly simplify HUD’s various homeless programs. In so doing, 

HUD has proposed not the same level of funding, but frankly, a 

large increase. If you look at the funding level that we had at HUD 

in 2001 versus 2008, it’s an increase of 55 percent. 

I think you’ll agree there are very few programs in the Federal 

Government where you have that kind of an increase at this time. 

Just between 2007 and 2008, the request made, which is the exact 

amount that’s in the conference report, would provide a lot of additional funds to better serve homeless persons, including homeless 

veterans. 

Mr. GARRETT. I don’t know if Mr. Dougherty wants to— 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. You’re absolutely correct. We look at this each 

and every year. We have continued to expand programs. We’ve targeted grant proposals to make sure that some historically underVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
26

served areas, tribal governments, and States and localities that 

have not had homeless-specific programs, are included. 

We’ve had a very consistent and significant increase both in the 

number of veterans that we’re seeing and serving and we think 

that’s working very well as our immediate past Secretary said, Secretary Nicholson, that when you’re showing you’re succeeding in 

doing this, that’s not the time to lift off the accelerator. That’s the 

time to go forward. And I think that’s the mode that we’re in, to 

do more. 

Mr. GARRETT. Okay. And in one of those areas, specifically where 

we may be going forward, and someone asked this question in part 

on HUD–VASH—correct me if I’m wrong. That’s the only dedicated 

voucher program aligned in that area. Is there anything that you’re 

looking at as far as the—maybe you talk with the various housing 

agencies, local housing agencies and the like that can work with 

them to increase the actual utilization by them of those voucher 

programs? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. I think one of the things that we can tell you, 

because we monitor every veteran who is in that permanent housing with case management, the original HUD–VASH Administration initiative that began many years ago, about half of those 

vouchers that were originally started for that purpose have gone 

away. The other half that has really come back to almost max the 

original number were because local public housing authorities came 

to the Department of Veterans Affairs and said we have Section 8 

vouchers. If you will provide specific case management to veterans, 

we’ll give a preference for veterans to get into that housing. 

Mr. GARRETT. Why did those other ones go away? 

Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well—I’m not the expert. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. As the tenant leaves the unit, that Section 8 goes 

back to the PHA. 

Mr. GARRETT. Okay. I see. Another interesting thing I learned, 

that’s why I come here, I learned from your testimony today, Mr. 

Wood, as well as far as the—well the various positions, Mr. Shays 

addressed it in some part—the economic status of the veterans in 

general. It’s sort of counterintuitive when you just come to these 

hearings, you don’t hear that side of the equation. You think it’s 

just a total negative, gloomy picture. And yet in fact if you can just 

reiterate some of them on the economic side, on the job employment side, and over homeownership rates, they’re at the level, or 

in certain cases, above the level. So, first of all, correct me if I’m 

wrong on that. And secondly, if the problem then is—is the problem then with just a specific targeted group? And if so, and I guess 

part of your answer is already is you’ve tried to define or identify 

causation of that targeted group. You talked about post-traumatic 

stress. Economic, of course, is one, but there has to be an underlying cause of that. Another factor which you didn’t raise, I just 

wonder is there a correlation between those individuals—we have 

a volunteer service at this point. Is there a correlation of the status 

of those individuals post being in the service and pre being in the 

service? In other words, we’re encouraging people maybe in certain 

economic status and their economic status continues afterwards, or 

what variables do you consider may be the cause? And that’s my 

last question. 

27

Chairwoman WATERS. I’m sorry. We have a vote on, and I’m 

going to try and get Ms. Moore in with her questions before we 

have to leave and dismiss this panel. I would ask the gentleman 

to respond in writing to Mr. Garrett’s question. 

Ms. Moore, would you like to try and get your questions in now? 

Ms. MOORE. Thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman. I have so 

many questions, so I’m going to have to sort of squeeze all of them 

in a short period of time. The GOE data seemed to indicate that 

we are serving homeless veterans disproportionately less than we 

are other homeless populations. And I certainly do understand that 

we don’t have enough vouchers to serve all of the homeless and we 

don’t want to necessarily pit homeless veterans against homeless 

families or other homeless individuals. However, I am very curious 

about the planning process at HUD where you invite communities 

to identify—to use the challenge data and to identify homeless veterans and then make it optional for those communities to provide 

veterans preferences. So I am curious as to whether or not any of 

you think, number one, that we might want to revisit the veterans 

preference scenario for housing, given the numbers of troops that 

will inevitably come back in greater numbers because of the incursions in Afghanistan and Iraq and of the multiple deployments. 

Also, I know that there are 39 exclusions for income for veterans. 

So we talk—we’ve heard over and over again from members and 

from the panel that often veterans have a higher income. And so 

there’s sort of a disconnect between why there are more homeless 

veterans if they have higher incomes. Have we ever considered that 

some of the recurring income that veterans receive, that portions 

of that ought to be excluded, too, particularly if there have been 

post-traumatic stress disorder diagnoses? 

The gentleman from the Veterans Affairs, if there were more assessments done. And thirdly, this flexibility that we give these 

housing authorities where they want to get substance abusers out 

of the house. You can’t visit your mother who lives in public housing if you’ve been convicted of anything. 

Do you think that that particular predilection of local housing 

authorities, public housing authorities, do not want people with 

substance abuse histories in their housing, would militate against 

those communities really serving the needs of our veterans? 

Sorry I had to squeeze it all in like that, but go for it. I guess 

I want to start with Mr. Johnston. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Okay. In terms of the preference, for years, as 

you know, instead of having Federal preferences, which we had 

many years ago, they are local preferences. And I think the reason 

that Congress and HUD thought that was a good idea was that 

there are so many different characteristics when you go from city 

to city that it gives communities much more flexibility to target the 

needs of their particular community. 

We do recognize that veterans are a needy population, and this 

summer, Assistant Secretary Cabrera, who administers the Section 

8 program, issued a letter to all of the executive directors of the 

public housing agencies urging them to consider establishing a 

local preference for veterans. So we’ll be getting some information 

later, once they’ve had some time to think that through and consider implementing to see what effect that will have. 

28

Ms. MOORE. If we saw, for example, like we see now, that there 

is a disproportionate number of homeless veterans, is that something we might want to do? Not offer that flexibility? 

Mr. JOHNSTON. I can certainly bring that question back. 

Ms. MOORE. Okay. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. I don’t administer the Section 8 program. 

Ms. MOORE. All right. Go on. I would like to hear a little bit 

about the exclusions—I mean, if you think we ought to look at excluding, particularly when veterans are disabled, if their recurring 

income are disability payments, certainly I think others here on the 

panel have pointed out that you have higher needs, that there are 

more expenses related to being disabled. You can’t just run out and 

mow your lawn if you’re disabled. You have to pay somebody. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Right. 

Ms. MOORE. You can’t just jump in your car and go somewhere. 

You have to get a cab. And these expenses mount up. Should we 

exclude more of their income for disabilities? And then also I want 

somebody to address the housing flexibility issue as it relates to 

substance abuse. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Well, in terms of excluding the income, it’s certainly a very good question, and let me take that back to Mr. 

Cabrera and— 

Ms. MOORE. Okay. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. —find out to what extent this is in the statute, 

to what extent it’s worked, and what exclusions there are currently 

with income. That’s a very good question. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. The Chair notes 

that some members may have additional questions for this panel 

which they may wish to submit in writing. Without objection, the 

hearing record will remain open for 30 days for members to submit 

written questions to these witnesses, and to place their responses 

in the record. 

Before dismissing this panel, I would like to ask that you respond to Ms. Moore’s questions that did not get addressed. Unfortunately, we have about 41⁄2 minutes left to get to the Floor, and 

I’m going to dismiss this panel so that you won’t sit here and wait, 

and we will convene the next panel when we return in about 30 

minutes. So, thank you very much for coming today. This panel is 

now dismissed. 

[Recess] 

Chairwoman WATERS. I’m very pleased to welcome our distinguished second panel. In particular, I would like to personally welcome to the panel Dwight Radcliff, chief executive officer of U.S. 

Vets, headquartered in my district, with whom I have worked 

closely and productively. I am pleased that today the other members of the subcommittee will benefit from Dwight’s comprehensive 

knowledge and insights in this area, as I have for some time. 

So, we won’t wait for other members, we’ll just get started. The 

floor is quite busy. The committees are quite busy, and we will now 

have our panel: Mr. George Basher, chair, National Coalition for 

Homeless Veterans; Ms. Nan Roman, president, National Alliance 

to End Homelessness, whom we welcome back before the subcommittee; Ms. Karen M. Dale, executive vice president of operations and strategic development, Volunteers of America; Ms. DeboVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
29

rah DeSantis, president and CEO, Corporation for Supportive 

Housing; and Mr. Rick Weidman—I have a card here somewhere 

for Mr. Weidman. He is director of government affairs for Vietnam 

Veterans of America. And we had thought that Sharon Hodge 

would be presenting today, so we’re very pleased that Mr. 

Weidman is able to be here. 

We will get started with the testimony, and I will start—oh, and 

also, Mr. Ron Chamrin, assistant director, National Economic Commission, The American Legion, Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Basher, will you start off the testimony for us, please? 

STATEMENT OF GEORGE BASHER, CHAIR, NATIONAL 

COALITION FOR HOMELESS VETERANS 

Mr. BASHER. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans appreciates the opportunity to testify 

before this committee. I’d to introduce myself. My name is George 

Basher, and I am chairman of the board of directors for the National Coalition for Homeless Vets. I also have the honor to serve 

as the chairman of the Veterans Affairs Advisory Committee for 

Homeless Vets, which you heard referred to earlier by Mr. Dougherty. And for the past 12 years, I had the pleasure to serve as the 

director of the New York State Division of Veterans Affairs. 

With respect to the National Coalition, NCHV was founded by a 

group of community-based homeless veteran service providers in 

1990. It’s a nonprofit organization. Our mission is ending homelessness among veterans by shaping public policy, promoting collaboration, and building the capacity of service providers. NCHV is the 

only national organization totally dedicated to helping end homelessness among America’s veterans. 

The founders were all former members of the military, and they 

were concerned that neither the public nor policymakers understood either the unique reasons for homelessness among veterans 

or appreciated the reality that so many veterans were overlooked 

and underserved during their period of personal crisis. In the years 

since its founding, NCHV’s membership has grown to over 280 organizations in 48 States and the District of Columbia and Guam. 

As a network, NCHV members provide the full continuum of care 

to homeless veterans and their families, including emergency shelter, food and clothing, recuperative and hospice care, addiction and 

mental health services, employment support, educational assistance, legal aid, and transitional and permanent housing. 

Now we heard testimony earlier from the previous panel about 

the degree of homelessness, and by anybody’s measure and anybody’s count, veterans today comprise roughly 20 to 25 percent of 

the total homeless population, recognizing that veterans make up 

about 11 percent of the population in the country, and today’s military is populated by less than 1 percent of the population of this 

Nation. 

So, clearly, veterans are overrepresented in the homeless population. We’ve heard a variety of the possible reasons and probable 

reasons discussed, whether it be issues of mental health, whether 

it be issues of post-traumatic stress, or issues of unemployment or 

unemployability, all of those factors have combined to make this 

population particularly vulnerable to homelessness. And with reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
30

spect to those who are at risk for homelessness, I would suggest 

to you that the percentages probably don’t look too much different. 

So having said that, you asked us to comment on the various programs that VA and HUD have to offer for veterans. And with respect to the Department of Veterans Affairs, I think that they do 

a tremendous job of clinical care for veterans. The VA spends over 

a quarter-of-a-billion dollars directly to support homeless programs, 

and their healthcare for homeless vets program is clearly the best 

in the Nation and probably does as much for about 100,000 vets 

who are homeless ever year as any organization possibly can. 

The problem with all of this is that the VA has a focus on transitional housing, and so far to date, the only permanent housing program that VA has any involvement in is the HUD–VASH program, 

which we’ve heard, again, considerable testimony on. The success 

of this program, I don’t think, can be underrated but the need to 

spread a program like this, I think, is something that needs to be 

attended to, and I believe, Mr. Green, you’ve done a very good job 

of attempting to make that happen. 

Other VA programs, whether it’s the domiciliary program or 

their compensated work therapy program or any of the other 

healthcare outpatient programs that the VA directly provides services for, are more than supplanted by the programs that the community-based providers represented by NCHV bring to the table. 

These are typically small reparations during transitional housing, 

averaging 20 to 40 beds. These are not large operations, but, again, 

their focus is primarily transitional. 

When you get to the HUD side, as Mr. Johnston pointed out, we 

have the Shelter Plus Care program, which is HUD’s most successful homeless program. While not specifically targeted for vets, it 

was designed to be modeled after the HUD–VASH program. 

One of the difficulties that we’ve had, and I can speak to this 

particularly in my role as State director in trying to connect people 

who are veterans with the various services that are available to 

them, is always trying to be able to make sure that those veterans 

who are in HUD programs are identified, screened for eligibility for 

potential compensation or pension benefits, and then had the 

wherewithal to find assistance to pursue those benefits. That has 

always been a difficulty for those of us involved in this effort, that 

linkage between VA services and whatever services HUD provided. 

The provision in both of those bills that we have a special assistant to link HUD and VA services, I think, is absolutely critical. 

There needs to be an understanding. Veterans access services just 

the same as every other citizen in this country, but the unique circumstances that made these veterans vulnerable can best be treated clinically by the VA, but some of those needs are better met by 

HUD when it comes to housing. So there has to be a way to make 

that crosswalk between the agencies and make sure that we don’t 

have gaps and that we don’t leave people out in the cold and 

unhoused. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Basher can be found on page 50 

of the appendix.] 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Nan Roman, president, National Alliance to End Homelessness. 

31

STATEMENT OF NAN ROMAN, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL 

ALLIANCE TO END HOMELESSNESS 

Ms. ROMAN. Thank you so much, Chairwoman Waters, for your 

leadership on the housing needs of the most vulnerable people. The 

Homelessness Research Institute of the National Alliance to End 

Homelessness has just issued a report using 2005 and 2006 VA, 

Census Bureau, and American Community Survey data to assess 

the housing situation of veterans. That report has been referenced 

here today. 

I can tell you that the report says that there are far too many 

homeless veterans. On any given night, one in four homeless people 

is a veteran. And in 2006, this meant that there were nearly 

200,000 veterans homeless on a given night. Veterans also make up 

a disproportionate share of homeless people. They represent 26 percent of homeless people, but only 11 percent of the adult civilian 

population. In addition, in 2005, we estimated that at least 44,000 

veterans were chronically homeless. 

Are there so many homeless veterans because veterans have 

more housing problems? We’ve learned that, no, generally speaking, veterans are doing very well with respect to housing. Only 

about half as many veteran renters have housing costs burdens as 

the general population, 4 percent versus 8 percent in the general 

population, and 80 percent of veterans are homeowners versus 69 

percent of the general population. 

We did, however, find that there is a group of veterans who rent 

housing and who have severe housing cost burdens. In 2005, that 

was 468,000 veterans who were severely rent burdened. Of those 

veterans, 87 percent were extremely low income. The following 

characteristics were also overrepresented in this group: disability, 

female sex, living alone, and older. This goes to the question of why 

it is that some veterans do better than other veterans with respect 

to housing. 

So what does this mean? It means that most veterans are well 

housed. That’s the good news. But around half-a-million are not, 

and this group tends to be poor, disabled, female, alone, and older. 

Further, 200,000 per night are homeless. Given the veterans’ housing data and what we know more generally about homelessness, we 

can deduce that veterans with disabilities are very vulnerable to 

homelessness. Veterans, then, may be homeless not only because 

they lack affordable housing, but because the services to support 

them in housing are lacking. What can be done about that? 

Currently, the only housing assistance that’s available to all veterans is for homeownership for higher-income people. There are 

some targeted VA homeless programs, but those fall far short of 

need. There are also general HHS and HUD homeless programs, 

again that don’t meet the need. So, basically, unless a veteran has 

the money to be a homeowner or is homeless, there’s nothing for 

them but to get in line with everybody else on the waiting list for 

public housing and Section 8. And we should be able to do better 

than that for veterans. 

We have several recommendations. One is to do a better job of 

helping people with housing before they leave the military. This is 

not so much to identify people who are going to be homeless as to 

catch people who are likely to have housing problems. Many people 

32

enter the military poor. They exit poor. And the people who are 

exiting poor, we could help with housing assistance. 

We could make sure that the VA has the resources to provide 

rapid re-housing and transitional housing to scale, so if they see 

housing problems, they have some ability to address that. Currently, they have very few resources or the ability to address housing problems. 

We can provide enough permanent supportive housing to address 

the needs of disabled veterans. A fast way to do that is through the 

HUD–VASH program. Other people are going to testify about the 

permanent supportive housing. We also support the Homes for Heroes Act and the Veterans Homelessness Prevention Act, assuming 

that there is money separately appropriated to support the housing 

vouchers in there, because we wouldn’t want veterans to compete 

with other people for the same pool of vouchers. 

These measures will do the job, but they are a piecemeal approach. A more straightforward approach would be to give low-income veterans a housing benefit, similar to Section 8, that they 

could use for renting or owning a home. Alternatively, such a benefit could be targeted to low-income, disabled veterans. I think that 

just providing a housing benefit to eligible veterans would be a less 

tortured way of getting to the same place. 

We’ve learned a lot about homeless veterans. We know that they 

do not become homeless immediately after discharge, but that difficulties may take years to emerge, although there’s some evidence 

that period is shortening, and that the veterans from the current 

conflict are showing up earlier in the system. We know that posttraumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injuries, and other factors of war make them vulnerable to increased poverty and to 

housing problems. And of course current veterans, we also know, 

have more of those problems. We know that housing and supportive housing are a solution to these problems. 

We have an opportunity before us, I think, to be bold about the 

solution to this. There’s a lot of public will to help these returning 

veterans. We can prevent veterans from becoming homeless. We 

can house those veterans who are already homeless, and we can 

ensure that all veterans, including those with low incomes, have 

stable, decent, and affordable housing. 

Thank you so much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Roman can be found on page 88 

of the appendix.] 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much, Ms. Roman. 

Ms. Karen M. Dale, executive vice president of operations and 

strategic development, Volunteers of America. 

STATEMENT OF KAREN M. DALE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT 

OF OPERATIONS AND STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT, VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA 

Ms. DALE. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Waters, and thank you 

for this opportunity to testify. Volunteers of America is a national 

nonprofit, faith-based organization dedicated to helping those in 

need rebuild their lives and reach their full potential. It is our firm 

belief that veterans deserve the highest investment of our resources to have them achieve their full potential. 

33

For 111 years, Volunteers of America has responded to community needs with compassion and consistency. In times of disaster, 

and in times of war, Volunteers of America has been there. When 

the United States entered both World War I and World War II, 

Volunteers of America focused its efforts on holding the homes, caring for children and housing for women, expanded and adapted 

services to support servicemen, as well as mothers engaged in defense work. So we have a long history of being very committed to 

our veterans. 

Fast forward to today. Volunteers of America worked in partnership with the Corporation for Supportive Housing, the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, and convened a cross-section of 

stakeholders to ensure that the dialogue remained alive and that 

we focused on how to deal with this emerging issue. 

The leadership dialogue resulted in the release of our joint report 

entitled, ‘‘Ending Homelessness Among Veterans Through Permanent Supportive Housing.’’ Volunteers of America also initiated a 

radio tour that reached out to millions to increase this dialogue and 

make the general public more aware. We also sounded an early 

alarm that the network of homeless services today is not prepared 

for the emergence of female veterans who by 2010 will account for 

10 percent of all veterans. 

It’s important that we understand the context for this dialogue 

when we talk about the types of services that are needed. It needs 

to be accessible. It needs to be a flexible array of comprehensive 

services, including mental health, substance abuse management 

and recovery, vocational and employment training, money management, case management, and life skills. All of these things in combination are what’s needed, built on the cornerstone of housing, 

permanent housing, not moving from shelters to transitional housing, but rather ensuring that someone has a safe place to call 

home. 

We have substantial experience and a commitment to an array 

of services that we know work as solutions in meeting the needs 

of veterans. We have 32 grant and per diem programs with eight 

more in development. We have 13 homeless veterans reintegration 

programs, two HUD permanent supportive housing programs, service centers, a unique health mobile service center, transitional 

housing, grants for chronically mentally ill and frail elderly, and a 

program for incarcerated veterans. 

And I mention this full array of services to say that each veteran’s needs are unique, and we can’t just talk about one type of 

program. We need to ensure that we provide them permanent 

housing and then a full array of services based on their unique 

needs. 

We have a few recommendations that are based on our experience serving this population. First, we believe that the grant and 

per diem program needs to be fully funded, and that the funding 

should always be evaluated to match the scale of the need that 

we’re expecting with the population to be served. 

Additionally, the per diem payment program should be revised to 

reflect current costs of providing needed housing and services, and 

looking at that in the context of both urban and rural issues, beVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:30 Feb 20, 2008 Jkt 040434 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\40434.TXT HFIN PsN: TERRIE
34

cause we know that there are differences in trying to serve the veterans in both places. 

There are complex barriers that we experience in serving the veterans, and we believe it’s important that all agencies work with the 

nonprofit providers who are delivering these services to ensure that 

there’s flexible funding and ways that we work together to provide 

solutions. 

This year for the first time, Congress included funding for addi- tional HUD–VASH vouchers in the amount of $75 million. And we 

want to reiterate our support for the recommendation that 20,000 

Section 8 vouchers for the HUD–VASH program be issued on an 

annual basis, making the program permanent. Again, we know 

that this is a solution that works. It simply needs to be taken to 

scale. 

Quickly, I want to illustrate for you a story that talks about how, 

in the voice of a veteran, our services have helped them. Walt, a 

veteran of the U.S. Army, had been living on the streets and homeless. He was unemployed, alcohol-dependent, without financial support, and suffering from PTSD. Walt says after living on the street, 

he was quite wary of what was going to happen at the Volunteers 

of America of Florida program. There, under a safe roof, he was 

provided with referrals and linkages, as staff encouraged him to 

take care of his medical and mental health treatment as he desperately needed to do. To this day, Walt remains alcohol-free, has 

graduated the 2-year program, and has his own apartment. Walt 

says the Volunteers of America of Florida program ‘‘quite simply 

saved my life.’’ 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Dale can be found on page 68 of 

the appendix.] 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. 

Now we will hear from Mr. Radcliff. 

STATEMENT OF DWIGHT RADCLIFF, CHIEF EXECUTIVE 

OFFICER, UNITED STATES VETERANS INITIATIVE 

Mr. RADCLIFF. Madam Chairwoman, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to testify on a subject that 

I am very passionate about, and have dedicated my life to eradicating, and that is homelessness among America’s veterans. 

The United States Veterans Initiative, also known as U.S. Vets, 

is a private nonprofit corporation established in 1992 to address 

the unmet needs of homeless veterans. Since its inaugural facility 

opened in 1993 in Inglewood, U.S. Vets has become a recognized 

leader in the field of service delivery to homeless veterans, the 

largest operator of homeless veteran programs in the country. 

The United States Veterans Initiative collaborates with various 

for-profit agencies, including Cantwell-Anderson and Century 

Housing for many of its projects developments. Last night, more 

than 2,100 formerly homeless veterans slept in our 12 facilities 

across the Nation. They’re receiving a variety of services according 

to their needs, whether it be educational, counseling for benefits, 

mental health issues, addictions treatment, employment assistance, 

or rental assistance for those veterans who are disabled. 

We’re helping them to regain the skills that will make them selfsufficient and will give them the sense of pride that goes along 

35

with a productive life. Since 1993, we expanded our operations to 

include: U.S. Vets Los Angeles, a 485-bed facility for homeless veterans; U.S. Vets Long Beach Villages at Cabrio, a 26-acre base closure project, the largest transitional housing facility for homeless 

veterans in the country; U.S. Vets Las Vegas, a 260-bed facility; 

U.S. Vets Texas, which operates 100-bed permanent housing facility and employment center at the DeGeorge Hotel, and a 300-bed 

housing complex component at Midtown Days Inn in Houston; U.S. 

Vets Arizona, which has an 80-bed facility in Phoenix, and a 58-

bed facility in Prescott; U.S. Vets Hawaii, a 210-bed facility in Honolulu; U.S. Vets Washington, D.C., a 51-bed facility here at the Old 

Soldier’s Home, at the Armed Forces Retirement Home; and U.S. 

Vets Riverside, Compton. As a result of our successful strategies to 

educate, counsel, and empower homeless veterans, the State of Hawaii recruited U.S. Vets to provide services to a family program, 

300-bed family program, a brand new family shelter in Hawaii. 

I do want to comment that 65 percent of the veterans we have 

served have made successful transitions, and we’ve served more 

than 17,000 veterans since 1993. Eleven hundred veterans get employment every year in our facilities, and we continue to maintain 

an 80 percent placement rate in employment. 

I want to talk about the need and the scale of need. The Homeless Research Institute released a report citing that numerous findings, the findings highlighted the need to provide veterans with 

proper housing and supportive services in order to prevent homelessness from occurring in the first place. 

I commend Nan and the group that sits here today for their services. The report also calculates to reduce chronic homelessness 

among veterans by half, permanent supportive housing needs to be 

increased by 25,000 units, and the number of housing vouchers targeted to veterans needs to be expanded to 20,000 units. Fannie 

Mae also released a Gallup Poll that found 24 percent of veterans 

have indicated that they have been concerned that they may not 

have a place to live. 

The recent congressional hearing on foreclosure prevention and 

intervention held by this House subcommittee cited that 148,147 

foreclosure filings in California, the proliferation of subprime interest-only adjustable rates, and other mortgage products have locked 

low-income individuals, including veterans, into unsustainable 

loans. Veterans represent a substantial number of the current foreclosure crisis. 

And according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, 

nationwide there are 6.2 million homes renting at prices affordable 

to the 9 million extremely low-income individuals, families and veterans. This indicates a shortage of 2.8 million units of housing 

throughout the country. Additionally, no congressional district has 

enough housing available to the extremely low income. 

I want to go on and just talk about the cost of doing nothing, because homeless individuals who have no regular place to stay use 

a variety of public systems in a very inefficient and costly way. Preventing a homeless episode or ensuring a speedy transition into 

stable permanent housing can result in significant cost savings. 

People who are homeless are more likely to access healthcare 

services, and according to a report in the New England Journal of 

36

Medicine, homeless people spend more than the average of 4 days 

longer per hospital visit than comparable non-homeless individuals. 

The cost is approximately $2,400 per hospitalization. 

Homelessness both causes and results from serious health issues, 

including addictive disorders and treating homeless people for 

drug— 

Chairwoman WATERS. Sorry. 

Mr. RADCLIFF. That’s okay. 

Chairwoman WATERS. You are way over your 5 minutes. 

Mr. RADCLIFF. Thank you. 

Chairwoman WATERS. I would like to move on to Ms. DeSantis. 

STATEMENT OF DEBORAH DeSANTIS, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CORPORATION FOR SUPPORTIVE 

HOUSING 

Ms. DESANTIS. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and members of 

the subcommittee. My name is Deborah DeSantis, and I am president and CEO of the Corporation for Supportive Housing. Thank 

you. We are grateful the committee is focusing on the housing 

needs of veterans and want to first thank Representative Green for 

introducing the Homes for Heroes Act and the Veterans Homelessness Prevention Act, which we support. 

Today I want to share with you what we know about homeless 

veterans and how permanent supportive housing addresses their 

needs. CSH has unique experience as a national organization that 

for the last 17 years has helped communities build permanent supportive housing to prevent and end homelessness, with particular 

success in serving people struggling with multiple challenges. 

Many homeless veterans who so often wrestle with substance use, 

mental health, and co-occurring disorders clearly fall into this 

group. 

Many of the observations and recommendations in my testimony 

today are informed by the lessons learned during a leadership dialogue which CSH convened to discuss the Federal policy landscape 

for homeless veterans. 

First, our observations. Without a permanent place to live and 

support system to help them address their underlying problems, 

most homeless veterans bounce from one emergency care system to 

the next, from streets to shelters to public and VA hospitals, to 

psychiatric institutions and detox centers and back to the streets 

endlessly. 

Unfortunately, too many veterans exiting VA transitional programs experience this cycling because of the lack of permanent 

housing. While this is a national tragedy, our organization believes 

chronic homelessness can be prevented and ended through the creation of supportive housing. Supportive housing, as we know, has 

proven an effective and cost-efficient innovation that integrates 

permanent housing with high quality support services. Studies of 

supportive housing indicate that 80 percent of individuals who 

enter stay housed. Use of detox, emergency rooms, and hospital 

rooms lessen, and we see an increase in earned income by 50 percent and employment by 40 percent. 

37

Some important considerations for designing services strategies 

within permanent supportive housing projects for homeless veterans include the following: 

It’s important to understand the impact of veterans’ military 

service and designing service programming that respects values 

and is responsive to the impact of those life experiences, including 

a strong emphasis on peer-to-peer support models. 

Understanding the prevalence of specific mental illnesses, such 

as post-traumatic stress disorder and rates of anti-social personality disorder, which has been found to 5 to 6 times higher among 

veterans than non-veterans. 

Facilitating access to veteran-specific public benefits. Many veterans, especially those who did not serve during wartime, are not 

aware of, or have not accessed, VA pension or healthcare benefits. 

In addition, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan highly utilize our 

National Guard soldiers, who may not be as geographically concentrated near existing veteran services facilities as active duty 

components. 

Our recommendations. Given what we know about the needs of 

homeless veterans and the success of permanent supportive housing, CHS offers the following recommendations: 

First, support the creation of additional permanent supportive 

housing. While I know it’s not the focus of today’s hearing, I would 

be remiss not to mention the McKinney-Vento Homelessness Assistance program and our support of the 30 percent set-aside as we 

see a benefit to homeless veterans. 

Second, to support the funding for additional HUD–VASH vouchers, which has been referred to today. We see that as one of the 

most effective tools for addressing this population. 

And third, to provide funding on a grant, not per diem, basis. It 

was the consensus of the participants in our leadership dialogue 

that it’s not optimal to fund the services in permanent supportive 

housing on a per diem basis. The recommendation is based on the 

difficulties veteran service providers face in underwriting day-today operating costs. We believe that by providing funding on a 

grant basis, veterans housing and service providers would have 

greater security in providing quality care. 

I thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for this opportunity to testify 

today. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. DeSantis can be found on page 

76 of the appendix.] 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Rick Weidman, director of government affairs, Vietnam Veterans of America. 

STATEMENT OF RICK WEIDMAN, DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT 

AFFAIRS, VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA 

Mr. WEIDMAN. Madam Chairwoman, thank you very much for 

the opportunity for VVA to add its voice to the support for Mr. 

Green’s legislation. I particularly want to commend Section 6, 

which would exempt pension and death and indemnity compensation for figuring income for going into public housing. It is something that has been needed for many years, and this would be an 

extraordinary step. 

38

Is there a need for more permanent low-income housing? The answer is yes. It has a tremendous impact on the ability to help veterans recover and make it back from the street. Let me just say 

that Vietnam Veterans of America, two things. One is that our 

founding principle is never again shall one generation of American 

veterans abandon another generation. And while we are focused on 

the needs of the young men and women coming home, we are also 

not going to abandon our own generation or those older than us 

who continue to have problems that have led them to the state of 

homelessness. 

There is no such thing as a homeless vet. There are only veterans whose problems have reached such a crisis proportion that 

they have ended up on the street. And basically, each and every 

one of them is a failure of the VA, and I might add, the Veterans 

Employment and Training Service, and of the Department of 

Labor. Employment is a key in a lot of this, and the supportive 

services that will enable people not only to get but to keep jobs. 

Workforce Investment Act predecessor, JTPA, in 1990, program 

year 1995, we looked up how many homeless veterans they served, 

and it was 260 nationwide out of all of the billions of dollars. In 

program year 2005, they’ve increased that to 400 veterans nationwide. And then we wonder why we can’t help veterans get jobs. 

The reason is that the monies that have been allocated by the Congress to the Department of Labor don’t get where they’re supposed 

to go. We still are waiting for regs for the Jobs for Veterans Act 

which was enacted in 2002 that would accord veterans priority of 

service at all federally funded employment and training programs. 

That is the one piece that is missing from the continuum of services that you’ve heard so much about today. 

Let me also mention that 20,000 is probably, for VASH–HUD 

certificates, are probably—is a low number. But we need to get to 

where it is in order for us not to be spending services—precious resources on services for folks who have no permanent place to live. 

So that everything that is happening during the day comes unraveled at the shelter that night that does not have a clean, sober, dry 

and supportive services atmosphere to it. 

And part of that mix out, once again, the key is employment. Because it is the flashpoint of the readjustment process which Vietnam Veterans of America has held for 29 years, is the ability to 

obtain and sustain meaningful employment at a decent living 

wage. In order to do that, you need a permanent domicile and way 

for employers when you leave a resume to get back to you. So the 

permanent domicile is in fact the crux of it. 

I would just remind the committee for the record that many of 

the housing programs that are on the books today started postWorld War II. And initially, they were designed primarily for veterans. That is true not only at the Federal level, but in many of 

the State-funded programs, as well. And over the years, veterans 

have been pushed from the center to the edge, and in many cases 

the epicenter, if you will, where it’s even harder for veterans to get 

in because they believe that the VA does all things for all veterans, 

and that is simply not the case. 

So the role of this committee in terms of breaking the chain of 

failure is absolutely essential. Once again, I want to commend the 

39

committee for addressing this. Chairwoman Waters, there are some 

people who are players who walk onto the field and by their very 

presence change the nature of the game. You did that 15 years ago 

in the House Veterans Affairs Committee, and you are doing it on 

this committee, and Vietnam Veterans of America salute you and 

commend you for your ongoing superior performance. It is prime 

time performance. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you so very much. 

Mr. Ron Chamrin. 

RONALD F. CHAMRIN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL 

ECONOMIC COMMISSION, THE AMERICAN LEGION 

Mr. CHAMRIN. Madam Chairwoman, and members of the subcommittee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to present the 

American Legion’s view on the housing needs of low-income veterans. The American Legion commends the subcommittee for addressing this important issue. 

My name is Ron Chamrin, and I am OIF veteran. Not unlike 

many of my other brethren, I was in my mid-twenties during my 

year-long combat deployment. When I came back from war, I lived 

in housing that severely rent-burdened me financially. And due to 

the GI Bill not paying anywhere close to the cost of college, I found 

myself in $50,000 debt to student loans. 

Since 2001, approximately 300,000 service members are entering 

the private sector each year. This large influx of veterans, some of 

whom have high-risk factors of becoming homeless, is unnerving. 

There are numerous estimates that there are nearly 200,000 veterans who are currently homeless at any point in time. The American Legion believes that one homeless veteran is one too many. 

The mistake of incorrectly failing to recognize the increase in 

homelessness amongst Vietnam veterans in the late 1970’s and 

early 1980’s cannot be made again. According to the Urban Institute report in relation to the 1980 spike in homelessness, some observers felt that the problem was a temporary consequence of the 

recession of 1981 and 1982 and would go away when the economy 

recovered. But here we are, 30 years later, debating whether assistance and prevention of homeless veterans is a part of the cost of 

war. I hope that our country does not make the same mistakes as 

we did to our Vietnam veterans. 

Combat veterans of OEF–OIF and the global war on terrorism 

are at high risk of becoming homeless, and some who are in need 

of assistance are already beginning to trickle into our Nation’s community-based veteran service providers. In order to prevent a national epidemic of homeless veterans in the upcoming years, measures must be taken to assist those veterans who are currently 

homeless. Steps must also be taken to prevent future homelessness 

of veterans and their families. 

The American Legion supports additional and mandatory funding of the HUD–VASH program. A decade ago, there were approximately 2,000 vouchers earmarked for veterans in need of permanent housing. Today, less than half that amount is available for 

distribution. At a time when the number of homeless veterans on 

any given night is approximately 200,000, the need for safe, affordable, and permanent housing is imperative. 

40

The HUD appropriations bill would provide $75 million for new 

vouchers for the HUD–VASH program. Funding, if enacted, should 

be sufficient to provide assistance for thousands of vouchers, affecting approximately upwards of 15,000 homeless veterans. The 

American Legion supports Congress’s efforts to assist homeless veterans, and passage of these appropriations will greatly assist veterans. We would be greatly disappointed if these appropriations are 

not enacted into law. 

I’ll speak briefly on one piece of legislation discussed today, H.R. 

4161, the Veterans Homelessness Prevention Act. The American 

Legion supports this bill. H.R. 4161 would authorize the Secretary 

of HUD, in coordination with the Secretary of the VA, to carry out 

a pilot program to prevent at-risk veterans and veteran families 

from falling into homelessness. In addition, the American Legion 

supports initiatives that will give preference to America’s veterans 

and their families in obtaining housing through the programs of 

HUD. 

I’d like to discuss the National Alliance to End Homelessness report. The American Legion concurs with the three major recommendations put forth in the report: Establish a risk-assessment 

process during the first 30 days of discharge and pilot a homelessness prevention program. Create permanent supportive housing options for veterans, and expand rental assistance for veterans. 

The report states that currently over 930,000 veterans pay more 

than 50 percent of their income toward housing, be it renting or 

owning a home. The 2006 American Community Survey conducted 

by the U.S. Census Bureau reports that the median monthly housing cost for all mortgage owners was $1,402. This is important, because the American Legion is very concerned with the ever-growing 

gap of housing expenses versus veterans’ income. The 2006 survey 

further states that the median gross income for veterans in the 

past 12 months is $34,000. Some quick math shows a gross income 

of veterans of only $2,800 a month. If a veteran were to safely only 

use 36 percent of an average monthly income, this would only allow 

them to pay $1,000 a month. However, this is $400 less than national median monthly mortgage costs for all Americans. Put simply, the average veteran cannot afford new housing within safe financial practices in today’s housing market. 

In conclusion, we are at a critical period in our Nation and the 

treatment of veterans. Funding the HUD–VASH program will 

greatly assist veterans. With 300,000 servicemembers entering the 

private sector each year, the availability of transitional housing 

must be increased. Veterans of all eras must be supported. Affordable housing, transition assistance, education, and employment are 

each a pillar of financial stability. They will prevent homelessness, 

afford veterans the ability to compete in the private sector, and 

allow this Nation’s veterans to contribute their military skills and 

education to the civilian sector. 

The American Legion looks forward to continue working with the 

subcommittee to assist our Nation’s homeless veterans and to prevent future homelessness. Madam Chairwoman, and members of 

the subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity. 

41

This concludes my testimony. I’d be happy to answer any question that you may have and provide comments on statements made 

earlier. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Chamrin can be found on page 

57 of the appendix.] 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. I’d like to thank 

this panel for the very, very informative testimony that you have 

shared with us today. We will now move to raising a few questions 

that can perhaps further instruct us as we give support to this important legislation that’s being presented by our colleague, Mr. 

Green. 

Let me just say, Mr. Weidman, your comments took me back to 

Sonny Montgomery when I served on the Veterans Affairs Committee. I don’t think Mr. Montgomery ever got ready for me, but 

I think he learned a lot. He learned a lot during those days. 

Having said that, I don’t know if I’m absolutely correct, but it 

seems that the Vietnam-era veterans were the veterans who have 

paid a terrific price and a lot of sacrifices and helped to teach the 

public policymakers about what had to be done for our returning 

veterans. It seems to me that homelessness, healthcare issues, all 

of these issues were brought to us in a real way by the Vietnamera veterans, and you have been in the leadership of getting public 

policymakers focused on what we could do. 

Having said that, as we look at homelessness now, I don’t have 

all of the data, and I heard some of the information given to us. 

I don’t know what percentage of Vietnam-era veterans is still out 

there, and whether or not they are disproportionate to the overall 

numbers of veterans that are out there. 

If it is true, as I seem to think it may be, that we have Vietnamera veterans who have been on the street for all of these years, 

does that not make a case for us really looking at what we could 

do about permanent housing? And if so, let me start by asking Ms. 

Roman, I think you mentioned, what kind of models should we be 

looking at for permanent housing for the homeless veterans? 

Ms. ROMAN. Well, for homeless veterans with disabilities, clearly 

permanent supportive housing is the proven solution, and we 

should be going to scale there. There obviously are veterans who 

don’t have such serious disabilities. One of the things that I 

thought was interesting in our veterans report was that with respect to renters with housing cost burdens, the people who had the 

highest rate of risk were actually older veterans. The Korean War 

and World War II veterans had a higher rate of rental cost burden 

than younger veterans, which was a little counterintuitive for us. 

We would have thought that the older veterans would have more 

protection. But the Vietnam veterans were by far the biggest group 

of people with rental costs burdens, and they probably are the largest homelessness group as well. 

I think a lot of people just need some housing subsidy. It’s an affordability issue. So of the 500,000 who are rent-burdened, there’s 

probably a significant number who just need rent assistance, and 

then people who are disabled probably need supportive housing 

with services attached to it. Not to say that people who need subsidy don’t also need services, but it doesn’t necessarily need to be 

linked to the housing. 

42

Chairwoman WATERS. Ms. DeSantis, would you continue that 

discussion about the models of permanent supportive housing and 

what seems to work best for veterans? I’m focused a little bit on 

the recent information that we have gotten about the Iraqi veterans. We just learned that there are 20,000 more brain-injured 

Iraqi veterans than we had been told about. So if we are looking 

at supportive housing, and we’re looking at disabilities and understanding them better, could you talk a little bit about the kind of 

models we too should be looking at? 

Ms. DESANTIS. Yes. First let me say I agree with Nan that we 

certainly do need more affordable housing. The one thing to remember about permanent supportive housing is that it’s not one 

type fits all. And so as you say, Chairwoman Waters, it’s important 

to note the special needs of the individuals that we’re looking to 

house. 

So some of the supportive housing that we might look to develop 

for this population, I think it’s important to remember that it’s not 

always the most effective to create housing that’s—created it in a 

way that it’s 100 percent serving only veterans, because certainly 

there is a percentage of this population that can and should be integrated into the larger community. 

I would also add to that, that while there are VA services to be 

accessed, what we do see is that many of the veterans don’t know 

what those services are, where those services are available to them, 

how to access them, and they’re remote from their geographic location. So I think it’s important that when we consider developing 

permanent supportive housing for this population, we also think 

about how those services should be identified in the communities 

that these individuals are going to be living. 

I also want to note that we would ask consideration to have the 

clean and sober rule for VA surplus properties removed. Certainly 

a percentage of this population is experiencing substance use issues 

and alcohol abuse. Having that rule applied to the VA surplus 

properties makes it very difficult to utilize treatments that address 

their substance issues in a way that’s going to, I think, solve some 

of their issues. And also knowing that the VA surplus properties 

are the most readily available properties to turn into supportive 

housing, I think that’s also an important consideration. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. And lastly, Mr. 

Radcliff, I’d like to know how the two Iraqi veterans who received 

some attention in our area, young men who came back from Iraq, 

they were homeless, you took them in over at U.S. Vet. I’d like to 

know how they are doing. And I’d like you, because you’ve been involved with transitional housing for the most part, how would you 

transition into more permanent supportive housing given you’ve 

been focused on helping to transition people and get them back into 

the workforce. You have supportive services, but the housing part 

of it is not permanent. 

Mr. RADCLIFF. That’s correct. Well, although we happen to have 

rental housing onsite that allows for veterans to stay for an unlimited time and access some of the groups and services and meals 

that are there, we do not have a ‘‘permanent housing’’—under 

HUD’s definition—model. 

43

We’ve seen struggles. The two veterans, Jason and Ryan, who 

were recently seen on CNN, are recently separated veterans who 

are homeless and showed up at our facilities. They are doing well. 

They are adjusting. They are attending PTSD groups. One of the 

things that’s difficult for them to do is to have time to decompress. 

I think coming back from fighting a war and then going right into 

the workforce is a key issue for them. So there’s no—we’ve kind of 

given them the opportunity in our transitional housing to really decompress and focus on career and education goals. 

I want to thank the Congressman for authoring the Homeless for 

Hero Act. We agree with Nan’s premonition that we should get 

housing vouchers to the veterans. Because oftentimes, even if we’re 

successful in getting these veterans employment, then they’re not 

eligible. And we have veterans who make $11 an hour, newly employed, coming back from Iraq, who are not eligible under HUD, 

and tax credit housing. They make too much money, so they are 

income ineligible. That is probably the most fragile population that 

the community has made an investment in that would benefit from 

some additional services while in permanent housing. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Thank you very much. Yes, Mr. Weidman? 

Mr. WEIDMAN. If I may add to that, prior to the late 1980’s—actually, it was in the 1990’s—there was no VA, VASH–HUD certificate. And there was a feeling on the part of some, that’s not our 

job. I’m talking about of the Veterans Affairs Committee and at the 

VA. 

Today, one thing that has changed since Vietnam, is when we 

came home from Vietnam, and you were in the VA hospital 

recuperating from physical wounds, you were in the VA hospital. 

But that is no longer true today. The overwhelming majority of the 

services are delivered outpatient. So what’s happening is the young 

people who move from Walter Reed or Bethesda or one of the other 

35 military hospitals around the country, are discharged from the 

military and they’re told to go and seek services when they go back 

to the VA, they have no way to get back and forth. 

And everything is predicated on a nuclear, intact family with a 

spouse who does not have to work and so can ferry that injured 

veteran back and forth to multiple appointments for ongoing, longterm chronic care treatment. That just simply doesn’t hold. And 

while we have brought this to the attention of the previous Secretary, who is now gone, and we had brought this to the attention 

repeatedly of the Under Secretary for Health, nobody is moving to 

address a new paradigm. And just as the forward-thinking folks 

like yourself, Madam Chairwoman, in a different committee led to 

creation of the VA–HUD certificates where VA got into the housing 

business because it was needed in order to have transitional housing to be able to treat people. 

So, moving into the permanent housing business helps get construction of permanent housing that is nearby, or in some cases on 

excess land of VA hospitals around the country, is something that 

we would urge you to consider in the future. Because there are 

going to be people who are going to need years of treatment, and 

they’re not going to be able to stay at Palo Alto. They’re going to 

go, as an example, back to Los Angeles. But how are they going 

to get back and forth, given the fact that many of them can’t drive, 

44

to medical treatments at the various VA hospitals in the Los Angeles basin? 

And we would suggest that it’s time for a paradigm and would 

encourage you to work with Chairman Filner and others on that 

committee to develop that new paradigm about how are you going 

to provide for that ongoing treatment for these severely wounded 

veterans who are discharged from the military and sent back to the 

VA. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Well, thank you very, very much. My 

members have been very patient with the time that I’ve taken, and 

with that, I’m going to go back to Mr. Green, the author of the legislation before us today, for his questions. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. And 

Mr. Weidman, am I pronouncing it correctly? 

Mr. WEIDMAN. ‘‘Weidman,’’ sir. 

Mr. GREEN. ‘‘Weidman.’’ Mr. Weidman, I wanted to say to you 

that you are eminently correct when you indicate that the Chair 

is an impact player. She really is. And not only is she an impact 

player, she walks softly but she carries a huge, persuasive cudgel. 

That’s a country boy’s way of saying club. 

[Laughter] 

Mr. GREEN. And she ain’t afraid to use it. And I say ‘‘ain’t’’ for 

emphasis, for the kids who may be watching. But, really, it is a 

blessing to have this wonderful lady as the chair of this committee, 

because she has the courage to take on some of these issues. And 

believe me, it takes some courage, notwithstanding what people are 

saying, we still have great work to do to get this done. 

And I have to say to myself, someone is going to say something is wrong with us if we can spend $14 million an hour on the war, 

$14 million an hour, and won’t spend $12.5 million a year for a 

pilot program, somebody has to say, something’s wrong with you. 

It really is time for us to take action, immediate action to do something about this problem. 

Your testimony, friends, has convinced me that this problem 

merits our immediate attention. I am so grateful that you took the 

time to come and share with us. 

Sir, you indicated to us that 20,000 vouchers is a low number. 

Does everyone agree? If you agree that 20,000 is a low number, 

raise your hand, please. 

[Show of hands] 

Mr. GREEN. Okay. And let the record reflect that all persons 

raised their hands. Twenty thousand is a low number. So, we have 

not decided to bankrupt the country to do this for 20,000 vouchers, 

$25 million over 2 years, given what we are spending. We can do 

this. 

One more question. You said also, sir, that the money is not 

going where it’s supposed to go. I don’t want to put anybody on the 

spot, but I do have to ask this question. If you agree that the money’s not going where it’s supposed to go, would you raise your hand, 

please. 

[Show of hands] 

Mr. GREEN. Okay. Leave your hands up a little longer there. 

Okay, now, if you did not raise your hand then, raise your hand 

now. 

45

[Laughter] 

Mr. GREEN. Let the record reflect that every person on this panel 

has indicated that the money is not going where it’s supposed to 

go. Now that’s our challenge. We have a challenge of getting the 

money where it’s supposed to go, and we have to make sure that 

the money benefits the people that it’s supposed to benefit when it 

gets there. 

One more question dealing with employment. Everybody seems 

to see this as the gravamen, if you will, of the problem; employment. Do we need to have some sort of program, if it doesn’t exist 

now, that specifically deals in a much more pervasive way, in a 

much broader fashion, with the employment issue presented when 

a person goes into the military, and maybe he’s in artillery, and he 

comes out of the military, and he can’t find a job in artillery? He 

has served his country well, and we are honored that he did. But 

there ought to be some means by which persons can make that 

transition in an orderly, systematic fashion. Tell me, do we have 

a program in place now that is pervasive enough to deal with the 

unemployment issues? If you think so, if you think not, would you 

kindly raise your hand? 

[Show of hands] 

Mr. GREEN. Okay. Lower your hands. You may lower your hands. 

You really want to vote on this one I see. Now if you did not raise 

your hand then, raise your hand now. Let the record reflect that 

all members of the panel raised their hands. 

You talked about a new paradigm, and my time is almost up. 

Would you be willing to visit with, any number of you, with my 

staff members? Oscar Ramirez is here. He’s my legislative director. 

I really am now moved to try to go beyond what we’re trying to do. 

I think this is needed now. You have caused me to have a broader 

vision of where we need to go, but I’m not sure that I understand 

all of the pieces of the puzzle, and I would dearly appreciate it if 

some of you would be willing to work with Mr. Ramirez so that we 

can look at this new paradigm. Veterans ought not to have to sleep 

in the streets of life in the richest country in the world. 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I yield back. 

Chairwoman WATERS. You’re so welcome. Mr. Cleaver? 

Mr. CLEAVER. Madam Chairwoman, thank you. Since all of the 

members of this panel agree with my colleague, Mr. Green, I don’t 

have a lot to say or ask. 

I would wonder if any of you has some statistics. Our colleague, 

Charles Rangel of New York, has introduced a bill more for impact 

than for an attempt to pass it. It is a bill to restore the draft. He 

did so because it is his belief, and I must add the belief of probably 

hundreds of thousands, if not millions of other Americans, that if 

you demographically look at the soldiers in Iraq, that they are lowincome people. Therefore, that—I mean, if you can take this further, we go to war easily when we have low-income people out in 

the trenches. But I’m not even going there. 

Where I want to go is, do any of you have any information about 

the demographics? Because if in fact Charlie Rangel is accurate, it 

means that the people who are coming home are not just veterans 

with problems, physical and mental, they are veterans who are 

poor with mental and physical problems. And so it seems to me 

46

that we might need to design—not only Mr. Green’s legislation. 

This problem is herculean, I think, and we may not be looking at 

it holistically. So in any of the work you’ve done, do you have any 

demographics that you could share. Ms. Roman, please. 

Ms. ROMAN. We did see that among the people with housing cost 

burdens, 87 percent were extremely low income. And that’s why we 

suggested that part of the problem really is just poverty, and people can’t be expected to get meaningful employment if they live in 

a shelter. One thing to consider in terms of going to scale really 

is some kind of housing benefit for veterans across the board, lowincome veterans or disabled low-income veterans, to just address 

this economic piece. The question of people with disabilities who 

need supportive housing is different. You know, affordability is an 

issue there, too, but in that case, sources linked to the housing are 

also needed. 

But, clearly, you’re correct that poverty is causing a lot of these 

problems with respect to housing. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Yes? 

Mr. WEIDMAN. If I may suggest, Mr. Cleaver, we know a number 

of things about the people who are serving today in OIF and OEF. 

One of those things is that 60 percent of them come from towns of 

25,000 or less. In other words, it’s the most rural army we’ve fielded since prior to World War I, probably since the Spanish-American 

War, because—and the reason for that is economic. 

In a lot of areas, in rural areas, in small towns, there aren’t a 

lot of options for employment. So what do people do? To supplement their income, they have joined the National Guard and the 

Reserves, and it’s an economic thing. Therefore, they get activated, 

and if they’re a young person, there is no place in many parts of 

the country, there’s no employment available in that part of Texas 

or that part of Iowa or whatever State, and therefore they join the 

military. 

And when they come out on the other end, the—employment in 

fact is the key, and there is no—the means available through the 

Workforce Investment Act, if we had a Secretary of Labor who 

would address it with discretionary funds, but there isn’t any Secretary of Labor that does address it with those billions in discretionary funds. So there is a means there, but there isn’t the will 

to do it. 

I would just add that some tools that are available for employment and for not going back to the economic circumstances that 

caused one to enlist either in the Guard and Reserve or in active 

duty in the first place, one of them is, thanks to Mr. Rangel’s leadership on Ways and Means, we now have the Worker Opportunity 

Tax Credit for any disabled veteran of any age that is $6,000 back 

to the employer of the first $12,000 paid. But nobody knows it. Nobody knows it. The American Legion, VVA, and VFW have done 

more to publicize this to employers working with the United States 

Chamber than the Department of Labor has. 

So, in addition to needing more tools, we need the political will 

to care about folks once they leave military service. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Yes. 

Mr. WEIDMAN. And because—instead of having people that once 

they get hurt or they’ve ended their term of service, that you throw 

47

them away like expended war materiel. These are United States 

citizens who voluntarily took that step forward, pledging life and 

limb in defense of the Constitution, and we can and must do better 

by these individuals. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Yes, sir, Mr. Chamrin. 

Mr. CHAMRIN. If I may, thank you, sir. We have testified numerous times before the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity. And our studies have shown 

that education leads to better employment, which can lead to financial stability. Now I can give you the demographic report, but off 

the top of my head, only 20 percent of enlisted members have a 

bachelor’s degree or higher. 

I have numbers here that the average median income for some- one who gets a degree, of all Americans, is $55,000 a year. There 

are currently 400,000 veterans who have served honorably in Iraq 

and Afghanistan who are losing earned education benefits just because they’re leaving the National Guard and Reserve. Now these 

are 400,000 honorably served veterans who are potentially being 

severely rent burdened because they are no longer going to have 

the means to go into college. They could end up similar to myself, 

$50,000 in debt for just college alone. And I have no credit card 

debt. The military definitely creates highly disciplined, educated, 

committed soldiers with integrity. They’re quality citizens. So by 

not supporting them in just plain old education is a travesty upon 

our Nation. And with numbers I think we said before, 60 percent 

of the workforce is going to be turned over by 2020. We need competent, educated people to replace these Federal employees and private employees, and veterans are those people. At least get them 

an education to be competitive in the workforce. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Thank you. 

Chairwoman WATERS. You’re certainly welcome. And I’d like to 

thank this panel. Listening to your testimony today while we are 

focused on housing, because this is the Subcommittee on Housing 

and Community Opportunity, I wish we could take this veterans 

issue and include employment and education so that we could bring 

it all together. But we are committed to working with the appropriate committees to do that. 

One last thing before we adjourn: There used to be a time when 

members of the African American community would advise their 

sons to go to the service, because they said, you know, you can get 

trained. You can get some discipline. You aren’t doing anything 

now, so go in there and you’ll be a better person coming out, and 

you’ll learn something and you’ll be able to get a job when you 

come out. What happened to those jobs and that training? Has Halliburton taken all of the training away from our soldiers and jobs 

that they could be doing? Is there any training going on at all when 

they go into the service? 

Mr. CHAMRIN. If I may, ma’am, there’s a huge problem with licensing and certification of military occupational specialties and 

the transfer of those skills to the civilian sector. And Rick and I 

have testified numerous, numerous times about this, is that less 

than 10 percent of all jobs in the military are actually transferrable 

to the civilian sector using the military licensing. So that’s something that could really assist the veterans, and it’s not going to cost 

48

a lot, at least have the DoD provide transferrable licensing and certification to the civilian sector. 

Mr. RADCLIFF. Another piece of that, and, you know, of the 

17,000 veterans we’ve served, all of them were poor and homeless. 

A key piece in that is that the job—there is no translator in the 

civilian world. And most employers are looking for employees. They 

don’t want to go through the whole translation period, even the 

work opportunity tax credits. A lot of these employers don’t want 

to take the time to have the burden of filling out that paperwork 

and getting the benefit of the work opportunity tax credit. So in the 

real world, it is, what it looks like is that we need to get services 

that are onsite, that are unique, that are not necessarily a part of 

just mainstream, because a lot of the WIA one-stop work source 

centers don’t see homeless veterans, don’t see necessarily low-income veterans. 

Chairwoman WATERS. Well, this has been so informative and so 

good for us. I thank you all for being here, and I’d like to note that 

some members may have additional questions for this panel which 

they wish to submit in writing. Without objection, the hearing 

record will remain open for 30 days for members to submit written 

questions to these witnesses, and to place their responses in the 

record. 

And before we adjourn, without objection, the written statement 

of the National Association of Realtors will be made a part of the 

record. Thank you. This committee is now adjourned and the panel 

is dismissed. This will be the first time in all of my hearings that 

I will ask you to remain down there for a few minutes so that we 

can take some pictures with you. Thank you very much. 

[Whereupon, at 1:42 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(49)

A P P E N D I X

December 5, 2007

50


40434.001
51


40434.002
52


40434.003
53


40434.004
54


40434.005
55


40434.006
56


40434.007
57


40434.008
58


40434.009
59


40434.010
60


40434.011
61


40434.012
62


40434.013
63


40434.014
64


40434.015
65


40434.016
66


40434.017
67


40434.018
68


40434.019
69


40434.020
70


40434.021
71


40434.022
72


40434.023
73


40434.024
74


40434.025
75


40434.026
76


40434.027
77


40434.028
78


40434.029
79


40434.030
80


40434.031
81


40434.032
82


40434.033
83


40434.034
84


40434.035
85


40434.036
86


40434.037
87


40434.038
88


40434.039
89


40434.040
90


40434.041
91


40434.042
92


40434.043
93


40434.044
94


40434.045
95


40434.046
96


40434.047
97


40434.048
98


40434.049
99


40434.050
100


40434.051
101


40434.052
102


40434.053
103


40434.054
104


40434.055
105


40434.056
106


40434.057
107


40434.058
108


40434.059
109


40434.060
110


40434.061
111


40434.062
112


40434.063
113


40434.064
114


40434.065
115


40434.066
116


40434.067
117


40434.068
118


40434.069
119


40434.070
120


40434.071
121


40434.072
122


40434.073