Date: 2007-07-12
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. Id like to thank my friend. the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida for the time. and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Today. the -Housing Choice Voucher Program. more commonly known as section 8. helps provide housing assistance to around 2 million lowincome families and individuals each year. The program began in 1974. primarily as a projectbased rental assistance program. By the next decade. it had become evideht that the projectbased model was too costly and concentrated families in high poverty areas. thereby making it harder to break the cycle of poverty. In 1983. Congress stopped providing projectbased section 8 contracts and created vouchers as a replacement. The voucher program allows families With a voucher to find and lease a unit in the private sector. instead of being limited to certain section 8 housing complexes. Recipients pay a portion of their rent. based on their income. while the voucher -covers. the remaining portion of the rent. In 1998. the program consumed 42 percent of HUDs annual budget. By 2005. it had grown to over 62 percent of HUDs budget. If the growth in the program is not addressed and reformed. we could face a situation where deserving lowincome families would be unable to receive any assistance. The underlying bill makes a number of improvements to the section 8 program to reform and simplify regulations of local public housing agencieS. while preserving essential tenant protection. H.R. 1851 aims to simplify rent calculation and inspection requirements for section 8 vouchers. projectbased assistance and public housing. and to promote self sufficiency on the part of assisted families through work incentives and home ownership opportunities. This bill can make good changes to the section 8 voucher program. The funding allocation formula included in the bill codifies the formula change made in the continuing resolution. February 2007. It uses .the public housing agencies vouchers costs and utilization rates from the last 12 months. instead of the 2004 numbers for a quarter of that year. Under current law. HUD is required to recapture the amount in excess of each public housing agencys reserve limits. funds that. are left over after the renewal of vouchers. If the PHA does not use all the money that the government has authorized. then the government reallocates those funds to another PHA the following year. The community that Im honored to represent has lost millions of dollars to other public housing agencies under the change in law made by this Congress. The current funding formula neglects the coverage costs of litigation issues or weather damage. of living facilities which were financed by the excess funds. The managers amendment. Mr. Speaker. which will be debated later today. will allow public housing agencies to retain. to keep 12.5 percent of their reserve funds during the first year of the formula change. After the transition. PHAs will remain with 5 percent of their reserve funds in a given year. The managers amendment aims to somewhat compensate for losses faced by public housing agencies such as those in my community. I commend the Financial Services Committee. its chairman and ranking member. and all of its members. for working in a bipartisan manner to make improvements to the section 8 program. I look forward to the committees continued efforts to improve the program. and to addressing the concerns I have mentioned with the funding formula. Mr. Speaker. unlike the bipartisan nature with which and under which the Financial Services Committee has worked this bill. the.majority in the Rules Committee failed to live up to that same standard. There were 23 amendments submitted to the Rules Committee for consideration. The majority on the Rules Committee made only six amendments in order. Yes. half of them. a whopping three. were Republican amendments. but there were 12 Republican amendments that had been submitted. During consideration of this rule. the minority made attempts to make several other Republican amendments in order. but the majority blocked each amendment by party line vote. Thats quite a contrast to how the Financial Services Committee has worked. My colleague on the Rules Committee from Texas. Mr. SESSIONS. also offered an amendment to the rule that would have made this an open rule. Mr. Speaker. The majority on the Rules Committee blocked our efforts for an open rule. This is contrary to how the majority promised to run the House of Representatives. and it is most unfortunate. Mr. Speaker. I reserve the balance of my time.