Hearing on “Legislative Proposals to Preserve Public Housing”

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (CA-35), Chairwoman of the Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, delivered the following opening remarks during a hearing on preserving public housing:

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

I would like to thank Ranking Member Capito, and the other Members of the Committee on Financial Services for joining me today for this hearing on "Legislative Proposals to Preserve Public Housing."

The public housing program is facing a crisis. After years of chronic underfunding, many public housing units are in a state of disrepair. HUD estimates that the current backlog of deferred repairs amounts to $24.6 billion. This is why I fought to include $4 billion in the stimulus bill for public housing capital repairs. Unfortunately, given the massive amount of funding needed by the program, this funding, however essential, was only a drop in the bucket.

Perhaps in response to this funding crisis, some public housing agencies have decided to get out of the public housing business. Current Federal law provides three avenues for agencies to eliminate public housing: demolition, disposition, or conversion to vouchers. I am concerned about all of these actions; especially because there is no Federal law to require the one-for-one replacement of lost units.

Due to the lack of a one-for-one replacement requirement, over 200,000 public housing units have been permanently lost since 1995. The City of Atlanta has demolished all of its 25,000 public housing units. The San Diego Housing Commission has converted its entire stock of 1,366 public housing units to tenant-based vouchers. And I am hearing more and more reports of public housing agencies wanting to leave the program and serve families with vouchers.

I am concerned about the use of vouchers to replace public housing for several reasons. First, public housing is more effective than vouchers at serving low-income families in areas with a limited supply of affordable housing, low participation rates in the voucher program, and high rates of gentrification.

Second, public housing serves a population of people who cannot be served well with vouchers. Public housing is generally home to the "hard-to-house"—families that have certain challenges that prevent them from renting a unit in the private rental market. For these people, public housing is their housing of last resort.

Finally, public housing is always there. There are always ebbs and flows in the private rental market, which is why we cannot rely entirely on it to serve our most vulnerable populations.

This is why Chairman Frank and I have drafted legislation to preserve our public housing stock. My draft bill, the "Public Housing One-for-One Replacement and Tenant Protection Act" would require the one-for-one replacement of all demolished, disposed or converted public housing units and provide essential protections for tenants in these properties. Mr. Frank's draft bill the "Public Housing Preservation and Rehabilitation Act" would provide public housing agencies with the financial tools they need to achieve one-for-one replacement and repair units before they are too far gone. Both of these proposals are long overdue.

The Administration has its own proposal to preserve public housing, which will be the focus of a separate hearing next month. I am pleased that we have an Administration that is taking the crisis in public housing seriously and I look forward to working with them on preserving this valuable resource.

I am eager to hear the testimony of our witnesses today and I would now like to recognize our Subcommittee's Ranking Member to make an opening statement.

###