I am proud to stand here today with my colleagues in support of S. 1481, the Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act of 2009. This is a reauthorization and improvement upon the existing section 811 supportive housing program. Passing this bill today would send the legislation to the President's desk. I think this is the third time we've had this bill before the House over the last 4 years. It would pave the way to provide thousands more affordable housing units each year across this country to low-income persons with physical and mental disabilities. Importantly, the bill before us today costs the same amount as the existing 811 program. It just makes some very important improvements to efficiently expand the use of these important dollars. That is why I want to first just thank all the people who have brought this bill before us today, Senators Menendez and Johanns in the Senate as well as the ranking member of the full committee in the Senate, Senator Dodd; here in the House, the chairman of the full committee, Representative Frank and Representatives Capito and Biggert for their tireless advocacy on the issue of supportive housing, as well as really hundreds of staff both on the inside of this building and those advocates who have worked on this issue for a number of years. And lastly to the Melville family, this bill is titled the Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker is advocating for the passage of the Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act.
Share
More from Chris Murphy
Now that court documents have confirmed what we knew to be true, we write to demand that you restore previously awarded funding that the Trump administration has weaponized in an attempt to punish perceived political enemies.
Can any of my Republican colleagues defend the president selling announcements from the White House for $100,000 a month, in the middle of a war?
The war might be continuing, not just because of incompetence, but because the president has found a way to make money.
The firm appears to have little relevant experience with the legal and practical challenges that children face, raising serious concerns about the firm’s ability to provide not just representation but adequate, zealous representation.





