I think we all know in section 8 there are reforms that are needed. This amendment does nothing to those reforms, and it should be to the authorizing Financial Services Committee to initiate the reform so that, in fact, we can change it, make it work better, and do the right thing for the people in the system. But this is just not the way to approach it. We have worked in this bill to cut all unnecessary spending in HUD's programs. We provided funds to continue assistance to the 2.2 million families while cutting administrative fees by $150 million to $1.35 billion. It also would cut the housing assistance for homeless veterans program, which we need to give those veterans the kind of services that they desperately need. I agree with the gentleman from Ohio that reforms need to be done to the program. This is not the place to do those reforms, nor is he even proposing any reforms to the program, rather than just slashing important programs for people. And I don't want to be the one to have to pick and choose who is going to lose their house, their place to live under this amendment. So for those reasons, Mr. Chairman, I would oppose the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.
Share
More from Tom Latham
I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment…
I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment. The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes. {time} 2130
I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment. The CHAIR. A point of order is reserved. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 minutes.
I am in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. As you know, one of the very important functions of this committee is oversight--ensuring agencies under our purview are effectively and efficiently managed. The bill provides the Amtrak OIG…





