Woman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. The gentleman said there's a big difference as far as an increase in funding in this account from last year. The fact of the matter is that what was actually spent was not increased and will not be increased this year. We recaptured a great deal of money from accounts previously to fund our bill last year. So the funding level is actually the same as what it was last year. The bill funds the rental housing assistance at $21 million, which is the amount with the recapture from last year that was spent, and this amount is necessary to fund 18,000 existing long-term project-based rental assistance contracts. This will ensure that these units remain available for low-income families. The bill funding levels are not arbitrary, Madam Chairwoman. We have scrubbed these accounts. We've held hearings on them and made recommendations on what must be funded. Again, although it appears a sizeable increase, in fact, it is not because of the recapture we had from last year. I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and 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 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 Connecticut is recognized for 5 minutes.
I thank the gentleman. As we move forward to conference, we will work with the gentleman to ensure that any project ready for full funding grant agreements will receive funds under our conference allocation.





