On the recordMay 9, 1996
this very carefully drawn recommit says, if a majority of your income comes from work, you will get the same cap that welfare recipients get. We will be creating, if we reject this, precisely the disincentive my colleagues said they did not want. Remember, under this recommit there is no floor. If a housing authority does not want to go up to 30 percent, it does not have to. So the gentleman from New York's argument comes down to this: If you tell a housing authority it cannot charge a working person more than 30 percent of income, they will wind up paying more rent than if you tell the housing authority they can charge an unlimited amount of income. That is the difference. We are saying, if you are working, 30 percent is the maximum. There is no minimum. It is whatever the housing authority wants to set. The gentleman from New York says, no, we must protect these working people. Let us let the housing authority charge them whatever they want. What we will get is the people on welfare will be protected by a 30-percent cap, and people who are working will not be protected. Steve Forbes, where are you when we need you to make rational housing policy? Why do my colleagues want to say that working people will be treated not only in dollar amounts more but qualitatively more? This amendment does what the gentleman may have set out to do. And it is true, housing authorities will tell you, no, we need the money.…
Source
govinfo.gov




