I want to look at this aspect of it since, in the judgment of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey], the Department of Labor's directive does not preclude investment in ETI's, and since the bill of the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] does not preclude or prohibit or in any way challenge the investment in ETI's, why is there any need for an amendment?
Questioning the necessity of an amendment regarding investment in ETIs during a discussion on labor directives.
Share
More from Joseph Knollenberg
let me just say that one thing I don't quite understand about what is taking place here, but I want to get to the bottom of it. Having to provide a subsidy for empty units, and that is what you are doing, with a budget that only assumes…
I rise in support of this funding for housing counseling. This amendment recognizes the harsh realities that in many places across the country families face delinquencies in mortgage payments. And they're on a rapid rise. Michigan is one…
HOPE VI was intended to demolish 100,000 units of severely distressed public housing units, and the program has accomplished that goal. However, there is currently $80 million in unobligated funds going back as far as 10 years-plus. And…
every one of these projects relative to the gentleman's comments, must relate to the eligibility of the CDBG program. Every single one. We don't waive the requirements. In fact, to show how worthwhile we think these projects are, for the…
Other voices in this conversation
