Mr. Chairman, again, the argument is between local control and community control and continuing to have a Washington-based, one-size-fits-all solution for every community in the Nation. The other side of the aisle continues to argue that every community in the Nation ought to live under the same rules, regardless of whether that means moving to the lowest common denominator, regardless of individual characteristics of communities throughout our Nation, regardless of the quality of the neighborhoods and the quality of the life of the people that are impacted. We are saying in this bill, Mr. Chairman, that 50 percent or half of the vouchers and certificates that are available most go to the poorest of the poor, those below 60 percent of median income. If a housing authority wants to give 100 percent of their vouchers and certificates to people below 30 percent or below 20 percent or with no income at all, they can do it. There is no prohibition to that. What we are saying is that housing authorities need to have flexibility.
Rick Lazio: “Mr. Chairman, again, the argument is between local control and community control and continuing to have a…”
Editor's note · Context
Debating local control versus federal standards in housing policy.
Share
More from Rick Lazio
Primarily, really, it's an opportunity, for Congress, to make a statement, about a standard, a minimal standard, of ethics, and honesty, and virtue.
Tribal governments and housing authorities should also have the ability and responsibility to strategically plan their own communities' development, focusing on the long-term health of the community and the results of their work, not over…
His strength right now is his strength. It is the fact that tough talk equates for many voters to strength. And they are looking for somebody to help make them safe.
It's one thing to say we want to pause on Syrian immigrants, and it's another to say all Muslims ought to be kept out of the country.





