Congresswoman Waters Rejects the Bush Administration's Radical Section 8 Housing Block Grant Proposal

Los Angeles, CA - Today, Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35) sharply criticized the Bush Administration's Section 8 housing block grant proposal (the so-called "Flexible Voucher Program"), and the Administration's decision to propose funding for Section 8 housing that is $1.7 billion below the level needed simply to ensure that all authorized Section 8 housing vouchers are renewed.

"Section 8 housing vouchers currently assist two million low-income households, most of them low-income working families, elderly people, or people with disabilities. Yet these two million families represent only a small percentage of those persons who are eligible and who need a housing voucher. As everyone knows, in Los Angeles and in communities throughout America, there are huge waiting lists for housing vouchers. Only one in four low-income families eligible for a housing voucher currently receives any type of federal housing assistance. At a time when we need to be moving forward and figuring out how to get more housing assistance to those who need it most, the Administration's response is to take a huge step backward," said Congresswoman Waters.

"The grossly inadequate funding level proposed by the Bush Administration will not even allow the number of vouchers authorized in the last fiscal year to be maintained. This will leave housing authorities with three basic options (or some combination thereof) as to how to respond: Housing authorities can choose to reduce the number of persons served by decreasing the number of housing vouchers that they fund; they can increase the minimum rent that they require tenants to pay thereby reducing the assistance that they provide to tenants; or they can reduce the assistance that they provide by issuing fewer vouchers to those with the lowest incomes and issuing more vouchers to those with lesser needs."

"Each of these options is completely unacceptable, and further evidence of the Administration's total indifference to the needs of low-income renters. Without the rental assistance that vouchers provide, many of these households will be forced to return to a life of choosing between paying for food, child care, and health care, and paying for rent. Others no longer will be able to afford their current apartments and will be forced to live in overcrowded or substandard housing, or even into homelessness."

"The Administration should continue to honor our country's longstanding commitment to limiting the tenant rents of those with Section 8 vouchers to 30% of their net income for a fair market rental in their community, and not seek to put its budget shortfall on the backs of the poor. Nor should the Administration be permitted to address its Section 8 funding shortfall by eliminating the current "extremely low-income" targeting requirement that ensures that 75% of all new vouchers go to families with incomes below 30% of local area median income."

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculates that the funding level proposed by the Bush Administration would result in 250,000 fewer vouchers being funded if housing authorities choose to maintain the current level of subsidy for those vouchers that they do maintain. If housing authorities were to choose instead to continue maintaining the same number of vouchers as are currently authorized, nationally, the average Section 8 tenant's rent would have to rise by an average of about $850 per year.

"Here in Los Angeles, the City Housing Authority would have to issue 5,336 fewer vouchers and the County Housing Authority would have to issue 2,457 fewer vouchers if they chose to make up the funding shortfall by reducing the number of vouchers that they fund. If they issued the same number of vouchers, the City of Los Angeles would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $933 per year, and the County Housing Authority would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $977 per year in order to absorb the impact of the Bush Administration's proposed funding level."

If the Administration's block grant proposal is enacted, the grim picture for 2005 is likely to get considerably worse in succeeding years as public housing authorities are forced to make even deeper cuts. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that under the funding levels in the Bush Administration's budget, Section 8 expenditures in 2009, would fall $4.6 billion below the amount needed to maintain the level of service that the program currently provides.

If this cut were implemented by reducing the number of families served, state and local housing agencies would have to eliminate about 600,000 vouchers by 2009; this amounts to 30 percent of the number of vouchers now in use. If the cut were carried out by raising the rents of voucher tenants, the average tenant family would face a rent increase of about $2,000 per year by 2009. In 2009, the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority would lose 12,806 vouchers and the County Housing Authority would lose 5,898 vouchers. If the Housing Authorities chose instead to raise rents, the City of Los Angeles would be required to raise rents by $2,427 and the County would have to raise rents by $2,542.

"There also are 1500 prospective tenants in the City of Los Angeles who held vouchers but had not yet executed rental agreements whose vouchers have been canceled by the City Housing Authority, in part because the Housing Authority is said to have "overleased" by inadvertently issuing more than its authorized number of vouchers. There is nothing to suggest that there was intentional overleasing. The City Housing Authority was simply attempting in good faith to ensure that it would use all of its authorized vouchers."

"In these circumstances, I believe that it is wrong to penalize the Authority. It certainly is wrong to penalize these innocent families who thought that they had a funded housing voucher that they could use as soon as they had signed a lease. These families have waited many years for their turn to receive a housing voucher. The Bush Administration should be allowing the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority to use its reserves and HUD should be taking whatever steps are required to ensure that these families' housing vouchers are honored."

"The Bush Administration needs to go back to the drawing board. The "cure" that it is proposing to the Section 8 voucher program is far worse than any "disease" that the Administration is claiming. The Section 8 housing program is an excellent program that is not in any sort of a crisis. It simply needs to be funded properly. An Administration that can spend $150 billion on the war in Iraq and forego hundreds of billions more in revenue in order to fund the tax cuts that it has implemented surely can find the funds and the will to fund housing vouchers adequately. I will continue to insist that it do so." Congresswoman Waters Rejects the Bush Administration's Radical Section 8 Housing Block Grant Proposal
Calls for Full Funding of All Authorized Section 8 Housing Vouchers Including Those for City of Los Angeles Prospective Tenants Who Had Not Yet Entered Into Rental Contracts
Los Angeles, CA - Today, Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35) sharply criticized the Bush Administration's Section 8 housing block grant proposal (the so-called "Flexible Voucher Program"), and the Administration's decision to propose funding for Section 8 housing that is $1.7 billion below the level needed simply to ensure that all authorized Section 8 housing vouchers are renewed.

"Section 8 housing vouchers currently assist two million low-income households, most of them low-income working families, elderly people, or people with disabilities. Yet these two million families represent only a small percentage of those persons who are eligible and who need a housing voucher. As everyone knows, in Los Angeles and in communities throughout America, there are huge waiting lists for housing vouchers. Only one in four low-income families eligible for a housing voucher currently receives any type of federal housing assistance. At a time when we need to be moving forward and figuring out how to get more housing assistance to those who need it most, the Administration's response is to take a huge step backward," said Congresswoman Waters.

"The grossly inadequate funding level proposed by the Bush Administration will not even allow the number of vouchers authorized in the last fiscal year to be maintained. This will leave housing authorities with three basic options (or some combination thereof) as to how to respond: Housing authorities can choose to reduce the number of persons served by decreasing the number of housing vouchers that they fund; they can increase the minimum rent that they require tenants to pay thereby reducing the assistance that they provide to tenants; or they can reduce the assistance that they provide by issuing fewer vouchers to those with the lowest incomes and issuing more vouchers to those with lesser needs."

"Each of these options is completely unacceptable, and further evidence of the Administration's total indifference to the needs of low-income renters. Without the rental assistance that vouchers provide, many of these households will be forced to return to a life of choosing between paying for food, child care, and health care, and paying for rent. Others no longer will be able to afford their current apartments and will be forced to live in overcrowded or substandard housing, or even into homelessness."

"The Administration should continue to honor our country's longstanding commitment to limiting the tenant rents of those with Section 8 vouchers to 30% of their net income for a fair market rental in their community, and not seek to put its budget shortfall on the backs of the poor. Nor should the Administration be permitted to address its Section 8 funding shortfall by eliminating the current "extremely low-income" targeting requirement that ensures that 75% of all new vouchers go to families with incomes below 30% of local area median income."

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculates that the funding level proposed by the Bush Administration would result in 250,000 fewer vouchers being funded if housing authorities choose to maintain the current level of subsidy for those vouchers that they do maintain. If housing authorities were to choose instead to continue maintaining the same number of vouchers as are currently authorized, nationally, the average Section 8 tenant's rent would have to rise by an average of about $850 per year.

"Here in Los Angeles, the City Housing Authority would have to issue 5,336 fewer vouchers and the County Housing Authority would have to issue 2,457 fewer vouchers if they chose to make up the funding shortfall by reducing the number of vouchers that they fund. If they issued the same number of vouchers, the City of Los Angeles would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $933 per year, and the County Housing Authority would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $977 per year in order to absorb the impact of the Bush Administration's proposed funding level."

If the Administration's block grant proposal is enacted, the grim picture for 2005 is likely to get considerably worse in succeeding years as public housing authorities are forced to make even deeper cuts. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that under the funding levels in the Bush Administration's budget, Section 8 expenditures in 2009, would fall $4.6 billion below the amount needed to maintain the level of service that the program currently provides.

If this cut were implemented by reducing the number of families served, state and local housing agencies would have to eliminate about 600,000 vouchers by 2009; this amounts to 30 percent of the number of vouchers now in use. If the cut were carried out by raising the rents of voucher tenants, the average tenant family would face a rent increase of about $2,000 per year by 2009. In 2009, the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority would lose 12,806 vouchers and the County Housing Authority would lose 5,898 vouchers. If the Housing Authorities chose instead to raise rents, the City of Los Angeles would be required to raise rents by $2,427 and the County would have to raise rents by $2,542.

"There also are 1500 prospective tenants in the City of Los Angeles who held vouchers but had not yet executed rental agreements whose vouchers have been canceled by the City Housing Authority, in part because the Housing Authority is said to have "overleased" by inadvertently issuing more than its authorized number of vouchers. There is nothing to suggest that there was intentional overleasing. The City Housing Authority was simply attempting in good faith to ensure that it would use all of its authorized vouchers."

"In these circumstances, I believe that it is wrong to penalize the Authority. It certainly is wrong to penalize these innocent families who thought that they had a funded housing voucher that they could use as soon as they had signed a lease. These families have waited many years for their turn to receive a housing voucher. The Bush Administration should be allowing the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority to use its reserves and HUD should be taking whatever steps are required to ensure that these families' housing vouchers are honored."

"The Bush Administration needs to go back to the drawing board. The "cure" that it is proposing to the Section 8 voucher program is far worse than any "disease" that the Administration is claiming. The Section 8 housing program is an excellent program that is not in any sort of a crisis. It simply needs to be funded properly. An Administration that can spend $150 billion on the war in Iraq and forego hundreds of billions more in revenue in order to fund the tax cuts that it has implemented surely can find the funds and the will to fund housing vouchers adequately. I will continue to insist that it do so." Congresswoman Waters Rejects the Bush Administration's Radical Section 8 Housing Block Grant Proposal
Calls for Full Funding of All Authorized Section 8 Housing Vouchers Including Those for City of Los Angeles Prospective Tenants Who Had Not Yet Entered Into Rental Contracts
Los Angeles, CA - Today, Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35) sharply criticized the Bush Administration's Section 8 housing block grant proposal (the so-called "Flexible Voucher Program"), and the Administration's decision to propose funding for Section 8 housing that is $1.7 billion below the level needed simply to ensure that all authorized Section 8 housing vouchers are renewed.

"Section 8 housing vouchers currently assist two million low-income households, most of them low-income working families, elderly people, or people with disabilities. Yet these two million families represent only a small percentage of those persons who are eligible and who need a housing voucher. As everyone knows, in Los Angeles and in communities throughout America, there are huge waiting lists for housing vouchers. Only one in four low-income families eligible for a housing voucher currently receives any type of federal housing assistance. At a time when we need to be moving forward and figuring out how to get more housing assistance to those who need it most, the Administration's response is to take a huge step backward," said Congresswoman Waters.

"The grossly inadequate funding level proposed by the Bush Administration will not even allow the number of vouchers authorized in the last fiscal year to be maintained. This will leave housing authorities with three basic options (or some combination thereof) as to how to respond: Housing authorities can choose to reduce the number of persons served by decreasing the number of housing vouchers that they fund; they can increase the minimum rent that they require tenants to pay thereby reducing the assistance that they provide to tenants; or they can reduce the assistance that they provide by issuing fewer vouchers to those with the lowest incomes and issuing more vouchers to those with lesser needs."

"Each of these options is completely unacceptable, and further evidence of the Administration's total indifference to the needs of low-income renters. Without the rental assistance that vouchers provide, many of these households will be forced to return to a life of choosing between paying for food, child care, and health care, and paying for rent. Others no longer will be able to afford their current apartments and will be forced to live in overcrowded or substandard housing, or even into homelessness."

"The Administration should continue to honor our country's longstanding commitment to limiting the tenant rents of those with Section 8 vouchers to 30% of their net income for a fair market rental in their community, and not seek to put its budget shortfall on the backs of the poor. Nor should the Administration be permitted to address its Section 8 funding shortfall by eliminating the current "extremely low-income" targeting requirement that ensures that 75% of all new vouchers go to families with incomes below 30% of local area median income."

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculates that the funding level proposed by the Bush Administration would result in 250,000 fewer vouchers being funded if housing authorities choose to maintain the current level of subsidy for those vouchers that they do maintain. If housing authorities were to choose instead to continue maintaining the same number of vouchers as are currently authorized, nationally, the average Section 8 tenant's rent would have to rise by an average of about $850 per year.

"Here in Los Angeles, the City Housing Authority would have to issue 5,336 fewer vouchers and the County Housing Authority would have to issue 2,457 fewer vouchers if they chose to make up the funding shortfall by reducing the number of vouchers that they fund. If they issued the same number of vouchers, the City of Los Angeles would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $933 per year, and the County Housing Authority would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $977 per year in order to absorb the impact of the Bush Administration's proposed funding level."

If the Administration's block grant proposal is enacted, the grim picture for 2005 is likely to get considerably worse in succeeding years as public housing authorities are forced to make even deeper cuts. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that under the funding levels in the Bush Administration's budget, Section 8 expenditures in 2009, would fall $4.6 billion below the amount needed to maintain the level of service that the program currently provides.

If this cut were implemented by reducing the number of families served, state and local housing agencies would have to eliminate about 600,000 vouchers by 2009; this amounts to 30 percent of the number of vouchers now in use. If the cut were carried out by raising the rents of voucher tenants, the average tenant family would face a rent increase of about $2,000 per year by 2009. In 2009, the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority would lose 12,806 vouchers and the County Housing Authority would lose 5,898 vouchers. If the Housing Authorities chose instead to raise rents, the City of Los Angeles would be required to raise rents by $2,427 and the County would have to raise rents by $2,542.

"There also are 1500 prospective tenants in the City of Los Angeles who held vouchers but had not yet executed rental agreements whose vouchers have been canceled by the City Housing Authority, in part because the Housing Authority is said to have "overleased" by inadvertently issuing more than its authorized number of vouchers. There is nothing to suggest that there was intentional overleasing. The City Housing Authority was simply attempting in good faith to ensure that it would use all of its authorized vouchers."

"In these circumstances, I believe that it is wrong to penalize the Authority. It certainly is wrong to penalize these innocent families who thought that they had a funded housing voucher that they could use as soon as they had signed a lease. These families have waited many years for their turn to receive a housing voucher. The Bush Administration should be allowing the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority to use its reserves and HUD should be taking whatever steps are required to ensure that these families' housing vouchers are honored."

"The Bush Administration needs to go back to the drawing board. The "cure" that it is proposing to the Section 8 voucher program is far worse than any "disease" that the Administration is claiming. The Section 8 housing program is an excellent program that is not in any sort of a crisis. It simply needs to be funded properly. An Administration that can spend $150 billion on the war in Iraq and forego hundreds of billions more in revenue in order to fund the tax cuts that it has implemented surely can find the funds and the will to fund housing vouchers adequately. I will continue to insist that it do so." Congresswoman Waters Rejects the Bush Administration's Radical Section 8 Housing Block Grant Proposal
Calls for Full Funding of All Authorized Section 8 Housing Vouchers Including Those for City of Los Angeles Prospective Tenants Who Had Not Yet Entered Into Rental Contracts
Los Angeles, CA - Today, Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35) sharply criticized the Bush Administration's Section 8 housing block grant proposal (the so-called "Flexible Voucher Program"), and the Administration's decision to propose funding for Section 8 housing that is $1.7 billion below the level needed simply to ensure that all authorized Section 8 housing vouchers are renewed.

"Section 8 housing vouchers currently assist two million low-income households, most of them low-income working families, elderly people, or people with disabilities. Yet these two million families represent only a small percentage of those persons who are eligible and who need a housing voucher. As everyone knows, in Los Angeles and in communities throughout America, there are huge waiting lists for housing vouchers. Only one in four low-income families eligible for a housing voucher currently receives any type of federal housing assistance. At a time when we need to be moving forward and figuring out how to get more housing assistance to those who need it most, the Administration's response is to take a huge step backward," said Congresswoman Waters.

"The grossly inadequate funding level proposed by the Bush Administration will not even allow the number of vouchers authorized in the last fiscal year to be maintained. This will leave housing authorities with three basic options (or some combination thereof) as to how to respond: Housing authorities can choose to reduce the number of persons served by decreasing the number of housing vouchers that they fund; they can increase the minimum rent that they require tenants to pay thereby reducing the assistance that they provide to tenants; or they can reduce the assistance that they provide by issuing fewer vouchers to those with the lowest incomes and issuing more vouchers to those with lesser needs."

"Each of these options is completely unacceptable, and further evidence of the Administration's total indifference to the needs of low-income renters. Without the rental assistance that vouchers provide, many of these households will be forced to return to a life of choosing between paying for food, child care, and health care, and paying for rent. Others no longer will be able to afford their current apartments and will be forced to live in overcrowded or substandard housing, or even into homelessness."

"The Administration should continue to honor our country's longstanding commitment to limiting the tenant rents of those with Section 8 vouchers to 30% of their net income for a fair market rental in their community, and not seek to put its budget shortfall on the backs of the poor. Nor should the Administration be permitted to address its Section 8 funding shortfall by eliminating the current "extremely low-income" targeting requirement that ensures that 75% of all new vouchers go to families with incomes below 30% of local area median income."

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculates that the funding level proposed by the Bush Administration would result in 250,000 fewer vouchers being funded if housing authorities choose to maintain the current level of subsidy for those vouchers that they do maintain. If housing authorities were to choose instead to continue maintaining the same number of vouchers as are currently authorized, nationally, the average Section 8 tenant's rent would have to rise by an average of about $850 per year.

"Here in Los Angeles, the City Housing Authority would have to issue 5,336 fewer vouchers and the County Housing Authority would have to issue 2,457 fewer vouchers if they chose to make up the funding shortfall by reducing the number of vouchers that they fund. If they issued the same number of vouchers, the City of Los Angeles would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $933 per year, and the County Housing Authority would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $977 per year in order to absorb the impact of the Bush Administration's proposed funding level."

If the Administration's block grant proposal is enacted, the grim picture for 2005 is likely to get considerably worse in succeeding years as public housing authorities are forced to make even deeper cuts. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that under the funding levels in the Bush Administration's budget, Section 8 expenditures in 2009, would fall $4.6 billion below the amount needed to maintain the level of service that the program currently provides.

If this cut were implemented by reducing the number of families served, state and local housing agencies would have to eliminate about 600,000 vouchers by 2009; this amounts to 30 percent of the number of vouchers now in use. If the cut were carried out by raising the rents of voucher tenants, the average tenant family would face a rent increase of about $2,000 per year by 2009. In 2009, the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority would lose 12,806 vouchers and the County Housing Authority would lose 5,898 vouchers. If the Housing Authorities chose instead to raise rents, the City of Los Angeles would be required to raise rents by $2,427 and the County would have to raise rents by $2,542.

"There also are 1500 prospective tenants in the City of Los Angeles who held vouchers but had not yet executed rental agreements whose vouchers have been canceled by the City Housing Authority, in part because the Housing Authority is said to have "overleased" by inadvertently issuing more than its authorized number of vouchers. There is nothing to suggest that there was intentional overleasing. The City Housing Authority was simply attempting in good faith to ensure that it would use all of its authorized vouchers."

"In these circumstances, I believe that it is wrong to penalize the Authority. It certainly is wrong to penalize these innocent families who thought that they had a funded housing voucher that they could use as soon as they had signed a lease. These families have waited many years for their turn to receive a housing voucher. The Bush Administration should be allowing the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority to use its reserves and HUD should be taking whatever steps are required to ensure that these families' housing vouchers are honored."

"The Bush Administration needs to go back to the drawing board. The "cure" that it is proposing to the Section 8 voucher program is far worse than any "disease" that the Administration is claiming. The Section 8 housing program is an excellent program that is not in any sort of a crisis. It simply needs to be funded properly. An Administration that can spend $150 billion on the war in Iraq and forego hundreds of billions more in revenue in order to fund the tax cuts that it has implemented surely can find the funds and the will to fund housing vouchers adequately. I will continue to insist that it do so." Congresswoman Waters Rejects the Bush Administration's Radical Section 8 Housing Block Grant Proposal
Calls for Full Funding of All Authorized Section 8 Housing Vouchers Including Those for City of Los Angeles Prospective Tenants Who Had Not Yet Entered Into Rental Contracts
Los Angeles, CA - Today, Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-35) sharply criticized the Bush Administration's Section 8 housing block grant proposal (the so-called "Flexible Voucher Program"), and the Administration's decision to propose funding for Section 8 housing that is $1.7 billion below the level needed simply to ensure that all authorized Section 8 housing vouchers are renewed.

"Section 8 housing vouchers currently assist two million low-income households, most of them low-income working families, elderly people, or people with disabilities. Yet these two million families represent only a small percentage of those persons who are eligible and who need a housing voucher. As everyone knows, in Los Angeles and in communities throughout America, there are huge waiting lists for housing vouchers. Only one in four low-income families eligible for a housing voucher currently receives any type of federal housing assistance. At a time when we need to be moving forward and figuring out how to get more housing assistance to those who need it most, the Administration's response is to take a huge step backward," said Congresswoman Waters.

"The grossly inadequate funding level proposed by the Bush Administration will not even allow the number of vouchers authorized in the last fiscal year to be maintained. This will leave housing authorities with three basic options (or some combination thereof) as to how to respond: Housing authorities can choose to reduce the number of persons served by decreasing the number of housing vouchers that they fund; they can increase the minimum rent that they require tenants to pay thereby reducing the assistance that they provide to tenants; or they can reduce the assistance that they provide by issuing fewer vouchers to those with the lowest incomes and issuing more vouchers to those with lesser needs."

"Each of these options is completely unacceptable, and further evidence of the Administration's total indifference to the needs of low-income renters. Without the rental assistance that vouchers provide, many of these households will be forced to return to a life of choosing between paying for food, child care, and health care, and paying for rent. Others no longer will be able to afford their current apartments and will be forced to live in overcrowded or substandard housing, or even into homelessness."

"The Administration should continue to honor our country's longstanding commitment to limiting the tenant rents of those with Section 8 vouchers to 30% of their net income for a fair market rental in their community, and not seek to put its budget shortfall on the backs of the poor. Nor should the Administration be permitted to address its Section 8 funding shortfall by eliminating the current "extremely low-income" targeting requirement that ensures that 75% of all new vouchers go to families with incomes below 30% of local area median income."

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calculates that the funding level proposed by the Bush Administration would result in 250,000 fewer vouchers being funded if housing authorities choose to maintain the current level of subsidy for those vouchers that they do maintain. If housing authorities were to choose instead to continue maintaining the same number of vouchers as are currently authorized, nationally, the average Section 8 tenant's rent would have to rise by an average of about $850 per year.

"Here in Los Angeles, the City Housing Authority would have to issue 5,336 fewer vouchers and the County Housing Authority would have to issue 2,457 fewer vouchers if they chose to make up the funding shortfall by reducing the number of vouchers that they fund. If they issued the same number of vouchers, the City of Los Angeles would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $933 per year, and the County Housing Authority would have to raise the average tenant's rent by $977 per year in order to absorb the impact of the Bush Administration's proposed funding level."

If the Administration's block grant proposal is enacted, the grim picture for 2005 is likely to get considerably worse in succeeding years as public housing authorities are forced to make even deeper cuts. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that under the funding levels in the Bush Administration's budget, Section 8 expenditures in 2009, would fall $4.6 billion below the amount needed to maintain the level of service that the program currently provides.

If this cut were implemented by reducing the number of families served, state and local housing agencies would have to eliminate about 600,000 vouchers by 2009; this amounts to 30 percent of the number of vouchers now in use. If the cut were carried out by raising the rents of voucher tenants, the average tenant family would face a rent increase of about $2,000 per year by 2009. In 2009, the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority would lose 12,806 vouchers and the County Housing Authority would lose 5,898 vouchers. If the Housing Authorities chose instead to raise rents, the City of Los Angeles would be required to raise rents by $2,427 and the County would have to raise rents by $2,542.

"There also are 1500 prospective tenants in the City of Los Angeles who held vouchers but had not yet executed rental agreements whose vouchers have been canceled by the City Housing Authority, in part because the Housing Authority is said to have "overleased" by inadvertently issuing more than its authorized number of vouchers. There is nothing to suggest that there was intentional overleasing. The City Housing Authority was simply attempting in good faith to ensure that it would use all of its authorized vouchers."

"In these circumstances, I believe that it is wrong to penalize the Authority. It certainly is wrong to penalize these innocent families who thought that they had a funded housing voucher that they could use as soon as they had signed a lease. These families have waited many years for their turn to receive a housing voucher. The Bush Administration should be allowing the City of Los Angeles Housing Authority to use its reserves and HUD should be taking whatever steps are required to ensure that these families' housing vouchers are honored."

"The Bush Administration needs to go back to the drawing board. The "cure" that it is proposing to the Section 8 voucher program is far worse than any "disease" that the Administration is claiming. The Section 8 housing program is an excellent program that is not in any sort of a crisis. It simply needs to be funded properly. An Administration that can spend $150 billion on the war in Iraq and forego hundreds of billions more in revenue in order to fund the tax cuts that it has implemented surely can find the funds and the will to fund housing vouchers adequately. I will continue to insist that it do so."