[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2025

_______________________________________________________________________

HEARINGS

BEFORE A

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

___________________

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES

STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas, Chairman

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
TONY GONZALES, Texas NORMA J. TORRES, California
DAVID G. VALADAO, California PETE AGUILAR, California
BEN CLINE, Virginia ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona
DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio

NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full
committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking minority member of the full
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.

Doug Disrud, Diem-Linh Jones, Avery Pierson,
Jared Sutton, and Graydon Daubert
Subcommittee Staff

__________
Page

Department of Transportation Budget 1
Request............................................................ 1

------
73

Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Request for
the Department of Housing and Urban
Development............................................................ 135
------

Members' Day...........................................................135
------

Inspectors General of the Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
Department of Transportation, and the
National Railroad Passenger Corporation
(AMTRAK)........................................................... 177
------

GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FIRMAT

___________________________________

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

______

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
57-284 WASHINGTON : 2024

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
RELATED AGENCIES FOR 2025

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2025

_______________________________________________________________________

HEARINGS

BEFORE A

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

________________________

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES

STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas, Chairman

NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full
committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking minority member of the full
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.

Doug Disrud, Diem-Linh Jones, Avery Pierson,
Jared Sutton, and Graydon Daubert
Subcommittee Staff

___________________________________

Page
Department of Transportation Budget
Request............................................................... 1
------

Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Request for
the Department of Housing and Urban
Development.................................. 73
------

Members' Day......................................................135
------

GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FIRMAT

___________________________________

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

______

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
57-284 WASHINGTON : 2024

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

----------
TOM COLE, Oklahoma, Chairman

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut
Chair Emeritus STENY H. HOYER, Maryland
KAY GRANGER, Texas MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
Chair Emeritus SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama BARBARA LEE, California
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
KEN CALVERT, California DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida HENRY CUELLAR, Texas STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland DEREK KILMER, Washington
MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania
DAVID G. VALADAO, California GRACE MENG, New York
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan PETE AGUILAR, California
JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
BEN CLINE, Virginia BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania NORMA J. TORRES, California
MIKE GARCIA, California ED CASE, Hawaii
ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
TONY GONZALES, Texas JOSH HARDER, California
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas DAVID J. TRONE, Maryland
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois
RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana SUSIE LEE, Nevada
ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York
JAKE LaTURNER, Kansas
JERRY L. CARL, Alabama
STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
JAKE ELLZEY, Texas
JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona
CHUCK EDWARDS, North Carolina

Susan Ross, Clerk and Staff Director

(ii)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, HUD, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS
FOR 2025

----------

Tuesday, April 30, 2024.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUDGET REQUEST

WITNESS

HON. PETE BUTTIGIEG, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Womack. The subcommittee will come to order. Welcome to
our first subcommittee hearing of the fiscal year 2025
Appropriation season, and my first hearing as chairman of this
subcommittee. Thank you. Right on cue, Mike. I'm deeply honored
to lead this piece of the Appropriations Committee with
potentially the most direct impact on each congressional
district across the United States, including my own. Today we
welcome the testimony from the Honorable Pete Buttigieg,
Secretary of the Department of Transportation implementation on
the fiscal year 2025 budget. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for
appearing before us today and for your service to this country.
I know I've said it to you before, but as a former mayor
myself, I appreciate that we have such a successful Mayor at
the helm of the DOT, and I mean that. The Department of
Transportation is requesting $25.5 billion in discretionary
budget authority for fiscal year 2025, coupled with the $36.8
billion in advanced appropriations provided by the
Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act. The IIJA and the
nearly 81 billion from the Highway Trust fund. DOT is seeking
$143 billion in total resources. In total, the IIJA provides
184 billion in advance of program appropriations from 2022 to
2026. Let me remind you, these appropriations are under the
jurisdiction of the subcommittee. As such, we will continue to
subject the IIJA appropriations to strong oversight as we
develop the fiscal 2025 bill.
Mr. Secretary, I look forward to working with you to
prioritize our Nation's vital infrastructure and transportation
needs in Arkansas's third district and across the country,
while safeguarding hard working the hard earned taxpayer
dollars of our citizens. I know our work on this subcommittee
impacts the safety, economic opportunity, and the quality of
life of every American, a duty I take seriously. Even as we
work to rein in excessive spending, let me assure you that
safety will remain our top priority for the subcommittee as we
prepare the 2025 bill. From the Francis Scott Key Bridge
collapse to the East Palestine Trail derailment, to the close
calls happening far too often at our airports, you can see the
importance of safe transportation systems. We will continue to
provide appropriate levels of support to DOT programs that
ensure the safety of our skies, our roads, and our railroads. I
want to work with you, Mr. Secretary, to ensure that our states
and localities are getting the most bang for their buck out of
this infusion of federal support for infrastructure. We cannot
expect these unprecedented levels of funding to continue in
perpetuity, which means the grants being delivered now need to
be an effective use of taxpayer dollars. Burdensome 100 page
applications and an immense web of new regulatory requirements
is not helpful to grantees trying to get shovels in the ground.
I also want to ensure that the impacts of these unprecedented
levels in investment continue to be felt by all districts
around the country, not just the large urban areas.
I recognize the mega projects that have been needed for a
long time in our big cities, but Arkansas's third district and
rural areas around the Nation need a level playing field. I
look forward to your testimony today in working with you to
ensure that the department can continue to deliver on its
mission to ensure a safe and modern transportation system. The
jurisdiction of this subcommittee is one of the most unique of
the Appropriations Committee as it impacts its impacts are seen
in every single congressional district. As such, we have a
history of bipartisanship that I look forward to continuing as
we begin the fiscal 2025 appropriations process. I'd now like
to recognize my good friend and the ranking member from
Illinois, Mr. Quigley, for his opening statement. Mike.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For those who did not
know, we had a very strong bipartisan partnership during a time
where we flipped and did both chair and ranking members of the
FSGG subcommittee. I look forward to carrying on that tradition
on the T-HUD subcommittee. And I must recognize from Rogers,
Arkansas to South Bend, Indiana, America's mayors are the
cradle of leadership. So, Mr. Secretary, welcome back. You've
been a great partner over the years, and I appreciate your
continued commitment to work with this committee to strengthen
our transportation networks. Overall, the budget request
dedicates nearly $10.9 billion--$109 billion to sustain our
transportation networks and protect the safety of our
transportation workers. This investment includes hiring 2,000
additional air traffic controllers to keep our skies and
runways safe and efficient, $2.4 billion to expand bus and
rapid transit to help everyday Americans travel to work, school
and health appointments, and more than $3 billion to prevent
collisions, improve worker safety and perform signal and
traffic upgrade track upgrades on our rail systems.
These investments, combined with those made during the
bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, will ensure
that whether it flies, floats, or rolls, advancements in safety
and modernization of our transportation can be made in this
decade. These targeted investments will help accelerate
transportation safety, resiliency and mobility improvements
while prioritizing lengthy and costly capital backlogs that
propel the sophistication of America's transportation networks.
Yet and still emergencies and unforeseen circumstances happen,
and this subcommittee should be prepared to help our federal
partners respond. Ensuring agencies such as DOT have the
resources and flexibility necessary to deploy and rapidly
respond to accidents, near incursions, or major catastrophe in
real time is vital. We must continue to invest in solutions to
create more resilient supply chain networks, workforce
pipelines, and multimodal reliability.
Revisiting the emergence of these needs each year through
the annual appropriation process is critical. I look forward to
working with the Chairman and you, Mr. Secretary, in getting to
fiscal year 2025 agreement that adheres to the Fiscal
Responsibility Act requirements without compromising the future
of America's transportation system. We look forward to your
testimony today, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Womack. I thank the gentleman from Illinois, and he is
correct, we had a terrific working relationship over at
financial services and general government. Look forward to
continuing that relationship here today. The overall chairman
of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Cole, had intended to be
here today, but I think everybody knows he's facing a disaster
in his own district with tornadoes a couple of days ago, and he
is there attending to matters in his district in Oklahoma.
Without objection, his prepared remarks will be included in the
record. And now I'd like to recognize my good friend from the
great state of Connecticut and the ranking member on
appropriations, Ms. DeLauro.
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Chairman
Womack, ranking member Quigley. Thank you both for holding this
hearing. Congratulations to you, Chairman Womack, on your first
hearing as chair of the subcommittee, and you are indeed a
great friend. I want to say a thank you to you, Secretary
Buttigieg, for being here today, for all that you have done to
streamline and improve the travel experience throughout our
airports, rail systems, and other transportation modes, and for
your role in overseeing all the work underway across this
country, rebuilding American infrastructure. And that is thanks
to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. I know we all
wish we were joined in this hearing by the new Chair of the
full committee and the previous chair of this subcommittee,
Chairman Cole. But as the chair remarked, he's unable to be
here. But we pray for a swift recovery for the communities
across Oklahoma that are impacted by the recent tornadoes.
For hardworking Americans, business travel, daily commutes,
hard earned leisure travel, everything in between, life in
America requires safe and efficient ways of connecting.
Americans deserve the safest, most advanced systems in the
world, across all forms of transportation. Our transportation
infrastructure is central to the health and to the well-being
of all of our communities. It connects everyone, urban,
suburban, rural areas, to their jobs, schools, grocery stores,
and the care that they depend on. And the work of your
department, together with this subcommittee, ensures every
American has access to reliable, safe, and efficient
transportation. As Americans travel in greater numbers than
ever before, we have seen our transportation infrastructure
really put to the test. Massive air travel disruptions,
catastrophic train derailments, elevated pedestrian fatality
rates, emphasize the work to improve our transportation systems
is never, never ending. And together, over the past three
years, through this committee's annual investments and in the
bipartisan infrastructure law, we have done so much to repair
our transportation infrastructure. But the progress must
continue.
In the 2024 government funding package, this committee made
robust investments in the safety and durability of our
transportation infrastructure. We created and sustained tens of
thousands of good paying American jobs with investments in
airports, highways, transit systems systems, passenger rail,
and in our ports. We made targeted investments to improve our
transportation system safety, cut emissions, increase
resiliency, address inequities, and fight the climate crisis
while generating economic opportunities for working and middle
class families. And we protected the bipartisan infrastructure
law, ensuring that the legislation's generational investments
continue to complement the work that your department does on an
annual basis. To build on the success, the president's request
for DOT includes $25.7 billion in discretionary funding to
create safer, more equitable, and more modern transportation
systems. Critically, the budget calls for an additional $1.7
billion in funding for the Federal Aviation Administration,
which desperately needs to bolster staffing, modernize its
systems to keep up with the historic rates at which Americans
are traveling through the skies. The budget also invests in the
Federal Railroad Administration for infrastructure and safety
enhancements and to assure that Amtrak is able to meet the
needs and demands of the public, which is increasingly looking
for rail options to meet their travel needs.
Just as an aside, Mr. Secretary, I ride Amtrak twice a
week, and it's always crowded. It really is full, and it is a
great and wonderful, safe way to travel, and we thank you for
that. I know you believe, like I do, that investing in our
transportation infrastructure is one of the best ways to
supercharge the American economy. We get an extraordinary
return on our investment dollar when we connect communities,
facilitate commerce, and draw Americans closer together by
building modern, fast, and safe transportation systems. So it's
wonderful to have you here with us this morning. We thank you
for all of your work. Look forward to your testimony. And with
that, I want to say a thank you to Chairman Womack and ranking
member Quigley, and I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank the gentlelady. Mr. Secretary, this is
the first hearing of the Transportation, Housing, and Urban
Development subcommittee in this cycle of appropriations, and I
cannot think of a more appropriate first witness than the
Secretary of Transportation. And with that, sir, the floor is
yours, and we'll accept your opening statement.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thanks very much, Chairman. And
let me add to the congratulations for your taking on this
leadership role. We're looking forward to working with you, and
our whole department feels the same way. Likewise, I want to
acknowledge and congratulate Chairman Cole, and our thoughts
are certainly with the communities impacted that he's with
right now. So with that, Chair, ranking member Quigley, ranking
member DeLauro, and all of the members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to discuss President Biden's
fiscal year 2025 budget request for our Department of
Transportation, and thank you for your partnership as we have
delivered safer, stronger transportation across every mode and
across the United States.
Roadway fatalities are at last trending downward, shipping
costs are down as supply chains run more smoothly, and airline
cancellations last year were the lowest in a decade. As you all
know, we also have much more to do. We are rebuilding not just
from the pandemic, but from decades of disinvestment and an
enforcement environment that, in our view, for too long,
privileged corporations instead of protecting people. The
President's budget request, totaling $146.2 billion, builds on
the progress that we've made and enables us to deliver on the
important challenges and opportunities that remain.
I'll start with our primary mission across every mode,
which is safety. On our roads, we have funded projects in every
state to improve safety for all travelers. After years of
heading in the wrong direction, we've now had seven consecutive
quarters of declining deaths on America's roadways. But this
remains a national crisis, taking over 40,000 lives a year. And
we're requesting $72 billion to improve America's roads and
bridges with an emphasis on safety and efficiency. We are
constantly reminded of the importance of transportation safety.
The country watched in shock as a cargo ship struck and
destroyed the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, taking six
lives and closing a vital port. We're working across the Biden-
Harris administration and with state, local, and private sector
partners to help reopen that port as quickly as possible. We
also immediately got to work with the state on the first steps
toward rebuilding the bridge.
With regard to aviation, America was rightly alarmed when a
door blew out of an Alaska Airlines flight in January. The FAA
acted swiftly to ground 737 MAX-9 aircraft until each plane was
safe to return to the air. And the FAA is significantly
increasing oversight of Boeing. The agency is also investing in
the physical infrastructure, staffing, and technology of our
national airspace and airports, requesting $26.8 billion for
the FAA, which will support oversight of aircraft production,
accelerate the modernization of the National Airspace System,
increase the target to hire 2,000 air traffic controllers and
continue improving airports.
On our rails, we're modernizing infrastructure, fixing
road-rail crossings and improving service in places like
Chicago; Moore, Oklahoma; and between New Jersey, New York and
Connecticut, just to name a few. We are requesting $16.4
billion, which, in addition to expanding and improving rail
service, will allow us to increase the number of safety
inspectors to 400 and add new staff to complete safety audits.
We recently finalized the rule for safe train crew sizes,
establishing what most Americans assumed was already the case,
which is a minimum of two crew members generally applying to
large freight trains. Indeed, we're taking every step that does
not require an act of Congress. But we are also continuing to
call on Congress to pass the bipartisan Railway Safety Act that
would provide much needed authorities to keep passengers,
workers, and communities safe.
Across the country, we are repairing and replacing what
existed in building and modernizing for the future. Last week,
I was in Las Vegas for the groundbreaking of the new rail line
from southern California to Las Vegas, which will, we expect,
be the first true high-speed rail line in service in the United
States. It was a very good day--for the millions of Americans
who will ride that train every year; for our truck drivers and
supply chains that will benefit from less congested highways;
for everyone across the country who will live in a climate with
800 million fewer pounds of carbon pollution annually. But it
is more than each of those separate benefits. It's a
celebration of the idea that America can still build massive,
forward-looking engineering marvels that make people's lives
better--with the potential of many more to come. That one
project is creating good union jobs for 1,000 men and women who
will maintain and operate the train line, plus another 10,000
good union construction jobs to build it. And everywhere I go,
I meet workers already benefiting from these jobs. I think of
workers like a young veteran I met in Washington State who
reminded me of so many people that I got to know in uniform now
facing the challenges of building a civilian life. He talked
about what it was like coming off active duty as a marine, how
hard it was to get on his feet as a civilian. And then he said,
``I came across this union, the amount of training I got, the
amount of work stability, the level I have to conduct myself
at, the purpose I have . . . prevented me from becoming a
statistic.'' And now he is the first person in his family to
own a house. Everywhere we're meeting people who remind us what
it means to have these kinds of jobs.
These benefits are being multiplied across tens of
thousands of projects, including construction workers building
livelihoods as they modernize America's infrastructure, helping
us build stronger supply chains, cleaner air, and safer, more
affordable ways for every American to get where they need to
go. We're making good progress, but there's more to do. And we
look forward to working with this committee to continue
delivering for every community in the country. Thanks very
much. And I look forward to our discussion.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, sir. We'll now begin the Q and A
portion of this hearing. Let me remind everybody, strict
adherence to the five minute rule should be noted that sometime
in the next hour and ten or 15 minutes, we'll have votes
called. We will make a game time decision at that time about
whether we break for votes and come back. The Secretary has
been very generous with his time, and we'll have to kind of
sort out where we are in the rounds before we determine that.
And some of that will be influenced by how many members are
expecting to return for potentially a second round of
questions.
So I'll recognize myself first. And not surprisingly, we're
going to talk a little bit about the Baltimore Bridge. Mr.
Secretary, a couple of weeks ago, I had a chance to sit down
with my friend, Governor Wes Moore of Maryland, to express my
support to Maryland in its recovery efforts after the Baltimore
Bridge collapse. Chairman Cole and I and other members of this
subcommittee and others will get to see those efforts firsthand
this coming Thursday when we take a trip there. I want to take
this opportunity to send my condolences, and I speak on behalf
of this entire subcommittee in expressing our condolences to
the families of the workers who perished in the line of duty
and convey my sincere appreciation to the first responders who
kept this event from being a bigger tragedy and to the men and
women who are working it night and day to clear the wreckage
and reopen the port of Baltimore. I understand the goal is to
restore full service to the port by the end of May. I was
pleased to see that more temporary channels have opened
recently and ahead of schedule to allow bigger ships to leave
and enter the port. Along those lines, Mr. secretary, give us
an update on the status of the full reopening of the port, what
the impact on the economy and supply chain has been, and what
your department has done to help the truckers, the shippers,
and other industries affected by its closure.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you for
your and this committee's attention to that situation. And
certainly was glad to hear that you and other members of the
subcommittee will be visiting, will participate in that visit,
as hosted by Governor Moore. The port of Baltimore is essential
to the regional economy, and it plays an important role in the
national supply chain as well, especially given its
specialization in the transit of vehicles, and then the bridge
itself, which provides such a vital connection for people and
goods--obviously missing that has a substantial impact, or
about 30,000 vehicles crossing that bridge on a daily basis. We
got to work right away, as soon as we got those calls in the
middle of the night, and have been working with Maryland
throughout to try to help them get back to normal. That's
included the immediate availability of $60 million in quick
release emergency relief funds for the Maryland DOT. We view
that as a down payment on what we know will be the substantial
cost of building a new bridge.
With regard to the opening of the channel, I can tell you
that while that limited access, deep draft channel was opened,
that allowed for 19 total transits--ten outbound ships (some
vessels were effectively stuck there because of the wreckage),
as well as nine inbound--and made it possible for more of the
workers in that port to be able to do what they do best. The
Army Corps of Engineers is projecting that they are on track,
as I understand it, for that May opening timeline of the full
channel, and that really is necessary. Even that 38-foot
channel is not enough to accommodate the largest vessels and
get the port and the workers who count on it back to normal.
Briefly, I would just also note that through our Port
Infrastructure Development Program, we were able to make funds
available for paving of a cargo laydown area at a facility
called Trade Point, which is one of the few parts of the port
that is outside and not inside of the channel that was
obstructed by the wreckage of the bridge. My understanding is
that that is already now helping to move some cargo. And I
would note that we continue to be in regular contact both on
the supply chain side through our new multimodal freight office
and our Maritime Administration, and then on the bridge
rebuilding side through our Federal Highway Administration and
have conveyed our Department's echo the President's commitment
that Baltimore and Maryland will have everything that they need
on the federal side.
Mr. Womack. We'll have some other questions that we'll
submit for the record on the Baltimore Bridge, and I'm sure
they will follow our visit up there on Thursday. Real quickly,
in my last minute, the fiscal 2024 Appropriations Act included
$12 million to start the recapitalization of the National
Defense Reserve Fleet, which is appropriate project designed to
help us in the Navy meet specifications and build that design
out of an American shipyard. Can you give us an update on the
status of this project and the timeline to get a contract
awarded in these remaining 45 seconds?
Secretary Buttigieg. I'll do my best to be brief and
knowing that you'll have our Maritime Administrator before you
soon, I'll just note that we take great pride in helping to
fulfill that important defense mission with the ready reserve
fleet and are working to recapitalize it using the resources
that were provided, while candidly noting that it has been a
challenge to recapitalize the vessels as quickly as they are
going out of date. But my understanding is that we are on track
to proceed with that, and we'll be happy to invite the Maritime
Administrator to provide a more fulsome update when there's the
opportunity later today.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to associate
myself with the remarks the Chairman made about the tragedy in
Baltimore and the families who lost loved ones there. But I
think we need to have an honest discussion here about the
emergency relief fund. Going into this there was a significant
backlog and recognizing that disasters like this can and do
happen, but the severity, the number and severity of natural
disasters as well wearing on our resources is significant. So
we need to have this discussion because there's not enough in
that fund. And we can argue, oh, we want to cut spending. Well,
if disasters happen, they disproportionately impact one area
that simply cannot handle this, but they do impact the country.
So if you could give us, Mr. Secretary, a deeper understanding
of the status of the emergency relief fund, how you envision a
supplemental at least addressing this Baltimore disaster, but
perhaps also the fact that we have a backlog and that we need
to recognize that that spigot, that fund, has to be larger
every year, just to be honest with ourselves, that it needs
more money.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question and for
your attention to the Emergency Relief Program, which we know
is so important anytime there is an incident affecting
transportation, like the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse. For
perspective, in terms of the proportions that are in play, in
May of 2023, FHWA provided $749 million in ER program funds to
help 39 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico make
repairs for roads and bridges that had been damaged by storms,
floods, wildfires and other events. In January 2024, Federal
Highways provided $729 million in the ER program funds to help
34 states, as well as DC, the US Virgin Islands, and Puerto
Rico. The last update I got showed $950 million available in
that fund. But we're tracking approximately $2 billion of unmet
need, and that is not including the projected cost of the
Francis Scott Key Bridge. Now, to be clear, that does not
necessarily mean that we would have $2 billion of requests
ready to go looking for reimbursement in a single year.
Mr. Quigley. What is that $2 billion?
Secretary Buttigieg. So that's effectively a pipeline that
will then be reimbursed as the states are ready and do their
spending. We've had some cases where just because of the length
of time it takes to do reconstruction, checks may be going out
five or even more years after the original incident, just
through the flow of the project. But what we do see is there is
a mismatch between the $950 million and the $2 billion plus and
counting that we see by way of need. And so, we would welcome
support on ways to make sure that that fund is adequately
topped up, knowing that severe weather is becoming more severe
and more frequent, not less. And that even though we are
separately working through programs like Protect to make our
infrastructure more resilient in the first place against the
kinds of threats that weather, natural disasters, and other
effects can cause, we still are facing an uphill struggle and
are going to need to do everything we can to be ready on the
back end to respond when disaster strikes.
Mr. Quigley. So if we equate this, as we often do, with a
household, it's like operating without insurance, in a sense,
and disasters do happen. What is the probable need for
supplemental? And if we're going to go to that expense, what
would it take to fill that fund with a reasonable amount of
money, an endowment, in a sense, to not have to have a, you
know, a wanting a wait for a supplemental when the next
disaster takes place?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, I'd certainly concur that it
would be optimal to know that the fund is being refreshed at a
rate that keeps up with the needs that have come to it. Again,
if we're using recent years as an index, we would see the last
2 years' disbursements would have been between $700 and $800
million, but we know there is even more, and you would want,
given the Francis Scott Key Bridge, you would want some kind of
cushion there. So, while we have not proposed a specific
supplemental at this time, that gives you a sense of the
proportion that we think would be needed in order to make sure
the ER fund was at a healthy level, and, of course, would also
spare us needing to go to supplementals in the future if we
knew that there were adequate balances for the unmet need that
was coming in.
Mr. Quigley. No, again. And those details are matters. So,
again, making sure the committee knows for the future, what
would it take to get the fund at a healthy level to address the
needs as they hit, and what would be a normal, appropriate
amount to fund that spigot every year? Thank you.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. You know, being authorized
at $100 million a year and then periodically being supplemented
by Congress, we can work with that. But a cushion that's more
in the line of the levels that we've found ourselves dispersing
in recent years would help us to stay ahead of that and reduce
the need for supplementals or additional work outside of the
regular budget cycle.
Mr. Womack. Sheriff Rutherford.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Secretary,
great to see you again, and thank you for being here this
morning. One of the things that I want to bring up is this
issue of vehicle technology and cybersecurity. You know, these
new connective vehicles, as they're called, particularly in
light of the fact that China has emerged now as the largest
exporter of vehicles globally, including here in the United
States. And, Mr. Secretary, I have to tell you, I'm concerned
about the potential security risk of these connected vehicles
built by the Chinese automakers and now operating in the United
States because through their massive subsidies and workforce
practices, as I said, they've become the largest exporter.
They're here. And these vehicles literally have the capability
of being manipulated and manipulating the vehicle's life and
safety systems, collect and transmit data, and implement
surveillance capabilities embedded within the vehicle's
technology. Now, I know the select committee on the Chinese
Communist Party has sent a letter to the Department of Commerce
and the Department of Defense issuing those concerns about
these vehicles. Can you talk a little bit about what DOT, maybe
NHTSA, whoever, can really help here in America, ensure, like
the Chinese are doing? If you--any vehicle data collected in
China has to be stored locally. Are we required anything like
that?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question. It touches
on something we take very seriously, which is the safety
implications of vehicle cybersecurity issues. The reality is
that vehicles are becoming more and more complex and more and
more software intensive each passing year. There's already
probably been more computerization on board than many consumers
were aware of, but that is only increasing. NHTSA was involved
in establishing a body called the Auto ISAC, an industry data
sharing partnership which is committed to quickly identifying
and responding to cybersecurity risks and threats in the
Nation's vehicle fleet. And NHTSA has refreshed its own updated
cybersecurity best practices, which we also believe is a
contribution to this issue, working with a number of
stakeholders and also updating a cybersecurity incident
response plan, which makes more clear the agency's
responsibilities in the event of a cyberattack or any issue
that would involve safety critical systems there. I think that
going forward, we need to continue assessing how best to
protect consumers without, of course, hindering the
technological developments that can make vehicles safer, more
convenient. There's a lot of consumer demand for this.
Mr. Rutherford. But excuse me, did they say anything about
collecting data here locally, keep it in America, as opposed to
going back to the CCP?
Secretary Buttigieg. I'm not aware of restrictions in terms
of how data is stored. Of course, most of our international
automakers are not Chinese automakers. But you also know how
many different components are finding their way into any
vehicle, regardless of the OEM. So that's certainly an area
that we'd welcome more dialogue on and be eager to work on.
Mr. Rutherford. Okay, thank you. I'd like to flip over to
the EV standards and really talk about the cafe standards that
have recently been announced that everyone is, I do not want to
say. Well, I might say up in arms about because nowhere in law
did Congress authorize DOT to set fuel economy standards that
effectively mandate EVs, while at the same time will force the
internal combustion engine out of the market. In fact, Mr.
Secretary, federal statute expressly prohibits NHTSA from
considering the fuel economy of EVs when determining maximum
feasible cafe standards for passenger cars and trucks. Now, can
you give me a little update on the cafe standards? What are
they finally going to boil down to? And how does DOT plan to
implement such as such a massive move to EVs without consumer
buy in, really? Because as we've all seen, so few really want
to buy them at this point.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, I do think it's important to
note that every year more Americans choose EVs than the year
before. And very few Americans who choose an EV decide to go
back. But I do want to agree and note that, as you correctly
stated, NHTSA does not take EVs into account when it's
formulating CAFE standards. They're about the quality of an
internal combustion engine. The rule that was proposed would
require a fleet-wide average of 58 miles per gallon by 2032. I
know that seems aggressive, but frankly, every CAFE----
Mr. Rutherford. To say the least.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yeah, but that's exactly what they
said when we outrageously suggested that you could get 20 miles
a gallon back in the eighties or nineties. So every time we
raise the bar, we find that industry is able to meet it. And
it's remarkable the innovation that goes on. But ultimately, we
believe these are about not just cleaner air, but saving
Americans money by having more efficient gas engines. And we
know that these gas cars are going to be on the road a long
time, even as the EV market share grows, which is part of why
we continue to think it's important to meet our statutory
responsibility with the CAFE standards.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield back, Mr.
Chair.
Mr. Womack. Ms. Watson Coleman.
Ms. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And
congratulations to you. I look forward to working with you.
It's good to see you, Mr. Secretary. It's always good to see
you. Thank you for your visit to New Jersey. Let's make it
happen again. You know, through the funding from both the
bipartisan infrastructure and the budget, your department has
been able to provide really good union jobs to many people in
this country. Uplifting our working class families while
lifting them up is vitally important. It's also very important
that we are inclusive. And for those communities which have
been marginalized, particularly black and brown we want to make
sure that they are reaping the benefit of this wonderful work
under this administration. Can you please discuss the
Department of Transportation's ongoing efforts to ensure that
members of historically marginalized communities, again,
especially black and brown and even women in nontraditional
jobs, are being included in the efforts to uplift the Americas
working class?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. This continues to be a very
important consideration for us. And as we advance initiatives
like the President's Justice40 Commitment, always, of course,
being mindful of the statutory authority behind it, we believe
we continue to have extraordinary opportunities to lift up
communities that have been passed over or in some cases even
harmed by the transportation decisions of past generations. And
we know that when we do that, nobody is made worse off and a
lot of people are better off. In terms of how we can best do
that, that has included measures like technical assistance to
help communities that are not wealthy enough to have,
sometimes, the most well-heeled federal relations
organizations, for example, still be able to compete and win in
our discretionary grant processes. It means, to the extent
permitted by statute, considering the areas of persistent
poverty or other factors that have placed an area at a
disadvantage, and generally ensuring that all community voices
are heard in the proposals for projects that are coming
forward. And I really believe that we are turning a corner as a
country in terms of how we make sure that federal dollars
benefit everybody and not just the fewer, the well-off.
Ms. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. How is the
department measuring the success of those efforts?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, this is . . . first of all,
again, I would point to Justice40 because that has set a clear
goal for us as an administration, and that is being tracked not
just in our Department, but on a government-wide basis. The
White House has updated its covered program list, and 40 of
those programs are in the US DOT alone. And they're subject to
a level of data gathering that can help us understand the
impacts of the choices that we're making. We're also making
sure that we just track the level of projects that are moving
through the different stages to make sure that those are in
lower-capacity or lower-wealth communities are not
systematically encountering more issues. We know that can
happen just because they have sometimes fewer resources, less
experience working with federal programs. And we're actively
engaging those who do not succeed in some of our applications
through debriefs, knowing that often it's on a third or a
second or third attempt that a community, especially a low-
income community, can successfully get these kinds of federal
funds.
Ms. Watson Coleman. So what is it that you all are doing to
be able to demonstrate whether or not you're being successful
in accomplishing what I believe is your noble and genuine goal?
My issue has always been working in this field myself years ago
that we put in these good faith efforts, but we missed the mark
when it comes time to actually showing where the dollars went,
where the contracts went. So how are we measuring that, sir?
What is your department doing to collect that information, and
is it available for us to peruse?
Secretary Buttigieg. So I certainly agree that often we see
the phrase ``good faith effort'' used, but we do not always see
the results. So we've held ourselves to a higher standard,
beginning with the dollars that we have the most visibility and
control over, which is, of course, our direct contracting
dollars. There we set a 20 percent goal. We're transparent
about how we're doing on that, and I'm pleased to report we've
exceeded that goal, and we're thinking about how to take it
higher in terms of the proportion of grants that go to SDBs,
small and disadvantaged businesses. We're likewise encouraging
our project sponsors, who of course handle the bulk of the
money--states, cities, airport authorities, transit agencies--
to do the same. And our recently revised DBE and ACDBE rule
contains provisions to make sure we have good data going
forward, too. The balance we're trying to strike, of course, is
we do not want to make it harder for those very same businesses
with overly burdensome data reporting requirements, but we do
want to make sure we have and can publish enough data to really
see how we're doing in that regard and would be happy to share
with your office more granular numbers, especially about the
progress we've made in our own contracting.
Ms. Watson Coleman. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Gonzales.
Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Secretary.
Texas has the greatest increase in population than any other
state in the country. And I was a little shocked to learn that
the chairman of TXDOT has not had an opportunity to meet you
and have a conversation with you. Would you be willing to get
on a call with myself, your team, and the Chairman of TXDOT? An
introductory call?
Secretary Buttigieg. Sure. I'd be happy to. I typically
engage with leaders of state DOTS in the context of AASHTO, but
if there's a more specific issue, we can work, or if you would
just like to arrange an introduction, I'd be happy to do that.
Mr. Gonzales. Fantastic. Thank you for that, Mr. Secretary.
San Antonio, Texas is home to one of the largest military
populations in the Nation. As a 20 year Navy veteran, it is
critical. I know that it is critical that we equip our military
personnel with the tools they need to succeed. One of those
tools is travel, and we have yet to see a direct flight added
to the DCA to San Antonio. There are a significant number of
personnel that travel back and forth from San Antonio to our
Nation's capital. It is critical that we have that we make this
as painless as possible for our men and women in uniform.
Currently, there are discussions about adding a direct flight
between San Antonio and DCA. I'm in full support of that. My
question for you is, do you believe it is important for our
military men and women to have direct access to our Nation's
capital?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, having traveled on orders
myself, I certainly recognize and appreciate the importance of
good air travel and other travel options for our military
members.
Mr. Gonzales. Excellent. My next question is, my district
is massive. It's larger than the State of Pennsylvania. I have
29 counties. 27 of those counties are rural. Livestock plays a
very important role in our economy. For years, livestock has
been relied on, has relied on an exemption to the electronic
logging device ELD rule. Without these exceptions for livestock
carriers, there is a risk of animals being left without proper
grazing accommodations or becoming subject to other health
risks. Mr. Secretary, do you have any, do you have any plans to
grant an exception to livestock haulers for the ELD rules in
fiscal year 2025?
Secretary Buttigieg. Certainly, I'm aware of the unique
issues that livestock haulers face. When you have living cargo,
it's a little bit different than boxes and inanimate objects,
and I think that's contemplated in the practices of FMCSA. I'm
not aware of any change to the current practice that is
forthcoming in terms of some of the flexibilities. Of course,
what we're trying to do is balance the importance of livestock
with the importance of safety. And those ELDs are there for
safety reasons. But we continually seek to strike the right
balance, to be reasonable in our flexibilities, and yet
demonstrate our commitment to the life safety issues that are
implicated in any of our regulations with FMCSA.
Mr. Gonzales. Excellent. I also represent a large part of
the Texas-Mexico border, nearly half of the overall Texas-
Mexico border. And trade and commerce is a big part of that.
You know, big function of trade and commerce is the
infrastructure that builds out to that and the level of
different roads. And I'd ask that you take a look at that as
we, as we're reviewing, you know, updating USMCA and some of
these other trade partnerships. It's so critical that we have
the infrastructure built out right as we nearshore from other
places, not only nearshore to America, but also North America.
I think it's critical that we, we look to, you know, our
partners to the south and how do we have this infrastructure
once again built out. We cannot just turn a switch off and turn
it on without that investment in there. So I look forward to
working with you and your team on these projects and others,
and thank you once again for coming before the committee, and I
look forward to that call. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you Tony.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you very much.
Mr. Womack. Ms. Torres.
Ms. Torres. Thank you Chairman. And I also want to
congratulate you on your new position. I hope that you are kind
to us when it comes to community projects.
Mr. Womack. I started by getting your name right.
Ms. Torres. Yes. Thank you. Secretary, it's really great to
see you again and I really look forward to hosting you in my
district when the Brightline project finishes. And I hope that
you and I and my colleague here can work together to ensure
that, you know, we move this project as fast as a train will
travel. So, you know, on time, on budget, all of that. As you
know, I represent SoCal's Inland empire. You visited my
district a couple of years ago and we were fortunate to receive
a $15 million award for a pedestrian bridge that was so
desperately needed. We are the suburbs of workers that work in
Los Angeles and, you know, they travel to 40, 50, 60 miles one
way to work. I represent a freight corridor, so anything that
happens at the port of LA and Long Beach impact my district,
Alameda corridor runs and splits my district in half. So you
can imagine the needs that we have, as you have seen them
yourself.
In fiscal year 2023 funding package, I secured a transit
oriented development pilot program with over $13 million of
funding. It's a pilot program. Transit oriented development is
important, as you know, for bringing transit and affordable
housing together, which is what we desperately need in the
Inline empire. Can you provide us an update on the department's
transit oriented development pilot program? And have you worked
with the Department of Housing and Urban Development to ensure
that we are coordinating the goal of this pilot program?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. And the short answer on
working with HUD is yes. I've spoken with both Acting Secretary
Todman and before that Secretary Fudge about this because we
recognize the relationship between housing affordability and
transportation options, specifically with regard to the
program. Just recently, in fact, earlier this month, FTA
announced $17.6 million in grants going to 20 communities in 16
States to support equitable transit-oriented development. And
the goal is to again try to integrate our thinking about what
are the two biggest costs for most households taken together,
housing and transportation. The overall funding for that
program is $68.9 million provided by the IIJA, which is a
substantial increase over the prior five years. I would also
note that we have credit programs in the Build America Bureau,
which can also be used to support transit-oriented development.
We hope to be able to make an announcement in the coming days
about a project that will go forward based on that. So we
certainly believe in the importance of transit solutions to
help with housing affordability, and welcome the opportunity to
continue working to bring that to your constituents.
Ms. Torres. Thank you. Thank you so much. This pilot
program was so successful that I look forward to working with
my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to put it into law
to ensure that we continue to support. By the way, the 16
States that received this funding, in communities across those
16 States, none of them were from SoCal's Inland empire. We did
not apply. And we did not apply because, again, what you talked
about in your opening statement, the need for assistance in
filling out these lengthy applications, I cannot stress to you
how much we need to ensure that we simplify the processes, that
we simplify the reporting options that we have currently
available for our communities, because they just, it is not
sustainable for smaller cities like the ones that I represent.
I also want to ask if you have a status on another program that
we funded, and that's the regional infrastructure Accelerator,
a program that was created for the development of regional
projects to get cities to work together?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. Yes, that's also part of
the Build America Bureau that I mentioned earlier. That program
accelerates project delivery and helps clear barriers. In
October, we were able to announce another step forward, thereby
expanding the RIA program to 24 accelerators, receiving $24
million in new funding, and we look forward to continuing to
develop that program. Also, with regard to your earlier note, I
appreciate the opportunity to mention our belief in the
thriving communities program and how that has helped link many
of these communities up to support for navigating those
sometimes challenging federal processes.
Ms. Torres. Mayors get things done, and with that, I yield
back.
Mr. Womack. Amen. Thank you, and amen. Mr. Valadao.
Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Secretary, for
your time today. I really appreciate you taking some time to be
with us today. Mr. Secretary, the State of California has
adopted a regulation targeting emissions of locomotives, and
they are seeking authorization from EPA to begin enforcing that
regulation. The regulation requires that railroads operating in
California must quickly begin adopting zero emission technology
for locomotives, technology that is currently not commercially
available. The EPA authorizes--if the EPA authorizes
California's regulation, supply chains across the country would
be in danger due to the operational and financial restraints
placed on the railroads. For that reason, numerous groups
representing manufacturers, businesses, farmers, ranchers
weighed in with EPA, expressing significant concerns. One of
the reasons why I bring this up is 65 percent of the national
locomotive fleet touches California. We're obviously 40 million
people. We have major ports all along the coast, move in
products. I think 167 million tons of freight that were moved
by rail in California in 2021, employs thousands of people.
It's huge for our economy. Where do you stand on this, and how
do you plan to move forward on this? Hopefully, some common
sense will prevail here.
Secretary Buttigieg. So when it comes to railroad
regulation, our authorities mostly relate to the physical
safety and safe operation of locomotives and railroads, and are
in that sense neutral to forms of propulsion or air pollution
issues that might be the jurisdiction of the EPA. I would have
to refer you to the EPA for anything more on their rule. I'm
not as familiar with it. Again, given that our authorities
typically have more to do with physical safety.
Mr. Valadao. I understand the EPA that's going to have this
position. But you're the one that's going to be left holding
the bag when again, it's controlling or having an impact on not
just California citizens across the country. If 65 percent of
the locomotives in the country are touching California and are
being delayed because of having either change engines or
completely remove engines off the fleet, it's going to have an
impact and you're going to be the one to blame. Because when
they think locomotion locomotives, they do not think EPA,
they're thinking Secretary of Transportation.
Secretary Buttigieg. I mean, our experience in this regard
probably is mostly more in the realm of the CAFE rule that I
was discussing with Mr. Rutherford. Certainly corporations tend
to resist regulations to have cleaner air. Our job is to try to
make sure that we strike a reasonable balance between what's
feasible and what's going to lead to fewer harms from
pollution. And certainly, we're hopeful that our supply chains
can become both more efficient and greener at the same time.
But again, I say that without professing a tab more knowledge
than I do about the pending EPA rule or California rule.
Mr. Valadao. So 1.6 billion tons of goods removed
nationwide, and the EPA's own numbers, only two percent was
from locomotives of all the greenhouse gas emissions. So we're
talking about a very small amount. I mean, you can move a huge
amount of goods with very little bit of very little fuel, but
they play such a vital role over the last few years. And I know
your office was really helpful on this but we struggled a lot
with moving goods. We had cattle all across California, were
running out of feed mills because we moved in so many goods
from Canada and from the Midwest to feed animals. But there was
even a point in time where we were on the verge of running out
of cement at our concrete plants to stock construction in our
major areas. These are things that have a huge impact on
housing prices, food, every other item that is on a storefront.
And when you look at greenhouse gas emissions, locomotives are
such a small part of it. But when you look at the overall part
of what they play in moving goods across the country, this is a
huge issue for us, and we have to take this with--we really do
have to pay some attention to it and shifting just a little
bit.
You were in Vegas the other day for the high speed rail.
One comment that you made that stood out to me because high
speed rail in California, they broke ground in 2015, was that
this was going to be the first true high speed rail. What do
you mean by that? And why is California, 10 years into this
project, construction already started? Why is Las Vegas is
going to be done before ours?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, the Las Vegas to Rancho
Cucamonga project follows a unique right of way, the bulk of
which is actually basically shooting down the middle of the
median of I-15. It's part of how they were able to establish
the project timelines that they were. So my remark, I should to
be very specific, it is not the first true high speed rail to
break ground. What I mean by that is, it will we project be the
first high speed rail to be in service in terms of revenue
rides. Their goal is to be in operation by 2028. They've got an
eye on the Olympics, and so we're excited that that would be
happening sooner. The north-south project, which we also
believe in, are investing in but recognize has a much more
complex right of way picture, is on a longer timeline than the
Brightline West project.
Mr. Valadao. All right, thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Now let's have a real Pete to Pete
conversation. Mr. Aguilar.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look
forward to your leadership and your tenure in this committee.
I've indicated to you privately I want you to be successful.
Whether that means you want me to be for you or against you, I
will do whatever is best for you. Secretary Buttigieg, good to
see you again. As former mayor Torres mentioned, it was good to
be in your company at that Brightline event. And I want to
thank Mr. Valadao for the segue in this question that I have.
The California delegation is incredibly excited to play a role
in bringing the Olympic and Paralympic Games to Southern
California in 2028. The ELA Olympic Organizing Committee is
already fully engaged in the planning process. Historically,
the Federal Government has provided significant resources to
support and ensure the safety and success of the Olympic and
Paralympic Games. Just thinking ahead about the department and
their preparations for L.A. 2028 Olympic transportation needs,
how are you thinking through that? Realizing that this is
always difficult? These are not annual things, but clearly this
is a significant event. It was equal to seven Super Bowls over
a short period of time and the significant challenges that we
have. How are you guiding the department and thinking about the
L.A. 2028 Olympics?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question, and as you
note, the Olympic Games are just a massive undertaking that
requires a lot of forward thinking about how to move people
around efficiently and safely. DOT, in particular our Federal
Transit Administration, have been working with the Olympic
organizing committee, L.A. 2028, since early 2023. Just had a
conversation the other day, most recently with that committee
myself, and I should note there's an intergovernmental working
group that's been set up by the White House to try to make sure
that transportation security and other needs faced by the
organizers are well coordinated on the federal side. We've had
DOT staff tour the expected venues, housing and transportation
projects recently, and are committed to working with the L.A.
region to make these the best Olympic and Paralympic Games in
American history.
A couple things of note. They have declared their intention
to expand transit in the region to meet the needs for these
games. So they are establishing a games bus route network to
provide the ability to reach relevant destinations and hubs.
There is also the supplemental bus system or SBS concept. We
will continue to work with L.A. to address the challenges that
come with that--basically mobilizing vehicles borrowed from
other jurisdictions, trying to help make sure they can navigate
funding, availability of vehicles, drivers and mechanics, and
just the logistics of borrowing buses from other transit
operators in other jurisdictions.
I would also note there are plans to establish mobility
hubs that will create inclusivity for all of the suburbs and
the outlying communities that are going to play a very
important role in the games. And we are pleased to see that the
GM of L.A. Metro has been working hard to try to turn L.A.'s
resources to work for what we think could be a chance to really
showcase what 21st century transportation can look like under
the kind of pressure that the foot traffic associated with the
games can cause.
Mr. Aguilar. And we want that to be successful. What
resources do you anticipate needing from this committee in
order to make that happen? Specifically, the bus program, that
you mentioned, it has been discussed about resources.
Secretary Buttigieg. That certainly is one where funding
could play an important role. We would be happy to work with
this committee and work with the organizers, depending on what
funding Congress could make available, just because we are
talking about a lot of vehicles and a lot of pieces that have
to come into place. We are also working to just make sure we
have the technical expertise and assistance in place and think
that that working group and that regular cadence of contact is
going to serve us well.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. As Representative
Torres mentioned, and again, Mr. Valadao alluded to, we were at
that Brightline event. I appreciate in your testimony, and I
also wanted to highlight that you discussed the project
creating 35,000 jobs, lowering our carbon footprint, and
bringing communities closer together. As the DOT distributes
funds from the Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction
Act, how do we ensure that communities and transportation
agencies at the state level are working together for that
shared goal of lowering emissions while connecting communities?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, we certainly find that every
state has a different strategy for addressing air pollution and
carbon emissions. So we are trying to meet them where they are
and, at the same time, ensure that every statutory high bar is
met. Often, we find there are projects that the states have
been wanting to do for a long time, but until the IIJA just
didn't have the resources for. And so, whether we are talking
about longstanding programs like the Congestion Mitigation Air
Quality Program, or things like the PROTECT grants on
resilience that didn't exist before the BIL, we are mobilizing
every tool that we can, and also, I would mention, in addition
to our state partners, sometimes directly engaging cities,
transit agencies, airport authorities, especially if we find
that they have maybe a higher level of climate ambition than
their respective state capitals, and we want to make sure we
are supporting them too.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Pete. Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr.
Secretary, for being here. I want to ask a couple of questions
about the sixth district of Virginia and the way that various
national events are impacting transportation in the sixth. We
all are concerned about the bridge collapse, the tragedy
involving the six deaths and the billions of dollars in damage,
effectively closing the Port of Baltimore, affecting $100 to
$200 million in cargo every day. Understand that this could
have some impact on rail traffic in Western Virginia. Union
officials say some coal trains are being rerouted through
Roanoke to coal piers in Norfolk. Could require Norfolk
Southern to double the amount of export coal loaded each month
at the Lambert Point Terminal. With coal, Baltimore is the
number two port, but Norfolk is the number one port. And it is
my understanding that CSX and Norfolk Southern are the two main
coal carriers in the region.
Can you tell us how you have been working with the
railroads in the Port of Norfolk to ensure not only that
Norfolk plays an integral role there in accommodating a lot of
the traffic from Baltimore and that there is a seamless
transition there, but how we can ensure that rail is able to
accommodate without delays, in particular to passenger rail,
that has grown quite a bit in that area as well?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thanks, and yes, this is not only a
shipping picture, but really has impacted rail, trucking, every
form of freight transportation. The week of the Francis Scott
Key Bridge collapse, I convened supply chain stakeholders from
across the spectrum, as well as across the region and the
country--not just the ports, but for this very reason, we had
rail, trucking, and cargo owners and other representatives
there. I will say I have been impressed by how various ports,
including Virginia ports, have stepped up to absorb some of
that temporarily-diverted cargo, and not just what that means
in terms of port capacity, but the railroad and also trucking
elements of that as well.
Just to convey how complex it can be, there are actually
some processes in the automotive finishing process that take
place on the grounds of the port of Baltimore that can't easily
be moved, such that vehicles that were absorbed in Georgia or
in Rhode Island because they couldn't get to Baltimore coming
off the ships still had to be trucked to Baltimore in order to
be finished and then trucked back out. And obviously, they had
to do that without the benefit of having the Key Bridge, which
serves so much of that cargo. So at the working level, our
multimodal freight office, which was newly created by the IIJA,
has been a very important tool that has helped us to have those
conversations, that dialogue, and we find that all the
different players have stepped up very effectively to absorb
what we certainly expect as a temporary but not trivial impact.
Mr. Cline. Now when it comes to road transportation,
Interstate 81 has been overburdened by truck traffic for
decades now. Originally built for around 15 percent truck
traffic, it accommodates over 30, 40, sometimes even 50 percent
truck traffic, depending on the day of the week, traveling up
to the Northeast from points South. And while we are working to
add a third lane and would appreciate your cooperation with
that, traffic fatalities are up on 81. NHTSA estimated that
nearly 41 thousand died in traffic crashes Nationwide in 2023.
What are NHTSA's plans to reduce fatalities impacted by
crashes? Is widening one of those ways that you all are seeking
to reduce crashes? And can you speak to the department's
support for adding that third lane to 81?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thanks. NHTSA is very focused on
reversing the rise in roadway deaths that we have experienced
in recent years. The data is suggesting we have finally come
off the peak, but I am certainly not satisfied with the current
level of roadway death in this country--about 40 thousand
people, which means roughly the equivalent of a fully loaded
airliner every single day, and a number that I should also add
is significantly higher than our peer developed countries. Our
strategy for addressing that has five elements: safer roads,
safer vehicles, safer speeds, safer people, including drivers,
and then a higher standard of post-crash care.
Mr. Cline. And that first thing that you mentioned, safer
roads. Wouldn't adding additional lanes mileage be part of
that?
Secretary Buttigieg. Potentially, yes. It certainly depends
on the project and the specifics, but we want to make sure that
there is a healthy and safe flow of traffic on any interstate.
Mr. Cline. Let me ask one more question, before my time
expires, that impacts the Roanoke airport because we do have
flights that go through Reagan National. The FAA recently
issued an analysis of adding more daily round trip flights to
Reagan National. It found that 5 more round trips would result
in an extra 12 hours of delays each day. It is already the 10th
most delayed airport in the country. It would have a negative
impact on safety at the airport. Just a few weeks ago, there
was a near collision between two commercial flights on a runway
with 819 daily take-offs, more than LAX, Newark or O'Hare, it
is clear that Reagan National's Runway is the busiest in the
Nation. It already ranks third for runway incursions. Can you
comment on the administration's position on adding those extra
5 slots?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes. We certainly recognize and
respect the role of Congress in determining the availability of
slots. I would note, having spent time up in that tower at DCA,
that it really is an exceptionally, as you noticed, not only an
exceptionally busy airstrip in terms of that one runway, the
hardest working runway in the National airspace. We would be
concerned about the pressure that that could put on the system.
Of course, we stand ready to make good on whatever Congress
provides.
Mr. Cline. Thank you. Yield back.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Espaillat.
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary, thank
you. First, I want to thank you for your recent compensation
program for flights delay and cancel and the dashboard page
that you have available for consumers. I think it is important
that we help consumers as delays and cancellations continue to
occur, but thank you for that. And I also, obviously, want to
thank you, express my sincerity for including $496 million in
the proposed funding for Second Avenue subway. And thank you
for coming to Harlem. That is an important project that will
obviously connect Harlem to the rest of the world.
And I also want to stress to my colleagues in the committee
that this also provides a social equity component that I think
is so important to the communities that we represent, those
that have been left behind for far too long, and that need for
these projects, not just to be a transportation project for a
transportation desert, but an economic stimulus for the
communities that we serve. And I thank you for your vision and
the president's vision for this particular model. Given the
complex nature of urban subway expansions, what measures are
being implemented to ensure that Second Avenue phase--Second
Avenue subway Phase II remains on schedule and within budget?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for your ongoing support for
this effort. And it was an absolute joy and one of the
highlights of my time here to be able to celebrate that
signature with the people who had been waiting for so long in
the case of the Second Avenue subway, and finally seeing that
funding. Now all eyes are on delivery, and that means making
sure that we maintain a tight cadence of interaction and
collaboration with MTA and all the players involved in that. We
are doing that through our Federal Transit Administration, but
this is also a big enough project that it is being tracked at
an agency-wide level, too.
We know that hurdles and issues can come up. We stand
committed to working through any of those to make sure that
this is delivered now that the funding is in place, because the
people of those Harlem communities and really that whole part
of New York that is served up to 125th Street deserve finally
seeing that project through after having waited literally for
decades in order to see it become real.
Mr. Espaillat. Well, I hope the subway leaves the station
fairly soon, Mr. Secretary, but I have another question. As you
know, I represent a district that has a significant number of
Dominican Americans. And as you know, the Department of State
and the governor--the government of the Dominican Republic, are
in final talks for a long anticipated modern U.S.-D.R. Open
Skies Agreement. The cost of flying back home for many of these
families is exorbitant. When they go visit their families back
home, sometimes they have to pay $1,500, $2,000. So a family of
four is going to have a difficult time going back home. And I
want to know, given the evolving dynamics of international air
travel, what strategies are in place to ensure the effective
implementation of the modernized U.S.-D.R. Open Skies
Agreement?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. I know how important this
is, especially to Dominican communities in the U.S. and to the
Dominican Republic, and I have had direct conversations with my
counterparts from the Dominican Republic about the importance
of this. Our Department and our interagency partners at State
and Commerce are all participating in these negotiations. We
have been negotiating for some time. We are very encouraged by
recent progress, though we are not there quite yet. And the
real focus is to make sure that we can get to a good place
while maintaining the essential elements of a U.S. Open Skies
Agreement and the policies that have helped to define that
through us in our relationships with all of the countries where
we have an air transport agreement.
So we are looking forward to getting to a conclusion on a
modernized agreement for what is the largest Caribbean market
for U.S. travelers. And Open Skies would certainly further
facilitate travel and tourism by promoting competition and, we
think, creating more affordable options for travelers.
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you. And finally, could you elaborate
how the Federal Highway Administration investment will help to
advance environmental restoration and cleanup within our
Nation's highways?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, thank you. Often there is a
brownfield element to some of the grants that we are pursuing,
including Federal Highways. That is one of the things that,
pursuant to our statutory authority, can help a project to
score well in discretionary programs. And we certainly value
chances to work with project sponsors to make sure that
cleanups are, where required, part of the benefit of a
transportation project for the future.
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Ciscomani.
Mr. Ciscomani Thank you, Chairman, and I am glad to see you
in this committee as well. I know you have been serving for a
while, and it was great serving with you on FSGG. So, great to
be working with you here as well. Thank you. And thank you,
Secretary Buttigieg, for being here today. First, I actually
want to thank you--offer you our gratitude in Arizona, for it
is great to see the I-10. As you know, a main corridor here for
us in our state, both for commerce and for tourism, for safety
reasons, all of the above, received desperately needed funding
for widening earlier this year. So I want to thank you for
that. The grant will go a long way in improving safety, travel,
and commerce, like I mentioned. This was long overdue. So I do
want to, once again, thank your department for prioritizing
this important issue for Arizona.
Now, Mr. Secretary, I am sure you are aware that there was
recently a major train derailment along the Arizona-New Mexico
border in which a train carrying car's capacitor material fell
off the tracks, caught a fire, and consequently closed down
parts of the I-40, which is an essential route for trade and
commerce. Many Arizona and New Mexico residents, as well as the
Navajo Nation tribal members, have been evacuated from their
homes, and many more are concerned about the health effects
that this derailment will have on their neighborhoods moving
forward.
While I am grateful for the fact that local first
responders took immediate and effective action to ensure that
no one was injured, train derailment after train derailment
should not be the new normal. In America, our transportation
safety standards should be the gold standard, but the American
people are rightfully beginning to lose faith in that standard
when they see incidents like this one in Arizona putting their
communities at risk. What specifically--what are you
specifically changing within your department to ensure
something like this never happens again?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thank you for the question. I
passionately agree that there needs to be more done to secure
rail safety and to prevent derailments and other accidents. In
regards to this particular incident, that day I was in touch
with the leadership of the Navajo Nation, as well as Arizona
and New Mexico. Our FRA administrator was on site yesterday and
will continue to engage. I-40, that stretch of I-40 is back
open, but there continue, of course, to be effects due to that
derailment and that fire.
Within the Department, we have taken a number of steps,
some of which we were working on from day one, others
accelerated in the wake of the East Palestine, Ohio,
derailment. That has included focused inspection programs,
including a focused review of the phase in of robust tank cars
that can handle the transportation of hazardous materials, as
well as a route assessment for high-hazard flammable trains.
Railroad by railroad, we have been conducting safety
assessments and acting on the findings of those assessments.
And I am pleased to note that just a couple of days ago, we
welcomed a new partner to our C3RS, or Confidential Close Call
Reporting System, as BNSF agreed to join that pilot following
the lead of Norfolk Southern. I will say, though, that the
overall rates are an extreme concern. With the exception of
Norfolk Southern, we have not seen a dramatic reduction in
derailments in the last year with Class I railroads. In fact,
for many, if not all of them, the rate has gone up.
That is one reason that I take every opportunity to renew
my urgent call for Congress to act on the bipartisan Railway
Safety Act. We will continue to do everything that we can that
doesn't require an act of Congress, but given that it has been
more than a year since East Palestine, we strongly believe that
it is time for Congress to act because that bipartisan
legislation would give us a stronger hand and more tools to try
to drive down that accident rate. I don't think most Americans
realized that there were derailments on a daily basis in this
country until what happened in Ohio. And every community that
lives near a railroad, including where I grew up, is asking
whether they are safe.
Mr. Ciscomani. Well, I agree with you that there is a
heightened attention on this, and certainly in Arizona, we are
seeing the effects of the rates that you are mentioning. I do
want to urge you and your team to prioritize rail safety, which
it seems that you have a clear understanding of the rates going
up on that, and get boots on the ground as soon as possible to
see what the community is dealing with in Arizona as soon as
you can. And as a result of this incident, analyze how DOT can
do better moving forward, which, by your notes, it seems that
that is what you are doing. I would love to work with you on
this.
And I do have another question about. We were running out
of time, and I know votes are called, sir, so we will. It may
take more than 30 seconds, so I will wait for the second round
if that is okay.
Mr. Womack. Ms. Wexton.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Chairman Womack. Congratulations to
you. I have no doubt you will continue Chairman Cole's high
standard of leadership for this great subcommittee. As members
of the committee may know, last year I was diagnosed with
progressive supranuclear palsy, or PSP. I describe it as
Parkinson's on steroids and I don't recommend it. PSP makes it
very difficult for me to speak, so I use an assistive app so
that I can participate and you can understand me. I want to
thank the chair and the ranking member for allowing me to do so
today.
Secretary Buttigieg, it is great to see you again. I want
to take a moment to thank you on behalf of the father and
father-to-be in my office for taking parental leave not long
after you and Jason adopted your two kids as newborns. Even
though you didn't take anything close to the 12 weeks that your
staff would, it was still a great example to set. I was also
happy to read recently that although you are not the stay at
home parent, you give the twins their bath every night. I am
intrigued that you composed a bath time song. My husband was a
stay at home dad when our kids were young and when they were
toddlers, bath time was my special time with them. I am not
creative enough to compose my own song, but my bath time
selection was ``I like You'' by Ernie and Bert from Sesame
Street. And yes, I sang both parts. If you are ever looking for
another bath time song, I highly recommend it.
I also want to thank you for the recent alternative PNTR-FP
that DOT released. We have spoken about this critical
vulnerability several times before and I am excited to see
things moving forward to address it, thanks to your and the
department's leadership.
It is an exciting time to be a passenger rail supporter in
Virginia. At the end of the last year and in large part thanks
to the bipartisan infrastructure law, two major awards were
announced through the Federal State Partnership program for the
expansion of Long Bridge and for high speed rail service
between Richmond and Raleigh. The FRA also awarded two grants
to extend the D.C. to Roanoke and track line to Bristol and
establish daily Cardinal Line service which travels right
through my district in Manassas. Just yesterday it was
announced that Amtrak Virginia had its highest ridership ever
this past March with over 123 thousand passengers. As you know,
Union Station is the second busiest rail station in the
country.
We are all aware that it has significant infrastructure
needs, yet it is getting no direct funding from the
infrastructure law. I was glad to see the environmental impact
statement and record of decision in March, but that is just one
step towards the much needed expansion project. We all want to
maximize the investments in Virginia that I mentioned, as well
as all the work that is being done in the Northeast Corridor,
but we won't be able to if Union Station remains a bottleneck.
My question for you is how can DOT, FRA, our regional
delegation, and other important partners like Amtrak work
together to identify funding solutions for this critical
project?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thanks for the question. First,
let me just note my admiration for the courage and spirit that
you have shown in confronting your diagnosis and continuing to
be an effective leader here in Congress, and for your kind
words about my family.
With regard to Union Station, we recognize its importance
really as not just a regional but a national transportation
center. And while we are glad that the President's Budget
proposes to reserve a $15 million set-aside for immediate state
of good repair projects, as you are well aware, the ultimate
needs of Union Station are at another order of magnitude. The
completion of the EIS is certainly an important step, and I
have been in dialogue with the District of Columbia and other
stakeholders about how to best position Union Station for long-
term success. That is going to include working to make sure
that they are not just on top of addressing some end of life
station infrastructure, but really preparing the vision for
what the future can look like in ways that would qualify for
discretionary funds.
And of course, we would welcome opportunities to work with
appropriators on any source of funding that could help get that
done. There is little question that will require multiple
sources, Federal, District, Amtrak, and others. Certainly that
is an eligibility for Amtrak with the Amtrak grants, but we
know how many different needs they are trying to cover on the
Amtrak site side as well, and we will maintain that dialogue to
try to make progress there. Thank you.
Ms. Wexton. I also want to thank you for your and the
administration's steadfast support for our Nation's transit
systems and transit workers. Transit workers deserve to be
treated with respect and to be free from violence, injury, and
harassment in the workplace. I was very glad to see the FDA
announce a final rule earlier this month taking major steps to
protect transit workers, including giving workers an equal seat
at the table with transit agencies in identifying and
addressing safety and policy issues. How do you see this rule
making things safer for transit workers and writers, and how
can this subcommittee support that goal?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question and for
your support of transit workers. We believe this rule is an
important step forward in giving transit workers the right
kinds of protections and the right kind of voice, participating
in the newer structures that have been created by legislation,
including committee processes, so that any kind of safety-
critical needs are addressed in a way that has to include the
voice of transit workers. Operators have been through so much,
and we think it is very important to back them and believe it
is absolutely possible to back them and hear them while also
meeting the needs of management and operating these agencies.
And I should note that I was thinking of them and of your
longtime advocacy yesterday when the family minivan became
unavailable and I found myself on a WMATA bus in the morning
and the Metro in the afternoon, getting my kids back and forth
from daycare, and that bus was full of people who count on it
every single day.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. Jennifer, you are a valued member of
this subcommittee and I share in the Secretary's remarks about
your courage and your willingness to continue to participate.
And I for one am thankful for the technology that has been
developed that allows you to be that valued and important
member of this subcommittee. Thank you, so much.
We are going to be called for votes here in 3 or 4 minutes,
which means in typical congressional fashion, we probably got a
good half hour left if we need it. And Mr. Joyce walks in just
in time to--go have a seat and I will call on you here, Mr.
Joyce. If anybody at the dais has a burning question that they
would like to ask in round two, I am going to be able to yield
that.
And so, Ms. Watson Coleman, I will recognize you first.
Just be as brief as you can so that we can get--oh, I know you
are. And you are recognized, please.
Ms. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Buttigieg,
you know what I am going to ask about. I am going to ask about
Mercer Airport. For 3 years we have been trying to get that
infrastructure built. We were told most recently that we asked
for too much for this size airport. A: I needed to know, is
there sort of a metrics where size equals the maximum amount
you can be awarded? That is No. 1. Number 2 is, can I have a
conversation with someone who will kind of guide me as to how
to direct this airport to ask for the right amount to get this
infrastructure? You know how much we need it. We deal with
40,000 people a year now, and looking to double that. Thank
you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Was that quick enough?
Mr. Womack. Thank you, that was quite quick.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. I will try to likewise be
concise. There is, of course, no way that I could miss out on
the importance of Mercer Airport after you hosted us for a
visit there, and I saw both the importance of it to passengers
there and the needs. With regard to successfully receiving a
discretionary grant, it is often the case that a project might
be rescoped in dialogue with the partner to try to get the size
to something that is enough to get something done, but also
fits within the program, given all of the different grants that
are needed. Without knowing all of the details of the most
recent application, you certainly have my commitment to make
sure that there is a good debrief, which we would welcome your
office participating in as well, to try to get them the best
possible information about how to put their best foot forward
for any upcoming rounds of discretionary grants.
Ms. Watson Coleman. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. Mr. Joyce is ready. The gentleman is
recognized.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Chairman Womack, and I apologize for
being late. I was at a Defense hearing, and certainly apologize
to you, sir.
Secretary Buttigieg. No problem.
Mr. Joyce. Mr. Secretary, in fiscal year 2019, the
Department of Transportation launched the Port Infrastructure
Development program. Since then, the department has distributed
more than $2 billion to port authorities, tribal, state and
local governments, and private companies. While 72 percent of
those funds have gone to the west and east coast, only 8
percent of those funds have gone to the Great Lakes ports over
the last 5 years. I am concerned that these funds are not being
distributed in a regionally equitable manner. Given the
concerning disparity, what should we in the Great Lakes region
be telling our local communities?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, as you know, representative, I
am myself a creature of the Great Lakes. I grew up in Indiana,
live in Michigan, met my spouse in Chicago soon after he would
returned from Milwaukee, and I know how important those
facilities are.
I will say that while the dollar amounts can vary on our
grants, especially when you consider the different-sized ports
that we support, the Great Lakes ports characteristically have
been punching above their weight, not just in the value they
add to the American economy, but also in the last couple of
rounds of the PIDP program. Now that, of course, doesn't mean
that every application was successful, but what I will say is
that we recognize that America's supply chains and the
importance of our ports isn't just about the well-publicized
matter of the large container ships that are bearing down,
often on ports like L.A. and Long Beach, but the traffic that
goes on, often bulk traffic that traverses the Great Lakes, and
that we also, of course, support through our management of the
U.S. side of the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway, which links
those to the Atlantic.
And we are certainly happy to provide debriefs to any port
that was hopeful of a grant recently, is going to try to come
back for another round, again noting that these ports have
really demonstrated their often small but mighty character,
both in our programs and just in their contributions to U.S.
shipping.
Mr. Joyce. Can you describe any actions your department has
taken to ensure and improve the equitable distribution of
Federal Grant Assistance under the program?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, one thing I did was I sat with
the representatives of the Great Lakes ports, make sure that my
staff and I had an opportunity to hear about the pride they
rightfully take and the value they add, and to share some
thoughts on how our programs are structured and how to make
sure that they do well and continue to grow their share. At a
project-by-project or port-by-port level, I also would be happy
to engage. And would note that our GLS administrator is himself
a veteran of the Great Lakes ports world, and we just see a ton
of opportunity there.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, I appreciate it. And I apologize
again for being late, sir.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Ciscomani.
Mr. Ciscomani. Great, thank you chair for this second
opportunity. Mr. Secretary, my question is around rest stops
and rest areas. As you know, Arizona is one of the fastest
growing States in the country and as such, it has pressing
needs in transportation. Now, Arizona DOT needs more financial
resources and it is looking at creative ways to bring in
additional revenue. And also, you may know, that many states in
the Northeast, especially along the I-95 corridor, have
commercialized rest areas. They add convenience, safety, and
more importantly, a revenue stream for States to utilize them.
However, because of a 1956 Federal regulation, some Western
states, like Arizona, can't commercialize their rest areas.
While some states produce revenue because of these rest areas,
Arizona is burdened with the cost of these areas. I kind of see
this as a double standard, to be honest with you. That is what
it strikes me as. So all I am looking for is can you commit to
working with me to address the disparity through the
appropriations process or the Surface Transportation
Reauthorization?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes. As you know, this relates to
federal law that prohibits that kind of commercialization.
Knowing that there is a great interest in provisions that would
either open up additional exceptions or change that provision,
we would welcome any request to provide technical assistance
and work with you and your office on that.
Mr. Ciscomani. Excellent. We will follow up offline here as
well so we can work on something. This is something that
Arizona has been working on for a long time. We have worked
with different secretaries on this and different congresses. We
haven't been able to get the result that we need on this. So I
am looking forward to working with you on that and hopefully
get it done.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, sir. Thank you, chairman.
Mr. Womack. All right, thank you, Mr. Joyce.
Mr. Joyce. Given the opportunity for a second round, thank
you very much. And Mr. Secretary----
Mr. Womack. It pays to come late.
Mr. Joyce. Discretionary grants are becoming more and more
difficult for smaller communities to apply for because the
amount of work needed to complete a given application. From
completing the benefit cost analysis to having to review 60
pages for notices of funding opportunities, small businesses
are effectively being disqualified from receiving funds for
vital community projects because of this burdensome process.
Mr. Secretary, what is the department doing to make these
programs more accessible to small and rural communities? And
once these funds are awarded, what is the department doing to
streamline the process so that they can be completed in a
timely manner?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thanks for the question. I approach
this as many other things with the mentality of a mayor who
once found myself knocking on the door of the USDOT and a mayor
of not the biggest city. I also think back to our time as a
mayor when I found out that our paperwork for tax abatements
was 17 pages and that we had a chance to get it down to two
double-sized sheets, and I try to take the same approach in
getting our federal paperwork under control. Believe it or not,
when I began pressing our team to find ways to get our notices
of funding opportunity under 100 pages, that was actually
considered a reduction from past practice.
Of course, part of what contributes to the complexity of it
is just the nature and the number of statutory requirements
that are built into each program. But it is certainly our
intention to make sure that these are more user-friendly
processes, especially so that smaller, rural, tribal, and
lower-income communities, which are some of the ones we most
want and need to help, find it just as easy to navigate and
succeed as the biggest cities that have a full-time staff of
federal relations personnel, like here in D.C.
Some of the measures we have taken to do that include not
just trying to simplify or consolidate our application
processes. For example, we took rural, Mega, and INFRA programs
and rolled them up into a single notice of funding
opportunity--kind of the same way when you have the application
for college, there is a common application so you don't have to
fill in your ZIP Code seven different times--but also working
hand in hand with those communities on the front end. And I
would like to take this opportunity just to again mention our
belief in the Thriving Communities Program--far from the
biggest dollar item that we will be asking this committee for,
but one that has enabled us already to enlist dozens of
communities in a program where we pair them up with capacity
building partners with a view toward making them better able to
compete and win.
The last thing I will mention is that it is not just the
matter of applying for a grant and getting to yes, but then
once you get the grant, there is the whole matter of actually
getting through implementation. And the smaller or lower income
of community, the more challenges they often face in even just
getting from the award announcement to the grant agreement, a
process that, it is not unusual for just that part to take a
year, and we are trying to fight that down to a tighter
timeline.
There, I think hands on assistance helps, but we are also
always interested in ways to simplify it, all the way down to
just creating templates or finding ways to use online tools
where there had been paper, pre-selected dropdown menus,
anything that can just take some of the complexity out of it.
And if you are hearing specific examples or pain points from
communities you serve, we'd be interested in hearing that too,
so that we can make these processes, again, more user friendly.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you. And you will appreciate the fact that
I sort of tailored my questions to your background, being a
Great Lakes kid and a former mayor. And I also want you to know
that if there is something that is in the statutory process
that is creating these types of issues for you, this is a two-
way street. You tell us where you think we can help simplify
those, and we will do the necessary work here to make sure that
we make it easier for these communities to get those. Because I
think you hit the point, the smaller communities, the ones that
need the grant the most, and they have the hardest time of
doing that, or they are hiring somebody from the outside to be
their grant person, and the money is not going to where it is
needed, the people itself. So thank you for your time.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Dave. Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thanks, chair. I hope the public has enjoyed
mayor's day here on the hill. Mr. Secretary, thank you for
being here. Appreciate your good work. And Mr. Chairman, great
initial hearing. Very important. We all know we have critical
work to do in a pivotal year on all this, I think we have the
right team in place. Very important hearing and well done.
Thank you all.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mike. Before we go, Mr. Secretary,
one final question for me as we wrap up.
Federal Transit Administration's Capital Investment Grant
program is heading into an era where the size of the grants
committed for transit projects are the largest in history.
Inflation has had a big impact on it, but the amount of demand
on the--on the Capital Investment Grant program pipeline looks
astronomical over the next decade. Now, based on projects
selected for fiscal year 2025 in the annual report, FDA is
slating over $20 billion in commitments via grant agreements,
many of which are expecting hundreds of millions in payments
each year from the THUD bill. IIJA provides $1.6 billion in
advance appropriations, but the well runs dry in 2026. So
quickly, what is your response to the concern that this $20
billion projected level of commitment over the next decade
might create a check that we can't cash?
Secretary Buttigieg. In brief, we are working to make sure
that we support as many worthy transit projects as we can with
the funding that we have. As you note, there is a long list of
projects that have met the statutory criteria to get a full
funding grant agreement or to go into engineering. The 2025
budget request, $2.4 billion combined with that $1.6 that came
through the infrastructure law, that gets us to about $4
billion to meet those current and future needs.
Just in terms of how that breaks out, that is about $1
billion for four existing New Starts, $2.1 billion for six New
Starts projects not yet under construction grants, and then
funding for New Starts projects that might become ready for
construction funding in 2025, core capacity projects that might
be ready in 2025, and then $533 million for four projects that
come under our Small Starts project. We do have enough
currently to meet these commitments, but the impacts of budget
cuts could force us to make payments over a longer period of
time, which, as you note, can increase the time-related costs
to projects.
Not to go one more time into former mayor mode, but we all
know that the longer a project takes, the more it costs if you
have been in the business of delivering it. If FTA is to run up
against the funding cap during the later years of an
authorization, what that would mean is that FTA would have to
delay signing any new full funding grant agreements until a new
authorization was signed and provided additional funding
authority. And it is fair to say that each passing year, those
projects would become more expensive if we can't get to them
yet because the funding hasn't been available.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. We are not going to require a second
round. We have had a sampling of it here today. We are going to
release the Secretary to a cheeseburger or whatever he has on
the menu----
Secretary Buttigieg. Sounds pretty good, Chairman.
Mr. Womack [continuing]. For lunch today. The rest of us
are going to go vote. I want to thank publicly, our team. Doug,
your team. Avery, Kate, Jared, Naomi.--oh, Diem-Linh. How could
I miss you? Christina, thank you. We don't want to overlook
you, but we just appreciate the outstanding work of our team
that has Womack proofed this hearing today. So thank you so
much.
And Mr. Secretary, as always, we are just delighted to have
you here, and thank you so much. For members that have follow
up questions that want to submit them for the record, you have
got 7 days. Get them to subcommittee staff, and we will make
them a formal part of our record.
In closing, again, thanks to all for coming this morning.
Look forward to working with you as we continue down the path
of the fiscal year 2025 appropriations season. With that, this
hearing stands adjourned.
[Questions and answers submitted for the record follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.010

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.011

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.012

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.013

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.014

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.015

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.016

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.017

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.018

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.019

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.020

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.021

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.022

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.023

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.024

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.025

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.026

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.027

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.028

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.029

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.030

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.031

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.032

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.033

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.034

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.035

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.036

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.037

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.038

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.039

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.040

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.041

Wednesday, May 1, 2024.

FISCAL YEAR 2025 REQUEST FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT

WITNESS

ADRIANNE TODMAN, ACTING SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Womack. The subcommittee will come to order.
Welcome to our second hearing of the fiscal year 2025
appropriations season.
Today I would like to welcome the Acting Secretary of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Honorable
Adrianne Todman, to this hearing on HUD's fiscal year 2025
budget request.
Thank you, Madam Secretary, for appearing here today.
Delighted to hear from you.
We look forward to hearing from you today about HUD's
request for the fiscal year 2025 fiscal year and kicking off
the current appropriations process. It is the fundamental job
of this subcommittee to complete our work on time before the
end of the fiscal year. I am confident that we can fulfill our
task.
I hope our colleagues who do not serve on this committee
will be cooperative and help us meet this goal.
Our job as appropriators is to carry out our Nation's most
fundamental duty of funding the government. This hearing is
just the start of what we are called to do to make this
government work for the American people.
Today we will hear testimony about the Department of
Housing and Urban Development's budget request for $66 billion
in discretionary budget authority in fiscal 2025. HUD also uses
mortgage guarantee fees from the Federal Housing Administration
to offset its spending.
The Office of Management and Budget currently estimates
$6.7 billion in offsetting receipts for fiscal 2025, an
increase of 1.2 billion from the fiscal year 2024 receipts
score.
We must recognize the impact that the health of the housing
market and FHA receipts have on this bill every year. In
addition to discretionary funds, HUD also proposes over $81
billion in mandatory programs over 10 years.
We are certain to face fiscal constraints in putting
together our bill. This forces us to get back to the blocking
and tackling of appropriations to make sure every dollar is
well spent and purposeful. It lets us focus on funding the real
needs of the government in a way that is sustainable,
justifiable, and works for the long-term fiscal health of our
great Nation.
HUD's programs impact every district, from providing rental
vouchers to families to helping first-time home buyers get a
mortgage to housing veterans who have served our country
admirably.
HUD programs allow elderly Americans to live with dignity
in housing that meets their needs and keep people safe from
hazards in their homes.
Deciding how to best allocate funding to these important
programs is our task and the task of our subcommittee.
One of my priorities on this subcommittee is to stop the
runaway housing inflation that impacts not only my constituents
in Arkansas but every American. We cannot turn a blind eye to
families impacted by the rising housing costs in part caused by
choices made by this administration.
I also want to focus today on out-of-control regulations
that set up unnecessary bureaucratic barriers. Overregulation
limits opportunities, and it feeds inflation often without
making meaningful improvements in people's lives.
I look forward to learning about HUD's successes and your
long-term goals in this hearing. This subcommittee stands ready
to work with you to better serve all Americans as we right the
T-HUD fiscal 2025 appropriations bill.
With that, I recognize my colleague and our ranking member
and my good friend, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Quigley
for his opening comments.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As we said yesterday, for those who don't know it, the
chairman and I were chairman/rankers on FSGG. Had a great
partnership. And I want to echo his desire on what should be
commonplace business here on the Hill of funding the government
in a responsible, timely basis. Doing so after the fiscal year
begins makes no sense. We need to show the world that we can
govern.
But I also want to welcome the Acting Secretary, Todman,
before this subcommittee. It is great to have you here, both as
Acting Secretary of HUD and an experienced affordable housing
practitioner.
You have led one of the Nation's largest housing
authorities and have seen firsthand the challenges of
addressing homelessness, preserving public housing and creating
housing opportunities for low income families. I look forward
to the very valuable and nuanced perspective your experience
will bring to our conversation today.
As you know, this Nation faces significant challenges with
housing affordability and homelessness. According to HUD's 2023
report on worst-case housing needs, over 8.5 million of the
lowest income households in the U.S. pay more than half their
income for rent, live in severely inadequate conditions, or
both. This is an increase of 760,000 households compared to the
previous year.
The solutions to these challenges are sometimes complex,
but this subcommittee has risen to the occasion on a bipartisan
basis each year to help HUD meet its mission to create
affordable housing opportunities and strong, sustainable
communities.
In fiscal year 2024, we were able to prevent evictions for
nearly five million low income households, invest in programs
that help mayors and governors fund locally driven solutions by
expanding grants to reduce barriers to affordable housing
production, and target 418 million more for homeless assistance
grants to help over 750,000 people move out of homelessness and
into permanent housing.
While we have made important strides to address
homelessness among veterans and families with children in
particular, the fight to end homelessness is far from over.
Data from HUD's most recent national count of people
experiencing homelessness on a single night in 2023 showed a
striking increase of 12 percent over 2022. This is the single
largest 1-year increase since HUD began collecting data in
2007, and it was reflected across subpopulations. While these
numbers are sobering, they are not cause for hopelessness. When
you talk to local leaders, they know what works.
I hope we all feel the urgency of providing the resources
and flexibility that localities need to support and house our
most vulnerable communities. Without it, the impacts of this
housing crisis can be felt beyond our housing systems.
Hospitals, schools, and criminal justice systems all bare a
huge burden.
Secretary, I am pleased that you have brought before us a
budget that will continue our progress in addressing these
complex challenges. I look forward to working with you and the
chairman to come to a fiscal year 2025 agreement that adheres
to the Fiscal Responsibility Act requirements without
compromising our responsibility to ensure millions of Americans
remain stably housed and receive the support they need to build
a safe and thriving home.
I look forward to your testimony.
And I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mike.
The chairman of the full Appropriations Committee, Mr. Tom
Cole, who was the subcommittee chairman this time last year and
wrote the 2024 bill, is preoccupied with disasters in his own
State.
My understanding is that Tom may be returning to Washington
this week. We have a scheduled visit tomorrow. So he won't be
able to be here, and any prepared remarks that Mr. Cole might
have had we will enter into the record.
And without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Womack. The chair notes that the gentlelady from
Connecticut, the ranking member on the full committee has
graced us with her presence. And Ms. DeLauro, I am going to
recognize you for your opening comments.
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I apologize
for being late. I should know better that with the hearings
that you would be conducting, that it is spot on. It is
happening. It is going to start on time.
So I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member Quigley
for holding the hearing. And I thank you to Acting Secretary
Todman.
Welcome to the Transportation, Housing and Urban
Development Subcommittee. Let me offer my congratulations to
you on the position of Acting Secretary of HUD. A big, really
big undertaking, you know, especially today because the biggest
issue that affects every single community across America is the
lack of affordable housing.
There is a shortage of nearly 8 million affordable homes
available nationwide. Housing costs have skyrocketed, driving
up the cost of living for American families, and putting
homeownership completely out of reach for many.
And this is really--homeownership, having a place to be, to
call your own, is the American dream. It is the American dream,
and people are suffering without being able to have access to
affordable housing. And the lack of affordable housing has
contributed to the escalation of the homelessness crisis.
I spoke to mayors from across the country yesterday. They
shared how rates of homelessness in their communities are
spiraling out of control. Some 600,000 people in America,
mothers, fathers, grandparents, children experience
homelessness on any given day.
This is an issue consuming the everyday of our local
leaders. What they said to me, actually, was this is the thing
that keeps them up at night, of how they are going to try to
cope with it.
One mayor said he has got like 12 or 1,500 people, you
know, every night outside, you know, just sleeping, you know,
and without any place to be. So it really is a critical issue.
So high rent, low housing inventory are crippling their
ability to respond. They need resources, including through
increased support for Housing Choice Vouchers and through
project-based vouchers, which would allow for additional
affordable housing development.
There are many factors that contribute to homelessness, in
addition to housing affordability, but we, as a Nation, have
yet failed to resolve this crisis. Provide for the most basic
of human needs for our most vulnerable populations should bring
us great shame but, at the same time, great urgency about doing
something.
The importance of providing more housing in places
Americans live and work and ensuring that there are roofs over
their heads, of children and families, should be a central
focus of this Congress.
And, indeed, in the final 2024 funding package, we made
investments to improve housing affordability and accessibility.
We prevented the eviction of nearly 5 million low income
individuals and families, and invested in legal aid assistance
for eviction prevention grants.
We provided historic increases for tribal housing and
community development programs. We invested in programs that
help mayors and governors find locally driven housing
solutions. And the majors yesterday told me they do have
solutions, and they need to get a hearing on those solutions.
And we expanded grants for reducing barriers to affordable
housing production, and we expanded housing options for people
experiencing homelessness by committing new resources to
construction and rehabilitating permanent, supportive housing.
However, I still--this is an incredible amount of work to
be done. Longstanding inequities in housing persist, are
exacerbated by the housing inventory shortage and elevated
borrowing costs.
It was just over 56 years ago that President Lyndon Johnson
signed the Civil Rights Act of which the Fair Housing Act was
included as title 8. Yet, the racial homeownership gap, the
difference in homeownership rates between White and Black
Americans is essentially unchanged to this day. And I would
like to hear more about what the department is doing to address
this historic inequity.
Looking forward to 2025, the President's budget request for
HUD proposes nearly $73 billion. We should support investments
that would enable HUD to expand rental assistance for low
income households, increase the affordable housing supply,
expand homeownership opportunities for underserved borrowers,
advance efforts to end homelessness, address housing-related
discrimination, increase climate resilience and energy
efficiency, and strengthen communities suffering from
underinvestment.
Bringing down the high cost of living for American families
has got to be our primary focus. People struggle every day.
They live paycheck to paycheck.
Housing is one of the primary drivers of the inflation
suffocating families' budgets and holding back our economy. I
believe that your department and this subcommittee must assume
a leading role in tackling these issues.
Thanks so much for being here, for your public service to
our country.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Womack. I thank the gentlelady.
Secretary Todman, you hit the lottery today. You are
appearing before--and I know I am biased--the best subcommittee
on the House Appropriations Committee. The gentlemen and ladies
that sit to my right and my left are genuinely interested in
addressing the issues that fall under our portfolio. HUD, of
course, being one of those.
So we are anxious to hear your comments today. I think you
will find that the Q and A we will do following your remarks
will be beneficial not only to you but to this subcommittee as
we continue to press against the challenges facing this great
Nation of ours.
And with that, I will give you 5 minutes for your opening
comments.
Secretary Todman. Thank you.
Chairman Womack, Ranking Member Quigley, and distinguished
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today under the President's fiscal year 2025 budget
proposal for HUD.
And thank you and your staff for supporting HUD's mission,
as reflected in our 2024 budget. I know that you had tough
choices to make, and we are looking forward to working with you
in the implementation of those funds.
HUD has been hard at work getting resources out the door.
We have stood up two new programs, ENB and PRICE to modernize
how and where we build housing. There were more apartments
under construction in 2023 than in any year on record, and we
are helping to build even more.
We have provided more new rental vouchers to Americans
across the country, the largest increase in 20 years. We have
helped almost 20 million families buy their first home.
Last year alone HUD allocated more than $340 million to
help eliminate health hazards, like lead, in American homes.
And we continue to prevent and remedy the impacts of
discrimination, and we are making investments in HUD's
workforce and technology to ensure that we can support
communities who need us now more than ever.
This past Monday, I also had an opportunity to meet with 40
or so mayors. There were Democrats, Republicans representing
big cities, the suburbs, and small towns, who acknowledge the
support that they have received from HUD and the Biden-Harris
administration.
But they also shared what they are hearing from their
constituents: The need for more rental assistance, access to
homeownership, and helping the homeless, particularly our
homeless veterans.
I also heard from your colleagues on the Senate side as
well about the housing need that exists in their respective
States.
So we, at HUD, know our work is simply not done. That is
why the President's budget proposes bold mandatory investments
focused on increasing the Nation's housing supply, helping
first-time homeowners by providing $10 billion in first
generation downpayment assistance, $15 billion to support
additional apartments that low income families can afford and
to make repairs to public housing, $33 billion to prevent and
address homelessness, particularly for veterans, our seniors,
and youth aging out of foster care.
Together this suite of funding and other tax proposals aim
to tackle housing affordability head on.
The budget proposal also requests $72.6 billion for HUD,
nearly $363 million more than the '24 enacted. And it is to
support our core programs and our housing delivery systems, our
public and assisted housing, the HOME program, CDBG, our
Housing Choice Vouchers, our Healthy Homes Program, programs to
prevent evictions and address homelessness with the urgency it
requires.
And certainly, initiatives to boost homeownership and other
wealth-building opportunities.
Our proposal also, once again, calls on Congress to support
communities devastated by disasters by authorizing HUD's
disaster recovery program. Whether it is hurricanes, tornados,
wildfires, or flooding, HUD needs to be better positioned to
aid communities much faster than we are right now, and we
cannot do that without Congress' help.
Senators, creating and sustaining strong communities and
providing--Congress people, creating and sustaining strong
communities and providing access to affordable housing are
priorities for the Biden-Harris administration, and the
President has put forward a vision that builds in our existing
body of work. And HUD is certainly prepared to do our part.
Chairman, ranking member, distinguished members of this
subcommittee, thank you again for this opportunity.
I will also agree, Chairman, that this is the best and
hardest working subcommittee here in the House of
Representatives, and I look forward to working with you on
behalf of the American people and their credible housing needs.
Thank you so much.
Mr. Womack. And we thank you.
Each member will have 5 minutes. We will adhere to the 5-
minute rule. Your light will turn yellow when there is a minute
remaining, so heed the warnings as recognized by the lights.
Members will be recognized in order of seniority based on
who was seated at the beginning of the hearing this morning.
I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Let me kick off this hearing by saying that our thoughts
are with our colleagues whose districts were devastated by
tornados this past weekend. I am especially thinking about my
friend and our full committee chairman, Tom Cole, who this week
is viewing the devastation on the ground in hard-hit
communities he represents.
We send our prayers to the injured and join those who are
mourning the lives lost.
Acting Secretary Todman, do I have your commitment that HUD
will work diligently and quickly with communities on the ground
to rebuild as soon as possible?
Secretary Todman. You certainly do.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
As you well know, the Appropriations Committee appropriates
the funding for the CDBG disaster recovery. That is the CDBG-DR
program.
Can you remind the subcommittee on the DR process and steps
HUD has taken to ensure that funds appropriated to communities
are quickly disbursed?
Secretary Todman. Certainly. Well, as I mentioned in my
opening comments, Chairman, we certainly do need Congress' help
to not just authorize the program but also to provide us with
those disaster recovery funds. I have yet to receive some of
the funding that we need to take care of our storms that
happened in 2023, and certainly look forward to working with
this subcommittee and others to get that across the line.
Having said that, one of the things that we did do very
recently was reach out to all of the existing disaster recovery
grantees, those States and big towns that has received our
funding, but also the general public to say how can we do this
better?
We know that we are not perfect. We know that this is
meeting families and communities, at their most traumatic time,
receive a lot of information, and we will be putting that to
work to make sure we are streamlining the program.
Mr. Womack. There are probably people on this dias that are
maybe a bit confused as to the difference between CDBG-DR and
what would normally happen in a disaster with FEMA, SBA, and
others involved. Can you delineate the differences between what
the responding agencies on these disasters do and then where
the CDBG-DR program fits in?
Secretary Todman. Certainly.
So FEMA is certainly the Federal Government's first
responder. They are usually the first boots on the ground, and
they help to stabilize communities just in the immediate and
short-term.
And SBA also helps by providing businesses and homeowners
with resources they need quickly to try to get back on their
feet.
What HUD does, and I say this across the country, is HUD is
there when the headlines are gone. You know, sadly, we have so
many disasters and so frequently that we forget sometimes some
of the Americans who are impacted. HUD's work is to be there to
rebuild and reknit the communities in the long-term.
I have been to Florida after Ian. I have been to Kentucky
after the tornados that happened there, met with the local
leaders and people.
So HUD is there to help rebuild homes in the long-term and
to build resiliency into anything our funds touch so that we
can try to prepare for what inevitably may be the next
disaster.
Mr. Womack. I am not going to ask you to wade into the
issues regarding the permanent authorization of CDBG-DR. That
is a fight that Congress will need to take up if, in fact, it
is going to happen. We appreciate your response on the disaster
recovery piece.
My last question in this round is one of my priorities is
making sure that HUD-VA Supportive Housing program, HUD-VASH,
is working well and veterans can access and use the HUD-VASH
rental assistance vouchers quickly.
Out of the 110,000 vouchers awarded in the HUD-VASH
program, why are nearly 30,000 vouchers still waiting to be
leashed up, according to HUD's latest dashboard?
Secretary Todman. You know, we do find that sometimes we
have been--it has been difficult for veterans to sometimes use
these vouchers in the private rental market, and so we have
been working very carefully with housing agencies on ways that
we can improve the program and also improve some of the
business aspects of our relationship with private----
Mr. Womack. Any early indications what those changes, what
those modifications might be?
Secretary Todman. We are certainly looking at issues around
inspections. We are looking at issues around getting
eligibility documents done quickly.
But one of the other things that we are doing is working
with our partners at Veterans Affairs to make sure that we are
receiving referrals or the agencies are receiving referrals
very quickly, and both agencies are working very closely with
each other on the ground to make sure veterans are housed.
Secretary McDonough and I just probably 3 weeks ago kicked
off a VA and HUD bootcamp to help housers and the VA Medical
Center leaders figure out how to work more seamlessly with each
other.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Chairman.
Madam Secretary, I want to dovetail on the chairman's
questions with CDBG-DR. I think, to put it in a broader
perspective, our thoughts are with the full committee chairman
and the sites he is visiting and the people who have suffered,
but we recognize that the number and severity of storms and
fires and other natural disasters have increased.
And we have to be honest with ourself and recognize that we
can't just build the same old infrastructure back. We have to
build it with resilience and recognize what the long-term needs
are.
But it has been nearly, what, a year and a half since
Congress has helped communities with long-term disaster funding
through CDBG-DR.
So I guess the first question is: What do you see as the
current unmet need at this point? And what is probably going to
be our annual need as we go forward so we can appropriately
plan and budget?
Secretary Todman. So I know that we have sent over to the
Congress sort of our DR funds need for the 2023 storms, and I
believe that is like $3.2 billion. $3.2 billion is the existing
need.
Mr. Quigley. Can you pull your microphone a little closer?
Secretary Todman. Certainly. I will get a little closer.
$3.2 billion is our existing need based on the storms that
occurred in 2023. That doesn't include any storms that have
occurred so far this year and probably at the tail end of last
year.
Mr. Quigley. Please keep us informed on that.
And I appreciate that you referenced homelessness in your
opening. You have watched us for some time and currently have a
good perch to see how we are doing as it relates to this, but
in the communities that seem to be succeeding at, at least,
reducing homelessness or it is not an increase, and,
particularly, unsheltered homelessness, what seems to be
working? What programs and ideas?
Secretary Todman. What I see works is a high level of
outcome-based coordination between the housing system, the
homeless system, and really the political leadership in towns
and counties across the country. And when that seamlessness
occurs, when everybody agrees on what their true north is, I
think that we do see a fair amount of work occurring.
But notwithstanding that intentionality, folks need
resources. People continue to tell me the need for more
vouchers, the need for more funds that we are giving to our
continuums of care.
So we know the need is great, as evidenced in our point-in-
time count report from last December, but with resources and
intentionality, we think that that is the way to help
Americans.
Mr. Quigley. You talk about coordination seemingly local,
but how is HUD? And are they coordinating with other Federal
agencies to provide supportive services to maximize our
investments and improve homeless intervention outcomes?
Secretary Todman. So we actually kicked off a new pilot
with our partners over at HHS to do just that, to match our
housing and their services. We call it a housing and services
accelerator. And Secretary Becerra and I kicked that off, I
want to say, just about a month ago.
It is a pilot that has targeted eight States that have
their Medicaid waivers, and the idea is to use some of HHS'
funding for not just services that are happening at sites and
elsewhere but also for some of those very modest upfront costs
that our most vulnerable families have, whether it is, you
know, helping to clean up an apartment before they get in there
or something tied to their rental fee.
So we are trying to marry our programs and HHS' services
dollars to try to make sure we are helping families who are the
most vulnerable.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. As a matter of personal privilege, I am going
to recognize Mr. Joyce who has important matters before the
United States Supreme Court from his position as chairman of
the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee.
And I will recognize Mr. Joyce for 5 minutes so that he can
depart early and----
Mr. Quigley. I object.
Mr. Womack [continuing]. Go set the--so he can go set the
SCOTUS straight. Okay?
Mr. Joyce.
Mr. Joyce. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I
am going to do as best I can to follow in your footsteps and
lead this committee.
Acting Secretary, welcome.
Secretary Todman. Thank you.
Mr. Joyce. I know you have big shoes to fill. My big dear
friend Marcia Fudge was there before you, and in honor of her,
I am going to ask you a question that she--about an issue that
she brought really to my attention and that is the use of lead-
based paint.
It was banned in 1978, but its harmful legacy has continued
in Ohio, especially in the Cleveland area where she represented
so ably over the years. Across the United States it is also an
issue, but 65 percent of Ohio housing was built prior to 1978,
and, therefore, lead paint is a bigger issue.
Even at very low levels, lead exposure damages a child's
brain and nervous system, potentially resulting in slow growth
and development, learning and behavioral problems, and hearing
and speech issues.
While it is critical to reduce the exposure to these,
existing programs that you have, have addressed lead in homes
to, obviously, try to prevent some of this. Given the urgency
to rid homes of hazards such as lead, what should we be telling
our local communities about resources that they can access
through the Department to reduce child exposure to toxic metals
and eliminate these hazards in their homes?
Secretary Todman. Thank you, Congressman.
And yes, removal of lead hazards was something really
important to Secretary Fudge, and I share that in her values.
You are absolutely right. We need to do everything we can
to remove these hazards from homes, particularly given what
they do to impact our babies. And we are very fortunate to have
a robust program that helps not just housing agencies but
mayors and county executives and nonprofits do that work.
I will say that I do think we can probably do a better job
making sure that folks are aware of these resources and teach
them how to access it. And that is going to be something that I
take on while I am in this seat and look forward to working
with you on some of those ideas.
Mr. Joyce. I am sure we all look forward to working with
you to help advocate for that in our communities and to our
constituents.
Can you talk about the innovative public/private funds that
offer new and more flexible gap financing that could increase
the pace at which these local communities can eliminate the
public health threat and compliment existing efforts?
Secretary Todman. No, absolutely. So, you know, almost
everything that HUD does requires the public and private sector
working with each other. We know that our health hazard funds
are sometimes matched with funds that are with, you know,
nonprofits and other private sector partners on the ground. We
know that we need to do more of that.
We know that we have businesses who are very interested in
making sure that we are moving lead hazards in and around their
communities as well. And so I think that there is more work to
do there.
Mr. Joyce. What aspects of your fiscal year 2025 request
will help improve the rate at which the Department can assist
communities in eliminating these home-based hazards.
Secretary Todman. Well, certainly, you know, the budget
reflects some of the constraints placed by the Fiscal
Responsibility Act, and so we are trying to be responsible
stewards and follow that law. But certainly, we prioritize
this, and we do have a robust number in there to carry out the
work of our health hazards program.
It is lead. It is mold. It is radon. It is all the things
that we know are hurting our families. And we certainly look
forward to working with the subcommittee on what our final
number looks like.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you very much. Keep up the great work.
Secretary Todman. Thank you.
Mr. Joyce. And thank you for your time, Mr. Chairman. I
yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Joyce.
And now I am going to recognize one of my Democrat friends,
and you guys may want to arm wrestle over it. Mrs. Torres, do
you need to----
Mrs. Torres. I have until about 11:00. I have got 30
minutes.
Mr. Womack. You have 30 minutes?
Mrs. Torres. Yes.
Mr. Womack. Ms. Watson Coleman, do you want to----
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Am I one of your Democratic friends?
Mr. Womack. I hope so.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I just want to make sure as I embark
on this.
Mr. Womack. We will find out when we get to full committee
markup, yes.
Ms. Watson Coleman, you are recognized.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And congratulations to you, Madam Acting Secretary.
Secretary Todman. Thank you.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. You have very big shoes to fill, but I
have looked at your bio, and you can certainly fill them----
Secretary Todman. Thank you, ma'am.
Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. Because of the work that
you have done.
I want to talk to you a little bit about the current
litigation before the Supreme Court debating on whether or not
homelessness and potentially setting a precedent that would
criminalize homelessness, which is unheard of in my mind. No
one wants to be homeless if they have an option.
How will HUD use funds proposed in the budget to combat
this? Additionally, what can Congress do to promote the use of
sound evidence-based approaches to resolving homelessness which
don't involve further victimizing people who are experiencing
it?
Secretary Todman. Well, thank you for that.
Well, I will start by saying homelessness is not a crime.
And what HUD can do is to prevent and eliminate homelessness
altogether. It is one of the reasons why when we looked at what
we prioritized, what the President prioritized in this budget,
we tried to make sure that that piece of our work receive the
amount of funds that we need to meet this moment,
notwithstanding the constraints of the Fiscal Responsibility
Act.
But we also have an obligation to work with our partners on
the ground who are on the frontlines carrying out this work,
our continuums of care, our housing agencies to make sure that
they are working as swiftly as they can as well in providing
technical assistance.
So we understand the need. We think HUD's role is to make
sure people are using our funds in a very intentional way but
also doing what we can, working with other Federal HUD
partners, to prevent homelessness to begin with.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I want to ask you about the using of
your funds because when I look at all the requests and the
money that you have at your disposal, it looks like a lot. Now,
I don't know if it is enough because we have such a massive
issue with homeownership, home rentals, and all kinds of
populations and things of that nature.
But has HUD found bottlenecks, bottlenecks that interfere
or delay the money that you have allocated to certain issues
getting kind of caught up in systems? If so, like, where do you
find that most prominently? And what is it that you think you
can do about it? What is it that you think we need to do about
it?
Secretary Todman. Thank you for that.
So I will say at the onset that we don't have enough
resources. The country, not just HUD, doesn't have enough
resources.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I believe that.
Secretary Todman. One in four eligible people for our
vouchers receive a voucher. Just one in four. So that means
that there are three of the four families out there who are
needing our help, who are either homeless or at risk of being
homeless because they are just on the edge.
So certainly, we don't have the resources that we need,
which is why the President, in each one of our three budgets,
has proposed more vouchers.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Okay. With that in mind, I agree with
you. Do you find bottlenecks?
Secretary Todman. Certainly.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Where are they?
Secretary Todman. The bottlenecks in using our vouchers
stems in some of the rules that HUD has to follow. You know,
landlords will complain about the length of inspections,
landlords will complain about making sure that--just working
with the government is sometimes slow.
So we have created some flexibilities over the past couple
years to give housing agencies tools that they can use to work
more quickly and to provide incentives to work with landlords.
I think that that connection is probably the biggest bottleneck
we have in the use of our rental assistance.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So is our biggest problem a lack of
housing, the variety of housing that we need? Is our problem
investors who buy up housing and create, you know, this more
expensive, unaffordable? Is it discrimination? What is it
altogether?
Secretary Todman. I would have to say if there is one
thing, it is that as a country, as a whole, we have not kept up
with the demand for housing, whether you are in big cities or
small towns, and that is a fact. Since 2008, 2009, we just have
not built at the pace that we need, and we need approximately
two to three million more housing units.
And so if there was one thing I would say, if we did that
one thing, I think it would make an impact, it is that because
by doing that, not only are we providing units for people to
live in, but we are also helping to reduce the overall cost by
increasing the supply that can meet the demand that we have.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Gonzales.
Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman.
And thank you, Acting Secretary, for being here.
I have the privilege of representing San Antonio, the
seventh largest city in the country, predominantly Hispanic
community. I would love to work with you on housing and some
other issues.
Would you be willing to take a trip to San Antonio? I would
love to host you at your convenience.
Secretary Todman. Absolutely. Happy to do that.
Mr. Gonzales. Fantastic.
What you will find is Texas is like a country of its own,
and we are used to kind of going about it our own way, but it
shouldn't be that way. You know, in many cases, at the local
level, housing is very much an issue, but if you talk to the
people of San Antonio, it is the local city council and it is
the local mayor that are feeling as if they are carrying a
larger share of the need and the want. And I think there is an
opportunity here.
You know, over the last decade, the overall poverty rate in
San Antonio has relatively stayed the same at 18 percent. There
is over 110,000 families on the public housing waiting list.
Another thousand families get added to it each month. So the
demand is absolutely there. The city is growing at an
incredible rate.
Opportunity Home San Antonio, which is the local housing
authority in San Antonio, needs well over half a billion
dollars to address capital maintenance issues across their
properties. I used one of my community projects to help with
this, but that is a couple million bucks. It is a drop in the
bucket compared to the need.
Like many public housing authorities across the country,
Opportunity Home must utilize other funding streams to provide
affordable housing, including local taxpayer funds.
Given the Federal Government's role in providing public
housing maintenance, are there any opportunities for additional
funding or incentives to cities that use local funds to
preserve and create new public housing?
Secretary Todman. Thank you for that. I look forward to my
trip to San Antonio with you.
You know, one of the things that HUD has used over the past
several years to help housing agencies with their capital need
is the Rental Assistance Demonstration program. We call it RAD.
And it has been very successful.
And agencies have been able to use that and leverage their
assets to be able to raise funds to make repairs. And so we see
that happening all over the country, including San Antonio. New
kitchens, new bathrooms, things that are really meaningful to
residents.
Mr. Gonzales. That is fantastic, and I would love to drill
down more on this program and others that work.
I visited one of the housing facilities on the west side of
San Antonio, and you had families drying their clothes outdoors
on a clothes hanger, you know, like it was, you know, 100 years
ago. And it is just not right in so many cases.
And I get that, you know, the demand for cost and you are
always struggling for dollars, but I just would love to find a
way on how we can deliver so that way these families can live
in a very dignified way.
And like you said, a new washer and dryer, that is a game
changer for many of these families.
My next question: We are in a housing crisis in San
Antonio. There is just simply not enough houses to go around.
Because of this, realty experts have said that newly built
homes are imperative to keeping up with the growing demand.
With thousands of people relocating to San Antonio, this has
been a significant concern to local realtors.
What efforts are underway to help increase the overall
supply of housing in the Texas area?
Secretary Todman. Sure. Over the past couple years, HUD has
worked with the other agencies in the Federal Government on an
overall housing supply action plan, and while we have proposed
dollars that we think are needed to resource that plan, we have
also used our existing administrative authorities to do things.
One example of that is the Federal Financing Bank Risk
Sharing Program that we have with Treasury, which has provided
really necessary gap financing for developers through the
Housing Finance Agency to kind of get that work done.
We were able to extend the deadline and make that
initiative permanent, and so we are hoping to have much more
housing built with that particular program, which is just using
the authorities that HUD and the Treasury Department have.
Mr. Gonzales. Excellent.
And that is all the questions I have. I look forward to
working with you and your team, and I look forward to hosting
you in San Antonio.
With that, Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Tony.
Mrs. Torres.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman. And I know I am your
friend because we serve on two committees together.
Welcome to our committee. We are so excited to have you
here and weigh in on some of our questions regarding housing
affordability.
When it comes to transportation and housing, low wage
earners are, you know, at the--for me, are at the very, very
low end. They are paying the highest in public transportation
and the highest--up to 50 percent of their income goes for
public transportation
So housing is incredibly important. Those vouchers are
incredibly important.
In fiscal year 2023-24, the funding bill provided funding
for nonprofits under HUD EDI program as community projects,
invested many of my community projects in affordable housing
for low wage workers in my district. Unfortunately, this year
nonprofit organizations will no longer qualify for those
projects.
We have housing availability and options for ag workers,
but for warehouse workers that I represent, you know, there is
really nothing that has been cut out for them.
Organizations like The House of Ruth, which is a domestic
violence shelter, the National CORE, which is a national award-
winning nonprofit organization, you know, that builds
affordable housing will no longer be able to qualify for this
funding.
Do you have any thoughts and ideas on how you can help them
build up the housing stock that communities like mine
desperately need?
Secretary Todman. In the face of HUD not being able to
provide any of the community project funding to----
Mrs. Torres. But specifically to nonprofits.
Secretary Todman. To nonprofits.
Certainly, nonprofits are qualified subgrantees to our--all
of the other funds that we have. Our CDBG funds come to mind.
In fact, many nonprofits across the country are deploying our
dollars as we speak.
There is very limited other opportunities that HUD has to
provide nonprofits with direct access to our funds. So it would
basically be sort of as a subgrantee.
Mrs. Torres. Okay. I would like to work with you on that
issue----
Secretary Todman. Sure.
Mrs. Torres [continuing]. On how we can expand some options
and opportunities for them to continue to serve our
communities.
On another issue, veterans across the country are sometimes
forced to choose between their disability benefits and housing
vouchers, HUD-VASH vouchers. Currently, HUD rules count
veterans' Federal disability stipend as income, which, combined
with social security, can put them above the qualifying level.
Restrictive, you know, income limits imposed on these low
income housing tax credits, is another obstacle for them.
Do you plan on revisiting the HUD definition of annual
income to exclude VASH vouchers specifically to deal with this
issue, to address this issue for veterans?
Secretary Todman. This issue came to our attention several
months ago, and we have been working very closely with our
partners at Veterans Affairs to just figure out what was going
on and how folks were--what some of the highest needs--members
of our veterans with the highest needs not being able to access
our housing.
And so we have been working closely with Treasury. One of
the things that we will be doing is increasing the eligibility
limit so that more veterans can access our VASH vouchers. What
that means is that by increasing it from 50 percent to 80
percent, we understand we are able to assist 97 percent of all
homeless veterans across the country.
So we think that is a good start.
Mrs. Torres. Okay, but their disability payments will still
get in the way.
Secretary Todman. Well, that includes--that 80 percent
would include their vet's benefits. It would be included in
their definition of income. So when we take our bar and raise
it to 80, it will take care of 97 percent of the homeless
veterans in the country.
And working with our partners at Treasury, we are helping
them figure out how to work with their programs as well.
Mrs. Torres. Great. Well, we will check in with Treasury
also, and I look forward to working with you.
And I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Norma.
Mr. Valadao.
Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Madam Secretary, for your time today.
I want to make you aware of a unique challenge we are
facing in California where we have a conflict between HUD and
IRS regulations. Given the State's affordability challenges, we
are starting to see more developers leverage HUD programs with
the low income housing tax credit to build new affordable
housing. However, HUD's methodology for calculating utility
allowances is out of date.
The IRS in California can calculate utilities building by
building while HUD is still using area-wide estimates that
don't consider the energy efficiency of new construction.
I never thought I would say this, but California is doing
something positive and market driven when it comes to
affordable housing. And currently, California is forced to use
HUD's outdated methodology, and we are overspending on
utilities. This is money that could go towards constructing
badly needed housing.
This seems like a simple fix, and I want to ask you if HUD
has any plans to update its methodology to allow States like
California to calculate utility allowances and utilize the tax
credit more accurately?
Secretary Todman. I am just hearing of this for the first
time, Congressman, so I will commit to figuring out what is
going on. And I look back at my team, who is busy taking notes,
and we will get back to you on how we can address that.
Mr. Valadao. I appreciate that. It is something that seems
pretty reasonable, and I figured you would be open-minded on
this one and wanting to work with us.
Secretary Todman. I am happy to work with you.
Mr. Valadao. In California, we really do struggle with some
of our housing issues there across the State and even in our
rural communities.
Since 2014, the Federal Government has issued nearly $20
billion in awards to communities in homeless assistance, an
increase of 53 percent. Chronic homelessness over the same
period increased 56 percent, and unsheltered homelessness
increased 30 percent, affecting more than 380,000 in both
groups last year.
In fact, 58 percent of those counted as homeless in the
point-in-time count last year were chronic and unsheltered.
How does HUD justify increasing awards year after year when
it is clear by your own data that more and more people are
experiencing chronic and unsheltered homelessness over the life
of the program?
Secretary Todman. I will tell you, you know, we were taken
back by what the point-in-time count in January of 2023 showed
us in terms of the needs across the country.
Since that time, January of 2023, we have deployed a number
of funding provided to us by this subcommittee to make sure
that we are helping folks on the frontlines deal with that 12
percent increase. We have sent funds to areas to help with
encampments. We have sent funds to help with our young homeless
individuals.
But let me say this. When we took a deep look in the data
of that 12 percent increase, what we found was that many of the
individuals were first-time homeless that we believe were being
assisted by the very robust social safety net that was created
during the pandemic to make sure folks were not deemed
homeless. And then when those different programs began to
expire is when we saw an uptick.
So we know that there is an issue. We have deployed some
additional funds, and the '25 budget, as best we can with the
constraints around us, has proposed funding to continue to help
localities.
Mr. Valadao. All right.
And then continuum of care. California receives the highest
amount of Federal funds of any continuum of care across the
country. Last year HUD provided more than $525 million to
California for this program.
Unfortunately, these awards have failed to reduce the
number of people experiencing homelessness. Focusing on the
chronic and unsheltered populations over the last 10 years,
chronic homelessness has increased 260 percent and unsheltered
132 percent.
When HUD sees these large awards going out year after year
to specific continuum of care and sees the constant increase in
homelessness in populations year after year, what intervention
or assistance does HUD provide?
How does it ensure the taxpayer resources are not going to
ineffective programs and are not mismanaged by incompetent
leadership and are driving positive metrics?
What is HUD's plan for improvement in the State with the
highest unsheltered population in the Nation?
Secretary Todman. Yes. So we know that the State and local
leadership in California are doing lots of things and using our
funds to address the homelessness crisis there.
HUD does not provide its funds willy-nilly to our
continuums of care. We actually have a competition. That
competition is now on a 2-year basis, but the idea is to just
prevent exactly what you're talking about. If we have a stable,
well-performing continuum of care, they will continue to
receive the funds that we have. When we don't, they don't.
And so we are keeping an eye on that, and we are also
providing technical assistance where necessary given the
magnitude of the issue.
Mr. Valadao. All right. Well, thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Secretary Todman. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. And now the ranking member of the full
committee, Ms. DeLauro. Welcome back.
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I apologize again. It is
hearing hopping here today.
But just a quick thought. Maybe, Mr. Chairman and ranking
member, as I said, I talked to a number of mayors yesterday,
and I know you, Madam Secretary, you did as well. They talked
about that there are several successful examples or projects,
models that are dealing with the issue of homelessness.
It may be worthwhile to bring those folks in to listen to
this because it is such a pervasive issue nationwide, and to
bring it more to the attention of our colleagues and what are
the kinds of things--and also, I think it helps us in terms of
what are the kinds of projects we should be funding, what
initiatives would make sense.
Anyway, let me--I reached out to my public housing
authorities in my district, and this first question comes from
someone you know, Karen DuBois-Walton. She is from Elm City's
community in New Haven.
And the second question comes from Jared Heon of the
Ansonia public housing authority.
We see a significant number of housing vouchers expiring
due to a lack of units for individuals and families to rent.
HUD exercised more flexibility to get people housed during the
pandemic, and you made that point.
Beyond significant investments in creating more affordable
units, how is HUD thinking in the short-term and long-term to
address low voucher utilization through greater flexibilities
for subsidies, expediting lease-up changes to the fair market
rent calculations, streamlining recertifications, or other
means?
Secretary Todman. No, thank you. And Karen is a tremendous
leader and one of the best housers in the country by far.
Let me say this. You know, we have learned through two
different streams of work, both the flexibilities provided
during the pandemic but also the flexibilities provided to
moving toward agencies in terms of ways to streamline their
program so they are focused on outcomes and not just paperwork.
And through both of those streams we know some of the
flexibilities that have worked. Some of them we have already
put into place, like a more expansive use of our administrative
fee to really incentivize landlords.
But I know there is more that we can do, and so there is an
internal working group at HUD as we speak talking about what
are things that we can do inside of HUD's authorities so that
we can carry on some of the flexibilities that you mentioned.
But additionally, legislative proposals also has imbedded
in them some of the things that we think can work that we don't
have the authority to implement, and we need some statutory
guidance from Congress.
So we know that there is more streamlining we can do. The
voucher program should be made much more streamlined than it is
right now, and I am committed to doing that.
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you.
The Ansonia Housing Authority, smaller public housing
authority, they want to expand their programs and services,
especially for seniors. They don't have the income to sustain
their homes but lack affordable housing options. These are
people who have lived in what is known as the Naugatuck Valley
in Connecticut.
Discuss how HUD might help public housing authorities like
the one in Ansonia address the housing supportive services
needs of seniors. One idea that was raised in particular is the
development of scattered site properties tied to project-based
vouchers.
Secretary Todman. So certainly we are, you know, a big
proponent of, you know, project-based vouchers because it
creates stability where if there is a senior with a voucher who
can't find a unit, it is probably pretty traumatizing to not be
able to find someplace secure.
What project basing does, it provides stability in one site
and then we can invite service providers to that site. Meals on
Wheels comes to mind. I know a lot of senior buildings have
Meals on Wheels as a successful partnership.
But in addition to that, HUD does have our resident
services dollars that go to housing authorities that can help
support these kind of programs, and there are lots of models
where housing agencies are working with local nonprofits and
their local human services as well.
So we can certainly make sure that those models,
particularly models that are working for smaller agencies that
may not have some of the bandwidth to create those
partnerships, we can make sure that we are providing those
models that I think can be replicated.
Ms. DeLauro. I am down to 16 seconds. Will there be another
round, Mr. Chairman? Can I just ask my last question?
Mr. Womack. There will be another round, but if you have
got another question, you are the ranking member of the full
committee.
Ms. DeLauro. Well, I know but I don't want to abuse my
colleagues here.
Very, very quickly. Cities today are restricted from using
more than 15 percent of their community development block
grants, those dollars on services. The cap prevents cities from
spending more dollars on supportive services and emergency
assistance like rent and utilities to keep people housed.
Is HUD exploring measures to either increase or waive
CDBG's cap on public services?
Secretary Todman. I think that is certainly one thing that
we can look to, and I know that we are interested in any and
all ideas to use, you know, these resources, these valuable
resources to achieve better outcomes. So happy to sit with you
on some of the ideas that you are hearing.
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you.
Secretary Todman. You are welcome.
Ms. DeLauro. Thank you very much. And thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Womack. You are most welcome. We will take that 45
seconds off Pete Aguilar's time.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Madam Secretary----
Ms. Todman. Yes.
Mr. Rutherford [continuing]. Great to see you. And thank
you for all you do.
Ms. Todman. Thank you.
Mr. Rutherford. Listen, I met with the Northeast Florida
Apartment Managers Association, a very large group, last week.
They brought up an issue that I don't know if your Department
is aware of. If you are, I would like to know what you can do
about this issue. If not, I would ask if you could look into
it. It is a little confusing, so follow me.
They are running into a problem where they can't confirm a
voucher-holder's--this is on the Section 8 voucher issue, going
back to, actually, some of the bottlenecks that my colleague
was talking about earlier.
They are running into this problem where they can't confirm
the voucher-holder's ability to pay rent because the public
housing authority will not confirm how much the housing voucher
will cover until there is an agreement in place with the
landlord.
However, the landlord--this is like a chicken-and-egg
thing. However, the landlord or property manager may not be
able to make that agreement until they know the prospective
tenant's ability to pay, which is partially based on that
voucher. So sometimes these voucher-holders are not able to
rent these apartments, because they may not meet the income----
Ms. Todman. Right.
Mr. Rutherford [continuing]. Requirement without the
voucher being counted in.
Have you run into this anywhere else?
Ms. Todman. It looks like we have a sequencing issue a
little bit or maybe a process issue that, you know, most other
agencies are able to overcome. So I am intrigued by what you
said and----
Mr. Rutherford. Yeah.
Ms. Todman [continuing]. Would ask the team to follow up
with your staff to see exactly what is going on. Because this
is a process that generally works every day----
Mr. Rutherford. Yeah.
Ms. Todman [continuing]. In terms of what the tenant will
pay, what the housing authority will pay----
Mr. Rutherford. Right.
Ms. Todman [continuing]. To get to 100 percent of the rent
that the----
Mr. Rutherford. But if the voucher is not counted in their
ability to pay, then they may not be able to rent that
apartment. So----
Ms. Todman. I understand.
Mr. Rutherford [continuing]. I look forward to working with
your staff on that.
Ms. Todman. Okay.
Mr. Rutherford. I really appreciate that offer.
I want to bring up the multifamily housing complaint
process.
Ms. Todman. Okay.
Mr. Rutherford. As I said, I am from Jacksonville, so I am
sure you are familiar with the Calloway Cove----
Ms. Todman. Yes.
Mr. Rutherford [continuing]. Apartment explosion and fire
that injured several people. And the indications were, from the
HUD OIG, that complaints were not being properly followed up
on, not handled in a timely manner, and that actually led to,
potentially, this explosion.
Two of the main recommendations that came out of the
specific investigation of this incident have to do with
developing a comprehensive process to ensure the complaints
received by the clearinghouse are resolved in a timely manner--
that is No. 1. That is their recommendation.
Number 2 is develop agency-wide policies and procedures for
the intake, monitoring, tracking of health and safety
complaints, and follow up on the mitigation. Some of the times,
when you look at mitigation, it is up to, like, 17 days. That
is just not acceptable.
Ms. Todman. Uh-huh.
Mr. Rutherford. So are these OIG recommendations on HUD's
radar? Are you guys working on this now?
And your fiscal year 2025 request includes $419 million for
the Information Technology Fund. Are you looking to use that to
assist with developing this tracking system?
Ms. Todman. No--thank you.
And so, first of all, let me say that it is horrible what
happened at that site, and, you know, residents' complaints
should always be listened to, and it is a manager's duty to
make sure that people are living in a safe building. So let me
say that at the top.
As it relates to the complaints, right now HUD does have a
decentralized process, because we do have partners who sit
between us and those owners who are the intake system for those
complaints. And we do get those reports, but they are coming
from all across the country.
So, yes, one of our IT investments is to find a way to take
all of those complaints and centralize it in a way that HUD
understands so those red flags can be raised. And that is an
investment that I know our Office of Housing is looking to take
on with our IT department.
Separate and apart from that, last year HUD did start our
new NSPIRE inspection program. It is the first time that the
same inspection protocols for public housing, the types of
sites that you are mentioning, and our voucher program, the
same inspection protocol, that protocol is now focused on
health and safety. The previous one was more focused on curb
appeal.
Mr. Rutherford. Okay.
Ms. Todman. This one is looking inside the units. And we're
hoping that when this is in its--it is in use right now, but--
when it gets really rocking and rolling we will be able to find
these problems and address them more quickly.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you very much.
And I look forward to working with your staff on the----
Ms. Todman. Absolutely.
Mr. Rutherford [continuing]. Voucher issue. Thank you.
Ms. Todman. Yeah, I am intrigued by that one.
Mr. Rutherford. Mr. Chairman, I see my time is up. I yield
back.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Aguilar, with a full 5 minutes.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Madam Acting Secretary, I will do the very best I can in
the, you know, 35 seconds that the chairman has allotted me
here. Appreciate his generosity.
You have big shoes to fill----
Ms. Todman. Indeed. Indeed.
Mr. Aguilar [continuing]. As has been said before. Your
predecessor served with many of us----
Ms. Todman. Yes.
Mr. Aguilar [continuing]. Not just in this chamber, but in
these committee rooms. So thank you for signing up for this,
and we look forward to working with you.
Climate disasters--as the chairman mentioned, climate
disasters--and the ranking member touched on this too--
wildfires, atmospheric storms, they have threatened the
homeowners-insurance market, as well, across California. In the
last year, 7 of the 12 top insurance companies in California
have stopped offering homeowners-insurance policies in the
State, threatening millions of middle-class Californians who
are seeking to renew or get their insurance policies.
Within the scope of HUD's jurisdiction, what can we do
together to help address the rising costs homeowners face with
respect to insurance while also, obviously, being a part of the
affordable-housing-provider mix and the insurance that is
available and required of these affordable-housing providers?
Ms. Todman. Yeah. You know, I have yet to run into an
apartment owner, public or private, who doesn't bring up the
escalating cost of insurance as a problem, in terms of being
able to maintain their operations or even finding insurance. So
I thank you for putting that question out there.
We have sat with housing providers about ways in which HUD
can use its authorities. We have very limited authorities when
it comes to the insurance industry, but what we can do is look
at our roles and see ways that we can meet this moment.
And I think it was just last week, if not the week before,
we adjusted our wind and storm coverage to really help some of
those housing providers deal with some of these escalating
insurance costs.
We are also working inside of the Public Housing Program to
see if there are ways that we can address increased costs
there. Sometimes agencies don't know that they can come to us
and ask for additional funding to address, you know, some of
the things that you have described.
So, one, we are getting information out there on what
people can do, but we are also taking a really precise look at
our rules to see, are we requiring folks to get levels of
insurance, perhaps, that they might not need to?
I have heard that we sometimes require insurance on--
unnecessary levels of insurance on empty buildings. And so we
are trying to look at commonsense things like that to see how
we can address those costs.
It is a real issue. I have met with mission-driven private
owners of affordable housing who are saying to me that they
can't stay in the business because they can't get insurance,
but their market-rate units can.
So there are lots of curiosities around what is happening
right now inside of the insurance industry, but HUD is working
with our owners with what we can do to help.
Mr. Aguilar. Are there suggestions that you have to us or,
you know, our friends on the authorizing side, flexibility that
would be necessary in order to help?
I mean, more of this is going to happen, whether it is
California or Florida or Oklahoma, more of these climate
disasters.
Ms. Todman. We will provide those to you. We have a working
group that has a--like, every single part of the housing
portfolio inside of HUD has provided me with things that they
can do. I will put on the table, ``Are there things that
Congress can help us do?'' and we will make sure to get that to
this committee and to the Congress.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you so much.
Ms. Todman. You are welcome.
Mr. Aguilar. I know you met with local leaders, a lot of us
met with our local mayors----
Ms. Todman. Yes.
Mr. Aguilar [continuing]. This week as well, and specific
to project-based vouchers.
As Congress considers increasing the cap for project-based
vouchers, what considerations would HUD suggest we keep in mind
with respect to implementing a cap increase?
Ms. Todman. Well, one of the things that HUD is going to
do, from its part, is finally implement the project-based
aspects of HOTMA, which was a law that Congress approved many
moons ago. And so we are going to get that across the line. We
think it will improve the administration of the project-based
program.
We are right now at a 30-percent cap, and, you know, there
are some folks who feel that project-basing isn't always the
best solution. But we also know that we see it working well,
particularly when it is difficult for folks to find a unit with
a voucher in their hand.
So, as we do this body of work of ways to make the voucher
program better, we will come back to you with things we think
we need that can help with the authorizations in that program.
Mr. Aguilar. Thank you so much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yield back.
Ms. Todman. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Madam Acting Secretary. Appreciate you being
here.
I want to return to the topic of homelessness and, in
particular, the need for policies that prioritize holistic
approaches to homelessness, encompassing both housing and
essential support services.
Do you think it is important that a person experiencing
homelessness who has untreated mental illness with self-
medicating substance-use disorders get treatment?
Ms. Todman. I think it is important that anybody who has
mental or physical illnesses get the treatment that they need.
Mr. Cline. And you would agree that an addict who is
addicted to methamphetamine or fentanyl should get treatment as
well, correct?
Ms. Todman. I believe that anybody who is having substance-
abuse issues should have treatment available to them.
Mr. Cline. Are you aware of the dramatic increase in
overdose deaths inside federally supported Housing First
programs?
Ms. Todman. I am sure that there is an uptick.
Mr. Cline. If I could, Mr. Chairman, I would like to insert
into the record an article from the American Medical
Association, JAMA, titled, ``Mortality Among People
Experiencing Homelessness in San Francisco During the COVID-19
Pandemic.''
Mr. Womack. Without objection.
Mr. Cline. Thank you.
Should a person experiencing homelessness who has untreated
mental illness with self-medicating substance-use disorders
receive treatment before we provide them with a housing
voucher?
Ms. Todman. So here are my thoughts on that.
In my experience, what I have found is that, if someone is
stabilized in a home, not only is it easier to provide services
but it is actually easier to even find that person.
When someone is homeless and on the streets and going
through sort of a mental trauma, it is difficult to provide
services to them. But what we can do once someone has a home or
is in a shelter, we are able to provide those services.
Mr. Cline. Can you tell me what metrics HUD is using to
assess the effectiveness of its programs in addressing
homelessness, mental illness, and substance abuse?
Ms. Todman. Our Emergency Shelter program and our Continuum
of Care have a number of different metrics that we use. I am
happy to provide those to your office.
Mr. Cline. Thank you.
And can you talk about how the data informing future policy
decisions--how it is informing future policy decisions and
resource allocation?
Ms. Todman. One of the things that we do is, we listen to
the folks who have to administer our programs locally about
things that we need to do to make sure the program is
effective. And we do that on a routine basis.
Mr. Cline. And can you tell us how HUD is collaborating
with mental health and substance-abuse treatment providers to
ensure that individuals experiencing homelessness have access
to the support services that are needed?
Ms. Todman. Absolutely.
So I mentioned before that there is sometimes a disconnect
between housing and services, and one of the things we want to
do is to braid those two a little bit more tightly together. We
certainly do provide--our funds do provide an opportunity for
services, not just housing. It can pay for services as well.
I mentioned earlier that we have a new initiative with HHS
to find ways to use Medicaid dollars to pair it with housing so
people are getting the services that they need, whether it be,
you know, of some mental trauma or it is something tied to
substance abuse.
Mr. Cline. Can you tell me how HUD is partnering with the
faith-based community that provides housing assistance and
supportive services?
Ms. Todman. Well, certainly our funds that we provide our
Continuums of Care, faith-based organizations have access to
those funds, as well, in being part of that front line of
providing folks with shelter, providing folks with interim
housing, providing folks with services.
Mr. Cline. Thank you.
I would just say, I think we would all agree that simply
providing housing without addressing underlying issues such as
mental illness or substance abuse is a recipe for failure.
And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Ms. Todman. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Espaillat.
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Congratulations, Acting Secretary.
Ms. Todman. Thank you. And might I say, you have a fabulous
name, Adriano.
Mr. Espaillat. I will never, ever forget yours.
Well, Mr. Chairman, in many ways, this--we have heard from
both sides of the aisle on this great need that America has for
housing. And it is really--what we hear is really a lack of
money, investment.
I think that maybe even from the Reagan years forward the
Federal Government has become an absentee landlord. We haven't
provided the funding for housing that it takes for families to
have a roof over their heads.
And so, as appropriators, it is incumbent upon us to make
this a priority. And this is not an easy issue; it is a deep-
pocket issue. Housing is never a cheap endeavor, right? It
requires an investment. But it has a direct impact on the
quality of life, obviously, of all Americans.
And I heard from my colleagues from both sides, really, a
similar story, similar questions to you, Acting Secretary.
And nowhere is this more profound and more visible than in
the NYCHA complexes of my district and across New York City.
NYCHA has 360,000 residents, and it has over 177,000
apartments. But they are in dilapidated conditions. They are
really in bad conditions. New boilers are needed; chipping
paint; roofs, elevators are done.
You know, the wear and tear of this housing stock has taken
a toll on it, and it needs investment. In fact, the projection
is that a 20-year capital investment need is for $78 billion.
Now, get that. I am sure it is no different in each of our
districts. The housing needs are so profound.
So I want to know, I mean, what plan do we have in HUD to
begin to address this humongous, humongous problem?
Ms. Todman. You know--thank you for that, Congressman. As a
country, we have not kept up with the needs of the public
housing portfolio, as you so well stated. And, you know, we can
do better, and we need to do better for the families who live
in those units.
It is one of the reasons why the President, for the past
three budgets, has proposed billions of dollars of investment
for our public housing sites, to deal with heating, to deal
with basic--just making sure people have an operating kitchen,
to get rid of some of the health hazards we talked about
earlier. We have to and we must do more.
You know, one of the things that we are doing, as well, is
making sure that people have access to, you know, a streamlined
version of the RAD, which is the only thing that many agencies,
including NYCHA, is using right now to make those repairs. We
are trying to make sure we are putting in our annual budget a
capital fund amount that deals with it, but it doesn't--it
really doesn't all the time.
Mr. Espaillat. It is a drop in the bucket, really.
Ms. Todman. But it is one of the reasons why we have
proposed a $7.5 billion investment in our public housing sites,
so we can begin the heavy work that you have talked about. And
I think that that work, married with some of the things that we
are already doing, will make a difference. But we must do more.
Mr. Espaillat. And that is a call to this committee. This
is the T-HUD Subcommittee. To make a priority out of housing
again, I think, is imperative for our Nation, on both sides of
the aisle. This perhaps could be a bipartisan issue that we
could work on.
Finally, Acting Secretary, there is a building in my
district, 1915 Billingsley Terrace in the Bronx, that
collapsed. And they are the recipient of--part of it
collapsed--they are the recipient of Low-Income Housing Tax
Credits. And it had previously been deemed structurally unsound
in 2020. Had the structural needs been addressed, many
residents wouldn't have had to live through this with this
experience, right?
What can HUD do to ensure that landlords keep up their
housing stock when they receive these Low-Income Housing Tax
Credits?
Ms. Todman. Right. So LIHTC housing gets not one, most of
the time, but two inspections there. There are requirements
that Department of Treasury has that they are inspected every
year, and then, if there are any vouchers in the building,
HUD's--the housing agency is inspected as well.
I think what I would like to do is maybe sit down with our
leadership at Treasury and say, what more can we do together to
make our inspections--making sure that our inspections are
finding these issues before these tragedies occur? And I am
happy to work with you on that.
Mr. Espaillat. Well, I will invite you to come and see our
NYCHA developments as well.
Ms. Todman. Absolutely. I look forward to that.
Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Ciscomani.
Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Chairman.
And I want to thank Acting Secretary Todman for being here
today. Thank you so much.
You know, safe and affordable housing is a key component of
preserving the American Dream that I often talk about. And in
southern Arizona, in particular, we are facing a severe
homelessness and affordable-housing crisis, so this issue is a
very, very high priority to me.
Now, I believe that the Federal Government must get
creative when looking at ways we can tackle this housing
shortage, and that is why I called upon the administration to
repurpose a small percentage of unobligated COVID-19 relief
funds towards a deficit-neutral, multi-housing demonstration
program to support the swift production of urgently needed
affordable homes and leverage public resources through private
investment.
So I was very pleased to see the inclusion of a line item
for a demo program of this nature in the budget request this
year from you all. So, as HUD works out the details of this
demo program, is this something that you would be willing to
work with me on, on this project?
Ms. Todman. Certainly.
Mr. Ciscomani. Great. Great. Well, I look forward to
working with you on that, and your Department, on this demo
program as well as other innovative ways that we can assist our
cities and towns with their housing issues.
Any further comment on that that you have, regarding just
getting creative on this, thinking outside the box?
I don't think my community is the only one facing this, but
certainly mine is, at a very high degree, in terms of
homelessness and, just overall, the affordable-housing crisis.
Ms. Todman. You know, I think that resources and innovation
and being very outcome-focused is what we are going to need,
and a lot of intentionality.
And so a lot of innovation doesn't necessarily happen here
in D.C. So much of it happens, you know, with the practitioners
on the ground who have to get things done. And so we invite
innovation from them and learn from them about the best ways
that we can take what is happening locally and bring it to
scale across the country.
Mr. Ciscomani. Well, I am really glad to hear that. And,
like I said, I was pleased to see that our inclusion made it
there in the line item on the budget. I would love to take you
up on that and work with you on that.
I will move on to a second question here.
The Federal Home Loan Banks have said they will be
contributing $1 billion to affordable housing this year. They,
along with HUD, play a key role in making housing more
affordable, as we are discussing.
How does HUD try to learn from and partner with Federal
Home Loan Banks' affordable housing programs and vice versa?
How does that relationship work?
Ms. Todman. Yeah. So we have a strong working relationship
with FHFA, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, who has
oversight over the Federal Home Loan Banks. And I know that the
Director there has been very pointed in terms of her
expectations on what the FHLBs do. And so that is our point of
contact.
We also work with, like I mentioned, our housing providers,
who do receive sometimes gap financing to build homes from the
Federal Home Loan Banks. But our primary relationship is
through FHFA.
Mr. Ciscomani. Great.
So is this level of funding something that the private
sector is looking for?
Ms. Todman. Oh, absolutely. I think that there is--I was in
a Senate Banking Committee hearing very recently with Director
Thompson, and I do think there was a line of questioning there
where she put on the table some of the things that she is going
to be requiring of the Federal Home Loan Banks in terms of
additional resources that they are bringing to the table.
Mr. Ciscomani. Great. Well, I look forward to working with
you on that as well.
I will squeeze in one more here.
You know, Arizona's Sixth District, mine, which I proudly
represent, has a significant military presence, and our
veterans are a vital part of our community. The HUD-VA
Supportive Housing Program has been instrumental in providing
housing and supportive services to our homeless veterans.
Could you elaborate a little bit on the key lessons learned
from this initiative? And how can HUD build on the program's
success to expand supportive services and housing options for
our veterans?
Additionally, what role can Congress play in ensuring the
continual expansion of these critical services to better serve
our veterans and their families?
Ms. Todman. So what VASH has taught us is that we can make
a huge change in helping people who are homeless. Through VASH
alone, we have reduced veterans homelessness by 50 percent over
the past decade. That is a big number; it is a meaningful
number.
So I think that we can learn from the lessons of VASH in
terms of the way in which we marry housing and services but
also the way in which departments can work together. HUD has
``Housing'' in our name, but we are certainly not the only ones
who can support the housing the country needs, and I think VASH
is a great model of that.
Mr. Ciscomani. Well, thank you so much. And I would
encourage the Department to continue to prioritize programs
like this one moving forward. Our veterans have sacrificed so
much for us, and none of them should go without a roof over
their head.
Ms. Todman. Indeed.
Mr. Ciscomani. So thank you so much.
Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Ciscomani.
Ms. Wexton is a valued member of this subcommittee and
suffers from a health condition that requires her to
communicate by extraordinary means, fascinating technology.
And, at this time, I am going to yield Ms. Wexton the
floor.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As members of the committee already know, last year I was
diagnosed with progressive supranuclear palsy, or PSP. I
describe it as ``Parkinson's on steroids,'' and I don't
recommend it. PSP makes it very difficult for me to speak, so I
use an assistive app so that I can participate and you can
understand me.
Welcome, Acting Secretary Todman. It is great to have you
here.
Last year, I spoke with Secretary Fudge about the Fostering
Futures program, a Virginia program that helps teens and young
adults in foster care after they turn 18. I was a guardian ad
litem for many years, and ensuring those resources are in place
is so important as these young people transition out of foster
care.
HHS manages a lot of the Federal work in this space, but
HUD also plays an important role. Just a few weeks ago, HUD
announced over $12.7 million through the Foster Youth to
Independence initiative to public housing authorities to
provide housing assistance to young adults as they make that
transition.
Can you please tell us about how the FYI program's targeted
assistance has improved outcomes for this vulnerable
population? And are there other ways HUD, or the administration
more broadly, is working to invest in youth as they age out of
foster care to ensure they are given the resources and tools
they need to succeed?
Ms. Todman. It is wonderful to see you.
You know, I think the foster--and thank you for your
leadership on this issue, is making a tremendous difference.
I know that the work that HUD is doing to help foster youth
who are aging out of the system is making a tremendous
difference. I try to think of, you know, when I was 18, 19
years old and being told, go adult, you know, go find yourself
an apartment, you know, go figure out how to pay your rent, do
all the things--I mean, it is hard enough being in my 50s, much
less being somebody who is 18 and being told, go into this
brave new world and figure it out.
So the least we can do to not just help our foster youth
but also help prevent homelessness is to catch our young adults
when they need us the most and house them. And so that program
has been working very, very well, and we look forward to seeing
it grow.
One of the things that we have been doing is making sure
that two systems are working with each other, and that is the
housing system and the foster-care system. And so our leader
inside of the Public Housing Program has met with his
counterparts at HHS to make sure that we are in lockstep in
getting these vouchers out the door and helping as many foster
youth as we can.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you.
Last year, I also spoke with Secretary Fudge about HUD's
work to stand up new Violence Against Women Act resources,
which included a public-facing website that had just gone
online shortly before our hearing in 2023. She was very excited
about the resources, trainings, and technical assistance that
would be available for anyone who might need them, both housing
providers and regular people.
So my question for you is, could you please give us an
update about HUD's efforts to provide these resources and how
the funding Congress has provided for these programs has been
used to support survivors and improve outcomes?
Ms. Todman. So we certainly have stood up our--or, it will
be stood up this week--our new Gender-Based Violence Office.
And we are certainly looking at ways in which we can staff that
up very, very quickly, ma'am.
In addition to that, our staff in our Fair Housing Office
have been receiving sometimes very painful calls from survivors
asking for HUD's help, and we have been helping them with the
resources and the abilities that we have.
So this is a priority for the Department.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you.
I yield back.
Ms. Todman. Thank you, ma'am.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Zinke.
Mr. Zinke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And welcome, Secretary--Acting Secretary. It is nice to see
you.
Ms. Todman. Nice to see you.
Mr. Zinke. And, first, I want to thank you. Your staff in
Montana has been very helpful in us navigating through multiple
community projects and stuff. So your staff in Montana, I can
say, has been very good.
Ms. Todman. Good.
Mr. Zinke. And thank you.
There is an issue, though, that--you know, you don't learn
much in headquarters; you learn a lot when you go to the front
line. And so Montana Housing Authority has an issue that was
brought to my attention. And it is an important enough issue
that they came all the way to Washington, D.C., to talk to me
about it.
They shared with me the problem they are having, in fact,
that the Montana Housing Authority has had $4.5 million swept
from their reserve account. With that money taken, and more
planned this year, it makes the problem come to the surface,
and it is a big problem. In fact, it is such a problem, the
loss of $4.5 million resulted in 576 Montana families that were
unable to access housing assistance.
And, then, a couple weeks ago, this same issue was brought
forward to you during the Senate Banking Committee hearing. You
were asked to reach out to the local housing authorities in
Montana to try to navigate through this.
To date, nothing has been heard from your office. And I
just want your commitment that you will reach out to the
Montana Housing Authority to get their input on how we remedy
this.
Because the sweeping of that account--I am sure everyone
does it a little differently, but the reserve account in
Montana, when it is swept, they can't go forward with existing
contracts. So it is a problem.
So if I have your commitment to work on that?
Ms. Todman. Absolutely. The sweeping of the reserves only
recently came to my attention, so I will learn more about that.
And I will say, it was my impression that members of the
HUD team had reached out to the Montana housing agency to talk
about their fair-market-rent methodology. So I will double-back
with them, but it is my impression that that connection
happened. But I will confirm.
Mr. Zinke. And you have my assurance, I will work together
with you to remedy it, but it needs to be remedied.
Ms. Todman. Absolutely.
Mr. Zinke. And, then, just on philosophy, you know, we talk
about, you know, renting vouchers, and you look at, you know,
affordable housing and why is it so unaffordable.
And in Montana, some of it, too, is that people from
California are coming, and maybe California, you know, housing
prices were more. So there is some of that. But a lot of it has
to do with high inflation and--high inflation and also energy
costs.
So, when energy costs are high, material costs are high--
building material costs. That dumps into labor costs. And
inflation--when we have high inflation, then you have high
interest rates. And we are all suffering from that. So that
house that was affordable before might not be under the current
interest rates.
I am particularly concerned about home ownership, you know.
And I understand helping people through a rough spot in
housing, but ultimately it has always been about home
ownership. And the American Dream, a lot of it is built on home
ownership.
And when you live a life of renting and there is no
opportunity to buy, home ownership, then a lot of it just--it
dissolves, for many, the American Dream. And there is a lot of
frustration from the younger people that look up and say, how
do I afford a $1.2 million house in Bozeman, Montana?
So some of it is, you talk about innovation. And I would
offer this: I think we should look at a government-backed 50-
year mortgage, because while you pay a lot of interest rates, I
think lowering monthly costs--it is lowering monthly costs so
people can afford something.
And then I think we should look at expanding definitions of
title. Because it gets very difficult to get a loan sometimes
on a condo, but you know what? You own the title. And maybe we
should expand our definition, on innovation, of what title
looks like so a person can buy maybe a piece of an apartment or
expand it so at least you own and gain equity in the title.
It might not be the first title you own. Hopefully it is
not. Maybe you can expand up. But the entry level for a lot of
families on a three-bedroom, two-bath, two-car garage is too
far.
So I applaud your efforts in that. I just caution that, you
know, spending--I think the source of the problem is getting
after inflation, lower that. The source of it is getting after
lower energy costs, crush the interest rates down, and look at
opportunities for how to expand the opportunity for everyone to
buy a home eventually.
So thank you for everything.
And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Ms. Todman. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. I thank the gentleman.
We have completed our round of questions on round one. We
are going to do a quick lightning round, if any of the
remaining members have a question that they would like to ask,
and I want to start.
In January of 2024, HUD's Office of the Inspector General
published an urgent management alert regarding improper
payments in HUD's tenant-based and project-based rental
assistance programs. It noted that the HUD leadership needed to
take immediate action to resolve issues in estimating improper
payments in those programs, the two largest at HUD.
So can HUD share an estimate of its improper payments for
last year for these programs? And have we made any progress in
estimating improper payments for these programs since January
of 2024?
We are hearing a lot about improper payments. I know
Chairman Arrington on the House Budget Committee is trying to
tackle improper payments. And there are many areas in the
Federal bureaucracy where improper payments are--the sum total
of them are extremely, extremely high.
Ms. Todman. Yeah.
Mr. Womack. Help me understand where we are in improper
payments.
Ms. Todman. Well, thank you, Chairman.
So, yes, the Inspector General at HUD and I have been
having this conversation over the past several months, ways in
which HUD can expedite its review of improper payments. It has
been some years that we have done that, and I think that we
were presented with a proposal that seemed like it was still
too many years to go.
One of the reasons is because some of the technological
needs that we have to do it in an efficient way was--it was a
heavy cost burden to the Department, sometimes eclipsing even a
percentage of the improper payments that we had in our rental
assistance programs.
But we are going to expedite. And the commitment that I
have made to really the whole HUD family but also the IG is
that we will have an improper payment estimate by the end of
next year.
Having said that, the program has improved over the years
in terms of making sure that there are no improper payments to
begin with. And so, while perhaps 20 years ago there was an
amount of improper payments that was unacceptable, with the
advent of third-party verification that agencies use, some of
the compliance work that we do with our privately owned sites,
we have been able to have a much more stringent approach to
HUD's payments so that we are keeping the public trust. And so
we know that. That is in place.
It is our obligation to get this body an improper payment
number, and we are committed to do that.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. All set.
Mr. Womack. No further questions?
Mr. Rutherford.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Madam Secretary, the Continuum of Care program, which I am
very supportive of and really appreciate all that you all do in
that, as you are aware, in Section 242 of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, we gave HUD the authority to do that 2-year
issue of the NOFO.
And so this is our first year going through. Can you talk a
little bit about the impact that that has had with the
providers?
Ms. Todman. We are enthusiastically looking to have this 2-
year competition opportunity.
You know, Continuums of Care need to be busy helping
homeless people----
Mr. Rutherford. Right.
Ms. Todman [continuing]. Quite frankly. And, each year,
they are trying to balance helping homeless people with
applying to HUD for more funds so they can survive the next
year to help more homeless people.
So these 2 years, I think, are welcomed not just by the
Department but also the COCs, and thank you for that. And we
are going to be implementing it with much enthusiasm.
Mr. Rutherford. Very good.
Has it increased your participation of providers, or is it
too early to tell?
Ms. Todman. It is too early to tell.
Mr. Rutherford. Okay.
Ms. Todman. It is too early to tell. But I can tell you, it
is welcomed, and we look forward to it.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Womack. Mike, any final remarks?
Mr. Quigley. I just thank Madam Secretary for being here
and your good work. We look forward to working together with
this committee. I think the chairman is right; we have a good
team here who wants to get appropriations done and done on
time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
With that, our time has concluded.
Thank you for being here today, Madam Secretary.
To my colleagues and to their staffs, anyone that has
questions to submit for the record, please do so within 7 days
to the subcommittee staff so that we can get those included
into the record.
Mr. Womack. I want to thank you for being here this
morning. We look forward to working with you as we continue the
fiscal year 2025 appropriations process.
And, with that, the subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Questions and answers submitted for the record follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.042

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.043

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.044

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.045

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.046

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.047

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.048

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.049

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.050

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.051

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.052

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.053

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.054

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.055

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.056

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.057

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.058

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.059

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.060

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.061

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.062

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.063

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.064

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.065

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.066

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.067

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.068

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.069

Wednesday, May 8, 2024.

MEMBERS' DAY

Chairman Womack. The subcommittee will come to order. Good
morning, and welcome to this year's Member Day Hearing. Today
we welcome our colleagues to testify on their priorities for
the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the
Department of Transportation for fiscal 2025.
As the ranking member and I noted in our dear colleague
letter inviting our members to come before the committee,
member engagement is key to the appropriations process. Our
bill is unique as every district nationwide has housing and
transportation assets. Last week, we heard from the DOT and HUD
secretaries, who provided a helpful national view. But as a
former mayor, I understand how important the local perspective
is. That is why I am looking forward to hearing from our
colleagues, who I consider to be the subject matter experts on
these issues in their districts.
With that, I want to recognize my ranking member and good
friend from Illinois, Mr. Quigley, for any comments he would
like to make.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This committee --this
subcommittee funds programs that impact every district in our
country, whether it flies, floats, or rolls, or provides a
family with a safe and stable roof over their heads. The
programs in this bill create jobs, keep communities safe, and
help advance our Nation's economy. We welcome feedback on how
we can work on a bipartisan basis to support the work of a
member--of members of this body, DOT and HUD, and the other
independent agencies. I look forward to hearing testimony from
members today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Chairman Womack. Thank you, Mr. Quigley. Today we kick it
off with a gentleman from Guam, Representative James Moylan.
Every member will have the standard 5 minutes to testify and
your full written remarks will be included in the record.
Please be sure to turn your microphone on when speaking and off
when you are finished. Congressman Moylan, you are recognized.
---------- --
--------

Wednesday, May 8, 2024.
HON. JAMES C. MOYLAN, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM GUAM
Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Womack, and
Ranking Member Quigley, for holding this hearing and for all
the work that you do funding critical agencies like the
Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and
Urban Development. The government of Guam agencies rely heavily
on Federal grant funding in order to supplement their meager
local budget. Without robust funding for these grants, our
local agencies will struggle to properly provide for our
constituents. Guam's Port, Airport, Housing and Urban Renewal
Authority, and Department of Public Works need funding for
grant programs that benefit communities in the States and
Pacific Territories.
First off, in fiscal year 2023, the AB Won Pat Guam
International Airport in Tamuning greatly benefited from the
Department of Transportation's airport improvement program.
Thanks to this grant, the airport has been able to start
addressing their structural deficiencies. Since Anderson Air
Force Base is restricted to the Department of Defense, Guam's
International is the only airport on the island for civilian
use. This makes grants like the Airport Improvement Program
vital for Guam. With the anniversary of Typhoon Mawar
approaching, I am reminded of how vital the airport was in
disaster recovery efforts, allowing for emergency response
personnel to rapidly assist those living in Guam and addressing
construction problems. The Airport Improvement Program has
undoubtedly proven itself as an essential part of building
Guam's capability, and with our recently submitted Airfield
Lighting Vault Rehabilitation community funding project, I hope
that this subcommittee can appropriate the necessary amount to
keep Guam's air industry alive.
Second, HUD's Community Development Block Grant for the
Insular areas is a lifeline for our local Guam Housing and
Urban Renewal Authority. GHURA is currently fighting a losing
battle on island to ensure that there is enough housing for the
ever-growing population of COFA migrants coming from the
Marshall Islands, Palau, and the Federated States of
Micronesia. The existing housing supply is stretched thin due
to the complications associated with building resilient housing
on island, and this issue will be exacerbated by the continuing
military buildup. Guam expects to add thousands of marines
relocating from Okinawa over the next few years, and there is
not enough housing on bases. This means these service members
will take their off-base housing allowance outside of the
fence, driving up the cost for housing for those civilians on
island. Service members housing allowances have led to the
creation of an inflated floor for the cost of rent for everyone
on island and local wages are not always able to meet these
dizzying costs.
And lastly, the insular Community Development Block Grant
needs more funding so GHURA can build more affordable housing
on island. This is a simple supply and demand issue. If we are
not building enough housing, then it will become increasingly
difficult for civilians to afford rent on their own homes going
forward. Insular CDBG grants have not been increased in years
and with massive inflation and the tyranny of distance, the
funds do not go as far as they used to and GHURA is struggling
to make up the shortfalls.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.070

Chairman Womack. Thank you, Mr. Moylan, for joining us and
for your testimony. It is always a pleasure to hear about the
needs of your community and particularly the impact of the COFA
migration, if you will, onto the island of Guam. We share your
interest in making our Nation's airports among the world's
best, and we recognize the situation you have there in Guam.
I do have one quick question for you, and that is you
mentioned the housing allowance and the fact that Okinawa is--
some of the marines who previously occupied Okinawa are being
displaced to Guam. So it hadn't occurred to me, but in your
testimony, you talk about how that has created kind of a--that
floor threshold that you talked about, kind of created kind of
a false sense of, and has driven up the cost, I guess, of
housing. Can you expound on that just a little bit more?
Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And yes, and we, the
island of Guam does welcome the Marine Corps, the defense of
our Nation. The importance of having the Marines there is very
welcomed. Since the buildup has started, we have had a lot of
service members continuously coming on out and with their cost
of living allowance, they are able to afford a higher level of
rental. Real estate market realizes that that far outweighs our
local economy and what the regular civilians are paid compared
to Federal funds. It is putting a great pressure and demand for
folks that are not Federally employed. And the money is just
not there for local folks to gain housing. In addition to that,
those with higher salaries and can afford more.
It is also the tyranny that our distance to getting our
supplies, our building materials is extremely high. The
shipment that costs--the product that may cost something on the
west coast is like 100 times more. You basically double it by
the time it reaches Guam. So you are building material--and we
had to build resilient homes. They are not wooden homes. They
are concrete, solid homes to withstand super typhoon winds. So
the building code is high.
The amount per square feet to build a home is extremely
expensive. Building costs, we are behind. There is some reports
that saying were several thousands homes that we don't have
ready to go. So our housing market is low, the demand is high.
We are looking at more folks coming on in, either from the COFA
agreement or from the military. And with the military buildup
comes additional construction workers, additional support
services, talking about tens of thousands of people eventually
by the time this buildup is completed.
We are also short on labor force, too. We were fortunate to
extend the H-2B workforce, which specifically comes from the
Philippines, for another 5 years. So these contractors are
secure that we can do this contract because we have them for
this long. We need to extend that. But they are restricted to
working on military projects. That is why they were brought in.
And our existing workforce, contractors, they are working
inside on military projects as well. So those that the
workforce that is able to help businesses recover from the
super typhoon help residents build their new homes. The price
went up again. And we are so restricted in the amount of people
that can provide structures, whether it be for commercial use
or whether it be for family use too, that is what we are
dealing with.
So with your help through GHURA, that is going to assist
some folks. But really that is one part of the puzzle and we
are still working on others so we can reduce our cost of goods
or reduce our cost of labor and get more workers so we can
supply this. Our concern, in addition, is when is the next
storm coming on in that is going to damage on the outside? Of
course it damaged the buildup process too, but we are going to
have damage to our commercial businesses, we are going to have
damage to local homes. We, as a community, we had to come
together, working closely with the military to ensure this can
be completed. And with your help, Mr. Chairman and the
committee, it will be really important and helpful.
Chairman Womack. You do have some unique challenges. Mr.
Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that you
brought up resilience in your construction and how important
that is going to be because as you know all too well, the
number and severity of storms has increased. So we want to work
with you there.
I also appreciate the Chairman bringing up and highlighting
the issue you raised with housing shortages exacerbated by the
Marines moving into Guam and, in many cases, transferring from
Okinawa. So I think it is incumbent upon us to recognize that,
and I hope you stay in touch with us on that matter to work on
additional housing on that base because there were all the
issues that related to try to build it elsewhere that you have
detailed.
And I appreciate you raising CDBG. I think we have been at
$3.3 billion for CDBG for somewhere between 3 and 5. It is also
important to recognize, I don't believe you can use it for new
housing, CDBG, it still needs to be increased. But on this
matter, we are going to have to work in concert with our
authorizing colleagues with you. We will be glad to do that. If
you want to comment on any of that, great. But otherwise, thank
you for your testimony.
Mr. Moylan. I appreciate the statement and I want to work
closely with the committee as well to see how we can help move
this forward. It is greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you.
Chairman Womack. Thank you, Representative Moylan, for your
testimony here today and your full comments will be included in
the record.
Next, we will turn to the Chairman of the House Ag.
Committee, who I am sure is going to give us an indication as
to how that farm bill is coming. We will leave that for a
different day, GT. GT Thompson from Pennsylvania. Sir, the
floor is yours.
---------- --
--------

Wednesday, May 8, 2024.
HON. GLENN THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Mr. Thompson. Mr. Chairman, thanks so much.
Chairman Womack, Ranking Member Quigley, members of the
Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing, Urban Development, it
is just an honor to be able to sit before you. Thank you. Thank
you for the opportunity.
Representing one of the most rural districts east of the
Mississippi river, access to quality infrastructure, reliable
transit, and resources for economic development is critical to
farmers, small businesses, manufacturers, and others throughout
my district that spans one third of the landmass of
Pennsylvania. In order to achieve these goals, I request robust
support for the following programs in FY 2025.
Starting with Essential Air Service. The Airline
Deregulation Act of 1978 made airlines the sole authority to
determine which domestic markets would receive air service, as
well as what airfares passengers would be charged.
Subsequently, the Essential Air Service program was established
to ensure taxpayers in small rural communities had continued
connectivity to the entire national transportation system by
subsidizing commuter and certified air carriers.
Now, this program is critical in rural America and has
provided links to hub airports at more than 170 locations
throughout the United States and that would otherwise lack
commercial air service. Representing many rural airports in my
congressional district, including two that participate in the
EAS System program, I see firsthand the importance of
maintaining this program for all Americans who live in
underserved rural areas.
Our Nation's small and rural communities depend on
commercial air service for transportation, medical supplies,
commercial goods, access to larger business markets, and, quite
frankly, economic development. Therefore, I respectfully
request subcommittee fully fund the EAS program at no less than
the FY 2024 enacted levels in FY 2025.
Bus Testing Facility program. The Bus Testing Facility
program at Penn State University, operated by the Thomas D.
Larson Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, tests new transit
bus models for safety, structural integrity, reliability,
performance, durability, noise, and fuel economy. The program
tests bus new bus models before they are purchased by transit
agencies. This often helps address problems before the fleet is
built, potentially saving considerable money and time.
Since the beginning of this program, more than 530 new bus
models have been tested, resulting in more than 10,000
documented design failures. By identifying these failures early
in the production process, the program has averted many fleet
failures, saving millions of dollars in maintenance costs,
litigation, and lost revenue. Therefore, I respectfully request
this subcommittee provide $7.346 million in total funding for
this program in FY 2025.
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvement
Program. In 2015, Congress created the Consolidated Rail
Infrastructure and Safety Improvements program to improve
safety, efficiency, and reliability of the rail network.
Through public private partnerships and cost sharing
agreements, program recipients can invest and capital project
systems to prevent derailments, grade crossing enhancements,
and more.
This program advances major maintenance projects that shore
up first mile and last mile connections served by short line
railroads, allowing goods to move more seamlessly to and from
the market. Representing hundreds of miles of short line
railroad track in my district, these investments are critical
to improving and extending the service life of vital freight
transportation networks in rural areas. Therefore, I
respectfully request full funding for this program in FY 2025.
And the Appalachian Development Highway System was created
in 1965 to stimulate economic development by connecting
isolated areas of Appalachia to the interstate system in the
Nation's integrated transportation network. The project allows
these isolated areas to benefit from greater access to their
surrounding communities and broader markets.
While more than 90 percent of the initial authorized ADHS
miles are completed and open to traffic, funding is necessary
to complete the remainder of ADHS. My district is home to four
unfinished ADHS corridors that would better connect with
thousands of my constituents to our Nation's transportation
network and result in increased economic growth. Therefore, I
respectfully request subcommittee increased dedicated ADHS
funding in FY 2025 so these projects can be completed in an
efficient, timely manner.
I have included additional requests on my written
testimony, including for robust funding for the FAA Contract
Tower Program and the Community Development Block Grant, and I
would also respectfully request consideration of the three
community project funding requests I plan to submit within this
committee's jurisdiction.
Thank you again, Chairman Womack, Ranking Member Quigley,
and members of the subcommittee for allowing me to express my
priorities for the FY 2025 cycle. I appreciate your
consideration. Look forward to working together on these and
other issues.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.071

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.072

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.073

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.074

Chairman Womack. Thank you, Chairman Thompson, for joining
us, for your testimony this morning, and for your work in your
other capacity as well. And we wish you the best of luck as you
work toward that farm bill. Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, chair, I
don't have a question, but I think your testimony reflects on a
couple things that I think need to be pointed out. A little
over a week ago, I went with Chair Womack, the chair, and the
ranking member of the full committee to Baltimore, to a
disaster of what needed to be done. And it occurred to me,
talking to the mayor and the governor there, that they probably
had the best group there they possibly could on bipartisan
basis, people who were serious about what occurs across the
country, regardless of whether it is D or R.
So hearing your testimony to me, it struck me that I
represent O'Hare. But I want you to know I fully appreciate
that to you and your constituents, those two airports are a
lifeline, have absolutely critical link to the rest of the
world, including medical supplies and economic development. So
I think it reflects that we need to remind ourselves that there
is more that unites us than divides us. And I should care just
as much about your airports as you do mine and the rail links
as well, so your constituents know you serve them well today in
that regard. And I want to stay in touch and work with you on
those concerns and needs.
Mr. Thompson. Mr. Quigley, thank you for much, and thank
you all for visiting Baltimore. The agriculture implications of
what happened with that terrible incident with the bridge----
Mr. Quigley. It is a link to the Midwest.
Mr. Thompson [continuing]. Are huge. Fertilizer, farm
equipment, it is a major port that serves both inputs coming in
and outputs being manufactured from America's number one
industry, which is agriculture. And I will say most of my phone
calls I get today are about that bridge and about when we can
start to move, you know, move the economy. So thank you for
doing that.
Chairman Womack. Mrs. Watson Coleman, any questions?
Mrs. Watson Coleman. No, Mr. Chairman. I just simply want
to say thank you very much for a very comprehensive look at
your priorities. And as you were sharing your priorities, I was
envisioning your district, so thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you.
Chairman Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Chairman.
Chairman Womack. Honored to have you. Now we will turn to
representative Stanton for his testimony. Mr. Stanton
represents the fourth district of Arizona. Welcome to the
subcommittee. Anxious to hear your testimony.
---------- --
--------

Wednesday, May 8, 2024.
HON. GREG STANTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
ARIZONA
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking
Member Quigley, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify in the importance of Federal investment
to meet Arizona's transportation and housing needs. My office,
as all offices across Congress, are in the process of vetting
dozens and dozens of potential projects for community project
funding. So many of them fall in the THUD space. Affordable
housing, construction to keep our pedestrians safe and our
traffic moving, and infrastructure to charge our vehicles are
all on the docket. And I look forward to working closely with
this committee to invest in Arizona.
Thanks to $158 million in Federal funds flowing through the
Federal transit agency, we recently officially opened Northwest
Extension Phase 2. Light rail in my community now extends from
Mesa in my district all the way to Metro Center in the West
Valley, linking the downtowns of three major cities, job
centers, and campuses like Arizona State University in my
district. I urge the committee to continue to robustly fund the
Federal Transit Administration.
We also received funds to create a scope and schedule for
commuter rail between Phoenix and Tucson. This would be huge in
the state of Arizona, connecting our communities, making them
more accessible and productive. This investment means that
people in Arizona can travel for work, for recreation, and to
local businesses to bolster the economy in their day-to-day
lives. I urge the committee to continue to robustly fund the
Federal Railroad Administration.
Last year, Arizona received over $13 million in Federal
funds to purchase zero emission buses and necessary
infrastructure. This transition not only improves air quality,
but it significantly lowers long-term fuel and maintenance
costs for Valley Metro, saving the taxpayers and helping the
flow of residents all over the valley. So, please consider
robust funding for the Bus and Bus Facility Competitive Grant
Program.
Aviation is such an important part of the Arizona economy.
Arizona's aviation economy supports almost 20,000 jobs,
contributes billions to our state and country. We have 3 of the
top 10 busiest general aviation airports in the country, with
Sky Harbor in Phoenix as one of the busiest. The overall
aviation infrastructure needs through the Nation are projected
at more than $150 billion over the next 5 years, almost $3
billion in Arizona. The Airport Improvement Program is vital
for the continuation of these efforts to reconstruct and
rehabilitate our airports. Please consider fully funding the
AIP program in your fiscal year 2025 bill.
In Arizona, we have seven contract air traffic control
towers, including Phoenix Mesa Gateway Airport, one of the
busiest--the busiest contract tower in the country. Mesa's
important air traffic safety program maintains and develops
general aviation activity and supports DOD flight training,
operation, and military readiness, as well as pilot flight
schools across the country. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
authorizes a pilot program to convert high activity contract
hours, like Phoenix Mesa Gateway, to FAA-staffed visual flight
rules towers while allowing qualified contract air traffic
controllers, of which over 70 percent are veterans, to remain
at their current tower. I urge this committee to consider
funding level of $30 million to establish this pilot program.
Air traffic is more than planes, it is drones as well. My
bipartisan bill, the Drone Infrastructure Inspection Grant Act
was incorporated into the FAA reauthorization bill. Funding the
implementation of the DIIG Act would assist states, Tribes, and
cities in using drones to inspect aging infrastructure such as
bridges, roads, dams, and the electric grid more efficiently
than ever before, identifying and rectifying issues at the
earliest possible stage, saving money and even lives. I urge
the committee to include language in the fiscal year 2025
Appropriations bill and fund this program at the authorized
level of $12 million.
Last, all the work we do in transportation is in close
coordination with our local and state agencies. This year,
Arizona received a $95 million INFRA grant to make major
improvements and widen Interstate 10. This grant represents a
unique partnership of governments involving state, Federal,
Tribal, and county governments in the planning and development
of the grant to address the safety infrastructure needs in
Arizona and within the Gila River Indian community. This
project would not have been possible without significant
Federal resources, and I encourage robust funding to these
programs in fiscal year 2025.
Thank you so much for this wonderful opportunity to address
this important committee in these critical times. Thank you,
Chair.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.075

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.076

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.077

Chairman Womack. Thank you. Spoken like a true mayor after
my heart.
Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you for your testimony. So tell me,
there is some long-term grandiose plan for comprehensive public
transportation in the region, like regionally coordinated. You
mentioned light rail, you mentioned commuter rail. Is there
some longer term plan to do this on a much larger scale?
Mr. Stanton. Yes. On the ballot in Arizona, in Maricopa
County this year, will be an extension of the sales tax so that
the region can provide matching funds for Federal grant
programs such as light rail, people mover systems, streetcar
systems, et cetera. Although, as you know, certain communities
in my--the ones that I represent, Mesa, Tempe, Phoenix, are
very big on light rail and the opportunities of light rail. We
have had over $14 billion of private sector investment along
our light rail, a massive success.
Some cities have a different political philosophy. They are
not interested in light rail, so we need to make sure that in
the plan, it is done in a bipartisan way with mayors of both
Republican and Democrat coming together, and that all their
priorities are met. So some of them are more interested in
highway construction or arterial street construction, and we
need to support that as well. Striking a city like, just like
in your region, Maricopa County, it is a diverse group of
cities, over 24 cities that make up the region. It is
complicated and so striking that balance, which is amazing that
they were able to come up with a single plan. It is called Prop
479. That will be on the ballot to serve all of those needs.
Chairman Womack. Good luck. Thank you.
Mrs. Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Representative Stanton. The one thing that is very illuminating
for me, and I am so glad I am here, is that we have so much----
Chairman Womack. Turn that mic on, please.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Oh, I thought it was, I am sorry. One
of the things that is most illuminating for me is that no
matter where we are, we have similar needs. I have got an
airport. It is not O'Hare. It is an airport that is regionally
important. You have one, the representative before that had
one, the representative before that has one. And we all have
needs associated with that. And the same thing with CDBG and
housing and things of that nature. So those things that sort of
bind us and the work that we need to do are more important and
significant than those things that divide us. And I am so glad
to be here, Mr. Chairman, and to hear from my colleagues what
their priorities are. Thank you.
Chairman Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Stanton. Only if I respond real quickly, and that is I
am a recovering mayor in Congress, and one thing I lamented as
mayor was we needed a better partnership from the Federal
Government, and we need to be better partners. This committee
is the committee that actually is the very best partners to
local government around the country, and I am very appreciative
of that. Thank you so much.
Chairman Womack. Thank you for your testimony. Without
objection, your full testimony will be entered into the record.
And finally, we move to our friend from New Jersey,
Jefferson Van Drew, from New Jersey's Second District. Sir, the
floor is yours. Please turn that mic on and proceed.
----------

Wednesday, May 8, 2024.
HON. JEFF VAN DREW, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW
JERSEY
Mr. Van Drew. I am either in good shape or bad shape
because you used my formal name, Jefferson, but that it is.
Thank you all for the work that you do. I appreciate it. I
really mean it. Chairman, Ranking Member, and my old friend for
many years from the New Jersey legislature. I spent 16 years.
Bonnie, I am not sure, how many years were you in the
legislature? Sixteen, yeah. So now we are colleagues again.
So, it is good to see you all, and I appreciate the
opportunity to testify before you. I will get right to it.
The William J. Hughes FAA Technical Center, a great
congressman that we had in New Jersey for many years, it was
named after him. This year's FAA reauthorization includes
provisions that will codify South Jersey's William J. Hughes
Technical Center, thereby making it permanent and permanent in
New Jersey. This historic win for New Jersey will expand the
technical center's role and make responsibilities within the
FAA even greater. We need to make smart investments to support
them and their expanded mission. I advocated for such
investments to be included in the President's budget request.
The fiscal year 2025 budget request does, in fact, include
historic levels of infrastructure funding for the technical
center. I request the committee match these levels by providing
the following funds from the FAA facilities and equipment
account: $23.4 million for the technical center laboratories.
These funds will be used to bring the laboratories into
compliance with power and security standards for the critical
national airspace systems that are based at the technical
center. Thirty-nine million for the William J. Hughes Technical
Center infrastructure sustainment. These funds will modernize
the main electrical utility substation that powers the entire
technical center. We should know that this is a bipartisan
request supported by my friend, Congressman Donald Norcross,
who represents the district next to me. Many of his
constituents work at the technical center, and I do appreciate
his support, and I want that on the record.
Community project funding. I have six community project
funds. These are all priorities and I request they be funded at
the full requested account, if possible. And I know it is a
tough job you all have. I have included identifiers in my
testimony to allow committee staff to easily locate the
requests if they need to do so.
The first request is $4 million for the economic
development account to construct a dental hygiene school at
Atlantic Cape Community College. Unfortunately, the committee
has informed me that this project might not be eligible due to
a prohibition on healthcare facilities. This is a little
different. It is an educational facility. I just, from the
heart, want to say how important it is.
You know, the county that I happen to reside in, I have six
counties in my district. The county I reside in was the only
county in the state of New Jersey that didn't have a county
college. And I fought for, worked for, advocated for, and
again, in a bipartisan way with many individuals through the
years to finally convince the powers that be in Cape May County
to go into a jointure with Atlanta County, and we have the
Atlanta Cape May Community College.
People think of my area as the shore, and it is. Beautiful
homes right on the beach worth tens of millions of dollars.
Many folks that are extremely challenged in rural parts of my
district, parts of my district, counties in my district have
the lowest per capita income in the entire state. Trying to
give folks opportunity. Dental hygiene, and I speak from
experience, I am a dentist, does that. It is actually one of
the few things that you can get a 2-year degree in, and you can
go on for a 4-year or even get your master's, but get a 2-year
degree and practice hygiene. We are critically short of dental
hygienists, not only in the state of New Jersey, not only in
southern New Jersey, but in the country. So it creates
opportunity and it fulfills a need. It is purely an educational
project. It is close to my heart.
So I would like to work with you all, if we can have any
reconsideration, just to make sure that there is no way and no
path forward. I think that there might be. It is not a
healthcare facility as such. It is an educational facility, and
it is also an economic development tool. It really is for the
entire area.
The second request is for $2.5 million to design and
prepare a site for Aviation Maintenance Training Academy from
the economic development account. This project will change
generations of much needed aviation maintenance workers. Again,
we need decent jobs for people and opportunity. The project is
supported by the United States Air Force. It has their support
and it has matching non-Federal funds from private sector
partners who are interested in recruiting from this facility.
That is important. Any funds we do are going to be matched in
the private sector by this maintenance training academy.
Third request is for $650,000 for the city of Millville
baseball field safety improvements. It might seem trivial. It
is not. Millville, another very challenged town. I know that
Bonnie is familiar with it. Member Coleman I should say. It is
a town that has a lot of working class, poor people, high
unemployment, has an unbelievable baseball program known
nationally. You are going to know one of the names that were
the result of this, Mike Trout. Mike Trout came out of this
program. It is a great program.
The city is poor. I don't know how else to say it. They
have a hard time maintaining these fields, maintaining the
infrastructure in the fields. And they have had other MLB
players, by the way, come from there. It is their economic
cultural cornerstone. It used to be the glass industry. The
glass industry is gone. It is reminiscent of the Rust Belt. If
you go through Millville, lots of beautiful areas, good hard
working people, really challenged. They are deteriorating with
improper lighting, improper field conditions, and a lack of
protective nets. This is for safety more than anything else. It
makes the field safety for generations of ballplayers. It is
quite an amazing thing. If anybody wants to see their program,
please let me know.
Fourth request, $800,000 for the Wildwood tram cars from
the transit account. The tram cars are a beloved and iconic
fixture of the Wildwood Boardwalk, if anybody has ever been
there. The requested funds will be used to replace eight of the
tram cars with more environmentally friendly engines, hybrid
engines, rather than the pure fossil fuel engines they use now,
and importantly, to make them ADA compliant, which they are not
ADA compliant right now. And again, we have a match. The
improvement district has advanced about a half-million, in
fact, $480,000 as a non-Federal funding match. They have
already done it.
Fifth request is for $4 million for the Atlantic City
airport, rail station, and cargo spur from the consolidated
rail infrastructure account. These funds will be designed and
engineered. They prefer alternatives from a feasibility report
that was completed last year. You are welcome to that report.
It offers benefits in terms of intermodal transportation and
economic development. It is strongly supported, strongly
supported by many institutions. I will just include a few of
them: our university, Stockton University; strongly supported
by our healthcare system, the AtlantiCare system itself; and
the South Jersey Transportation Authority. Again, we have
money, has advanced $1 million in Federal funds as a non-
Federal match. We are putting our local money there to make
sure that we are not just talking, but that we are walking here
and we are putting, you know, we are putting something into the
game.
Final request, $1.76 million for the NAB Avenue extension
from the highways account. The project also promotes intermodal
connections, but with the Millville airport, another airport
that also has a museum, another airport. And again, Member
Coleman can relate to this because I know what she is going
through with her airport that is struggling a little bit, but
has real potential. We are working with them. The funds will
be--design 1.3 miles of new roadway that will redirect
congestion from the downtown Millville area and promote
commerce in underserved areas of the city, such as Cumberland
County has. Cumberland County, I have six counties, that is one
of them, poorest county in the state of New Jersey. And yet
they have advanced, again, money where our mouth is, $445,000
as a non-Federal match. Already done.
I appreciate you guys, and I appreciate you listening to
all of it.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.078

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.079

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.080

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.081

Chairman Womack. Thank you, Mr. Van Drew.
Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your
testimony, sir.
You know, I listen to testimony and you make a really good
case for your district, and that is your responsibility and
that is important. But I think if I have learned anything being
here 15 years now, is that members know their district a hell
of a lot better than we do, which is exactly why it was right
thing to do to bring back these programs, to give members that.
Because if members don't know their districts, they are not
going to be members very long. So it just, in my mind,
reinforces that there are fiscal constraints and broad rules,
but I have a mind to take members at their good judgment of
what's right for them.
So, and I also want to add, I was a Cook County
commissioner for 10 years, and we had a public health system
within that county. There it was reinforced just how important
dental care was. I always thought of it as you keep your teeth
and they are clean. But I learned from the experts there just
how important it was for the wellbeing and health of people
long term, particularly people who have neglected their teeth
or their dental care for so long. So I certainly appreciate
that, but also for detecting other things like cancer. So I
want to reinforce your comments and statements.
And again, thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Van Drew. Ranking Member, I appreciate you, and I agree
with everything you said on just two issues. One, you know, I
have spoken loudly and strongly and will continue to do so for
what we now call community grants. It used to be called
earmarks. We've got more transparency. So, you know, some of
the issues that people worry about aren't there. And just to be
real frank about this, I would rather than a bureaucrat that
may not know my district very well and the needs and desires of
all of our districts for us to have input in that. So I have
strongly supported and openly supported that process.
And secondly, about the dentistry, you are right. In fact,
the more we know and the more we learn, actually, other health
problems not only--for example, I will give you an example,
people that have some really--gum problems, it is called
periodontal disease. That actually connects to and is related
to inflammatory diseases and heart disease as well. So it is
really important.
And in underserved areas, you know, those areas I just
see--it's amazing. When I went through dental school and even
after, when I did my residency, part of it, I did it in the
South Bronx. If anybody is familiar where that is, it is one of
the toughest places in the country. And I had kids that were
getting dentures at 15 and 16 years old because of a lack of
care, because of drug addiction, because of other problems, and
it led to other health problems. So it is an important piece,
and that is why I advocate for it so hard. And if there is any
pathway, I think it is a really worthwhile endeavor.
Mr. Quigley. Mr. Chairman, if you will indulge me, I
visited Howard Brown. They are just opening a dental clinic in
my neighborhood in Lakeview. And they told me firsthand that
some of the people were getting their first dental care or
their first dental care in over a decade. And beyond everything
you just mentioned, some of them getting implants and, you
know, teeth pulled out, their emotional wellbeing was enhanced
dramatically, their sense of who they are, but their ability to
eat what they want and their health dramatically altered who
they were and how they felt about themselves. So I would just
add that and thank you again.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Ranking Member.
Chairman Womack. Thank you, Mr. Van Drew.
Mrs. Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much. Clearly, the
Hughes Center has been a very important part of New Jersey and
on behalf of the country, too, as well. I mean, and to be named
after this wonderful legislator is just wonderful.
So, Jeff, there is no question that you know your district,
because the diversity of requests and I am thinking as you are
talking about the various towns and how it is going to impact,
because I do know that area, clearly, these are very legitimate
and worthy projects that need to be considered on behalf of our
citizens in New Jersey. Thank you for being here.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. I appreciate you. Thank you.
Chairman Womack. Jeff, as always, thank you so much for
your testimony.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you.
Chairman Womack. Without objection, your comments will be
included, full comments, in the record.
I want to thank all the members of the committee and for
those who testified this morning, Representatives Moylan,
Thompson, Stanton, and Van Drew. Look forward to hearing more
member input through the fiscal year 2025 appropriations
process. As I said earlier, everyone's written statements will
be included in the record.
And with that, this hearing is now adjourned.
[Statements submitted for the record follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.082

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.083

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.084

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.085

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.086

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.087

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.088

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.089

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.090

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.091

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.092

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.093

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.094

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.095

Wednesday, September 18, 2024.

INSPECTORS GENERAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION (AMTRAK)

WITNESSES

HON. RAE OLIVER DAVIS, INSPECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
HON. ERIC J. SOSKIN, INSPECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
KEVIN H. WINTERS INSPECTOR GENERAL, NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION (AMTRAK)
Mr. Womack. The subcommittee will come to order.
Today we welcome the Inspectors General from the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation,
and Amtrak.
Good morning to our witnesses, the HUD OIG, Rae Oliver
Davis; the DOT IG, Eric Soskin; and the Amtrak IG, Kevin
Winters. Thank you for appearing before us today and for your
service to the tax-paying public.
One of our fundamental roles as members of the
Appropriations Committee is to make sure that the funding we
allocate is spent as intended. We look to IGs across the
Federal Government to conduct oversight to ensure our tax
dollars are being well-spent. We rely on you to help us root
out waste, fraud, and abuse at the agencies under your
jurisdiction.
I have some concerns regarding the management and
effectiveness of DOT and HUD, given the unprecedented federal
funding both Departments have received in recent years. I have
similar concerns with Amtrak which, although a for-profit
organization, receives billions of dollars in combined annual
appropriations, and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or
IIJA, advanced appropriations.
Your audits and investigations provide a critical window
for policymakers and members of the public to peer through. I
am most interested to learn about the outcomes of your various
reports, which recommendations have been implemented and which
have not, and where additional congressional attention may be
needed. I was pleased to meet all three of your offices' budget
requests for the fiscal year 2025 House bill.
I and the entire subcommittee recognize the important work
you do. We look forward to your testimony as we make the tough
decisions that will be required as we conference with the
Senate to finalize a fiscal year 2025 T-HUD bill.
With that, I recognize the ranking member of the
subcommittee, my dear friend and the gentleman from Illinois,
Mr. Quigley, for his opening comments.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I appreciate your comments, particularly as to the
critical role our Inspectors General play, and we appreciate
your service toward that end.
I join you in welcoming our witnesses today. And I will
keep my opening statement brief so we can proceed with
questions, but I do want to underscore the importance of this
hearing and anticipate your questions.
All this shoulder injury is from hockey, not being in
Congress.
But examining the management and the oversight challenges
facing the agencies' funding in this bill helps this committee
make informed decisions about how we invest our resources.
Whether it is health or safety hazards in the home or
workplace, a changing workforce, or private sector development
outpacing Federal regulation, there are opportunities to
enhance the work of Amtrak, DOT, and HUD.
As these agencies are leading the modernization of our
Nation's infrastructure with support from historic investments
made through a Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, their commission
is some of the most complex public-private transactions in the
housing and transportation sectors.
Of course, as part of this historic undertaking, there are
and will continue to be lessons learned. There we are. Now I
got to start all over.
I believe the Amtrak CEO Stephen Gardner, Secretary
Buttigieg and Secretary Todman have what it takes to
effectively run these agencies. And I am here today to learn
how I can strengthen my work with them to make sound
improvements.
I look forward to learning more about how the agencies
funding this bill are meeting their management challenges and
where they can make progress.
Thank you for being here today and I again thank my friend
the chairman.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mike.
This morning, we will begin with the DOT's Inspector
General, Mr. Soskin.
Mr. Soskin, your full written testimony will be included in
the record, and you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Soskin. Chair Womack, Ranking Member Quigley, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to
testify today about our office's oversight of the Department of
Transportation's programs and activities. I am pleased to
appear alongside my HUD and Amtrak counterparts, IGs Oliver
Davis and Winters.
The independent and objective oversight that our offices
each provide serves a vital role in keeping the Federal
Government effective and accountable and providing transparency
to the American public. I greatly appreciate the subcommittee's
interest in and support of our work.
At DOT OIG, we conduct audits and investigations that
promote economy and effectiveness in DOT's programs, that
provide information to Congress and to the American people, and
that detect and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse.
This mission affords us a unique perspective of the
challenges DOT faces. My testimony today focuses on three areas
from our work.
First, DOT strives to make the U.S. transportation system
the safest in the world. Conducting data-driven assessments of
risk and implementing effective mitigation actions is,
therefore, critical.
For instance, while traffic fatalities have decreased by 5
percent from their 2021 high, DOT still faces a tall task in
its work to ameliorate surface transportation safety risks.
In the aviation safety realm, FAA has taken important steps
but is still working to address several of our recommendations
related to the 2018 and 2019 Boeing 737 MAX crashes, including
improving risk assessments after safety events. Our office is
also completing a review of FAA's oversight of Boeing's 737 and
787 aircraft production. We will be issuing a report with
recommendations next month.
Second, the Department is charged with improving
infrastructure while ensuring prudent stewardship of taxpayer
dollars. In fiscal year 2023, DOT's contract and grant
obligations totaled $112.3 billion. This is a more-than-50-
percent increase from fiscal year 2019, influenced by COVID-19
relief funding and the IIJA.
As these funds flow, DOT must focus on oversight that
ensures compliance with Federal law; that prevents fraud,
waste, and abuse; and that promotes competition. Our recent
reports have pinpointed weaknesses in contractor and grantee
oversight, resulting in millions of lapsed and inactive funds,
unsupported costs, questioned costs, and improper payments.
Another challenge as DOT administers these IIJA funds is posed
by increased domestic content requirements. For example, we
recently issued a report describing weaknesses that hindered
FTA's oversight of buy America requirements. This looked
specifically at the southeastern Pennsylvania transportation
authority's now-terminated contract to purchase rolling stock
from the state-owned China Railway Rolling Stock MA
Corporation, CRRC. But our audit made recommendations that will
apply more broadly.
Third, DOT has taken on the ambitious and imperative goal
of transforming our transportation system. Key challenges
include maximizing the benefits from airspace modernization and
strengthening cybersecurity. In addition, DOT will need to act
thoughtfully to attenuate safety risks without inhibiting the
ability of companies and other players to innovate in numerous
arenas.
On one hand, the primacy of safety is deeply woven into the
Department's DNA. On the other, the Department justifiably
takes pride in the history of American leadership in modes
ranging from rail to automobiles to aeronautics, leadership
that has helped make our country secure and prosperous.
Striking the balance required to sustain this leadership
while protecting the traveling public is no easy task,
particularly when multiplied across a myriad of modes,
technologies, and use cases.
For example, FAA has made recent progress in using its
authorities to permit additional beyond-visual-line-of-sight
drone operations in north Texas and nationwide. However, FAA is
still working to issue its notice of proposed rulemaking and
eventually a final rule to make such operations routine,
scalable, and economically viable.
Meeting the Department's many goals will also require DOT
and all of its employees to aspire to organizational excellence
and to be staffed with high-caliber, dedicated public servants,
whose activities are measured and monitored with data as they
work in our new, often telework-friendly, environment.
Mr. Chair, this concludes my prepared statement. I am happy
to answer any questions you or other subcommittee members may
have.
Mr. Womack. Thank you so much.
I now recognize HUD's Inspector General, Ms. Oliver Davis.
Your full written testimony will be included in the record, and
we are going to recognize you now for 5 minutes. Thank you.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Good morning, Chairman Womack, Ranking
Member Quigley, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for
inviting me to testify about my office's oversight of the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
HUD's programs provide critical funding to communities and
households throughout our country. Its 2025 fiscal year
appropriations total more than $60 billion in grants for rental
assistance, preventing homelessness, revitalizing communities
and promoting economic development.
Another $94 billion is available in HUD's disaster recovery
and mitigation programs through supplemental appropriations.
Additionally, HUD ensures trillions of dollars in mortgage
loans to provide affordable housing and homeownership
opportunities, and creates liquidity through these various
loans through Ginnie Mae's mortgage-backed securities program.
It is a portfolio that has grown to over $3.6 trillion in
mortgage-backed securities as of August 2024.
HUD's programs continue to expand as our country faces
significant and complex challenges in the housing space. There
is not enough affordable housing to meet the demands of
American communities.
The affordable housing stock is old and in need of major
repairs that are costly. The funding needed to improve
conditions at these properties has consistently outpaced HUD's
funding levels.
Current economic conditions may create liquidity crunches
for many of the independent mortgage non banks that HUD relies
on now to service loans and provide payments to investors.
There is legitimate concern about the impact that an economic
downturn could have on servicers' ability to operate and
whether Ginnie Mae will have to take on responsibility for
servicing portfolios like it did in 2022, with the collapse of
Reverse Mortgage Funding.
Natural disasters are expected to continue more frequently
and with great severity. Permanent authorization of disaster
recovery and mitigation programs would reduce the time it takes
for HUD funds to reach local communities in need.
My office's oversight strategy is centered on helping HUD
maximize the outcomes that its programs and funding generate
and strengthen HUD's capabilities to prevent fraud, waste, and
abuse.
We are focused on protecting taxpayer funds and ensuring
they can deliver better for the communities and families that
rely on HUD's important programs. We have identified over 30
open recommendations across HUD's programs as priorities for
HUD leadership to address.
For example, our office has recommended HUD do more to
enhance controls that prevent fraud before it occurs. HUD also
needs to ensure that its over 40,000 contractors and grantee
partners are held accountable for assisting in fraud detection
and prevention.
Similarly, we have identified that HUD remains chronically
challenged with identifying the extent to which improper
payments are made in its two largest rental assistance
programs. HUD has been unable to estimate the amount of
improper payments in these programs for the past 7 years. Funds
spent in these programs total more than $45 billion in payments
in fiscal year 2023 alone, and make up over two-thirds of HUD's
expenditures.
Estimating improper payments is the first step in finding
why they occur and creating a plan to reduce them. In its
oversight of safety hazards in assisted housing, HUD needs to
ensure that property inspections are performed within required
timeframes and that complaints about health and safety risks in
multifamily properties are resolved timely.
Recently, we examined large housing authorities' management
of health hazards in the public housing and voucher programs.
Our reports identified that households are living in units that
simply do not meet quality standards at a minimum. We also
found instances where HUD authorities are not properly
assessing lead-based paint exposure or properly informing HUD
of lead poisonings in their units.
We will continue prioritizing this type of work to ensure
HUD's programs' partners are accountable for providing decent,
safe, and sanitary housing to our communities.
We have a strong partnership with the Department of Justice
in combating sexual assault and misconduct by landlords
receiving HUD funding. This work has secured settlements with
landlords to provide monetary damages directly to victims. It
has resulted in agreements that they will never again be
landlords and, thus, never be in a position to victimize
vulnerable tenants again.
To conclude, I am proud of the hard work that my dedicated
staff is doing and the robust oversight that we are providing.
And I also want to thank the subcommittee for their continued
support of our budget, and I look forward to working with this
subcommittee in the future and answering any questions you may
have today. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Finally, it is time to recognize Amtrak's Inspector
General, Mr. Winters--our resident Devil Dog and Marine Corps
retired brigadier general. Thank you for your service to our
country.
Your written statement will be included in the record, and
you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Winters. Chairman Womack, Ranking Member Quigley, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to
discuss our oversight of Amtrak's programs and operations.
Although Amtrak OIG is relatively small, about 100
auditors, investigators, and support staff, I am very proud of
their independent and objective oversight efforts on behalf of
the American taxpayer.
This is an unprecedented moment in Amtrak's history. Not
only is it charged with providing safe and efficient
transportation to its customers, but it is also advancing its
largest capital portfolio in its 53 years of rail operations.
With access to as much as of $66 billion from the IIJA,
Amtrak is in varying stages of modernizing its fleet, tunnels,
bridges, stations and technology systems. Indeed, Amtrak has
numerous multibillion dollar infrastructure programs and
rolling stock procurements now in design or execution.
The infrastructure programs include participating in the
$40 billion Gateway Program in New York and New Jersey,
constructing the $6 billion Frederick Douglas tunnel under the
city of Baltimore, and replacing multiple large bridges, such
as those over the Susquehanna and Connecticut Rivers.
Amtrak's rolling stock procurements include three that are
the largest in its history: First, replacing its legacy Acela
fleet; second, procuring new inner-city trains; and third and
the one likely to be its most expensive, replacing its long-
distance trains. Any one of these would be a generational
endeavor, but Amtrak is engaged in all three simultaneously.
In our view, the pursuit of these multibillion dollar
capital programs presents a host of transportation improvement
opportunities for our Nation, but they also present significant
challenges and risk. That risk is amplified by the fact that
Amtrak still must meet obligations that are difficult under the
best of circumstances. That is, running safe, efficient, 24/7
passenger rail operations, and providing excellent, fiscally
responsible service to its customers.
Our work indicates that Amtrak recognizes the complexity
and seriousness of this moment and is taking steps to proceed
responsibly. Nevertheless, the scope of this simultaneous
undertaking is daunting, and our work highlights that there is
no shortage of lessons learned and room for improvement.
Accordingly, we believe Amtrak's programs and operations
require robust oversight by those in a position to do so, such
as us in the OIG, Amtrak's board of directors, the Federal
Railroad Administration and, of course, Congress.
For our part, we will continue to strategically focus our
limited resources on Amtrak's most serious challenges. For now,
they fall into three broad categories: First, the challenge of
running a safe and secure railroad that efficiently and
effectively serves its customers; second, responsibly executing
its historic capital improvement plans; and third, reducing the
ever-present risk of fraud, waste, and abuse.
Finally, we trust that the information we have provided to
your committee now and over the years proves helpful to your
oversight of Amtrak. And we appreciate your longstanding
support to our office. So I thank you and I look forward to our
discussion today.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. I know that members on both sides of
the aisle have a lot of questions and that we are looking to
this panel for answers.
We will proceed in the standard 5-minute rounds,
alternating sides, recognizing members in order of seniority as
they were seated at the beginning of the hearing, which
promptly began at 10 this morning.
We will try to move quickly so everyone can get their
questions in, so, members, please be mindful of your time and
allow our witnesses time to answer within your 5-minute turn.
I am going to recognize myself for 5 minutes.
While this hearing will mainly focus on the critical
oversight you provide, I want to be sure that you are getting
all that you need from the administration and from the agencies
which you oversee.
As you know, these authorities are provided to you by laws,
such as the IG Act of 1978. To that end, a couple of important
housekeeping questions.
Do you have any issues getting prompt, timely access to
staff, personnel, or documents when conducting investigations
from the agencies which you oversee? We will start to my left
with IG Winters.
Mr. Winters. No, I do not.
Mr. Soskin. We have strong relationships with the
Department and the OAs, and we have always been able to get all
of the information that we need.
Mr. Womack. Okay.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Yes, Chairman. I would agree. We have
strong relationships as well. Sometimes things required a bit
more conversation throughout my tenure, but we get to a good
place. We are good. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. I want to talk IT for just a minute. Do you
have your own IT systems with a firewall between your files and
the agencies which you oversee?
Mr. Winters. We do not have our own IT system. We rely on
Amtrak's. Nevertheless, we have sufficient internal controls to
ensure that our audit and investigation data is adequately
protected.
Mr. Womack. So internal controls, are you in a position to
test those and see if they are stressed at all?
Mr. Winters. Yes, we are. And we can see if Amtrak is, in
fact, penetrating our system, and to date, they have not.
Mr. Womack. Okay.
Mr. Soskin. Yes. To protect our independence, we maintain a
separate IT system that we oversee. And we have in place
controls consistent with Government cybersecurity policies to
prevent unauthorized access, including by the Department.
Your question mentioned firewalls, and we do not maintain a
firewall per se, because we use the Department's network and
there is no practical and affordable way to install a firewall
without significant additional investments. We are confident in
our security, and we would be happy to have our staff brief you
further on the details of that.
Mr. Womack. Okay.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Yes, we are completely independent. We
have a firewall as well as executives that oversee our IT. Yes.
Mr. Womack. A couple of open-ended questions on best
practices. How regularly, if at all, do you use your 7-day
letter authority? If rarely, how do you resolve issues with
your agencies before reaching the point of having to send such
a letter?
Mr. Winters. At the outset, I think it is important to note
that the 7-day letter is a very important tool for IGs, and we
appreciate the congressional support in instituting that tool
in our arsenal.
That said, I have never had the occasion, at least as the
IG of Amtrak, to use a 7-day letter. But to resolve disputes--
and disputes are normal for IGs, because we are auditing and we
are investigating and we are getting after data, and there are
very thorny issues that need to be navigated--one of the things
we did is develop--is we and the company developed--what is
called a relationship policy, which is basically a dispute
resolution mechanism that solves these issues at a staff level.
And if there is no resolution, there's a gradient, an
upward gradient in terms of getting to the appropriate levels
to get the thing resolved. So that has worked. In the nine
years I have been at Amtrak, that has worked very well, and we
never had an occasion to use a 7-day letter.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Soskin.
Mr. Soskin. IT Winters did an excellent job explaining the
importance of the 7-day letters. Like Amtrak OIG, neither I nor
our office, to the best of our staff's knowledge, has issued a
7-day letter.
When issues arise with an audit or investigation, that is
one of those tools out there, the existence of which helps us
resolve those issues quickly by reaching out to the appropriate
Department officials, and communicating openly. That is an
important part of those relationships that we have worked to
establish and maintain.
Mr. Womack. Good.
Ms. Oliver Davis. My colleagues couldn't have said it
better. And I will echo the gratitude for the tool, the 7-day
letter. I have never had the occasion to use it in the last 5
years. We also try to escalate disputes and conversations up
through the Department, ending with myself and the Acting
Secretary.
The one thing I would add that is a little different is
sometimes I do choose to take things out of our audit
resolution process and issue what is called a management alert.
I have done that for several important issues,
whistleblower protections, improper payments, things in our
lead portfolio. So that is something that I do that is a little
different, but it is not a 7-day letter tool.
Mr. Womack. At least you have got the tool in your toolbox
should you have to go at some high-torque answer, you know, or
resolution to a challenge.
Finally, and this will be quick, have any of you ever been
concerned about being as transparent with Congress or the
public as you would like? Has it ever been an issue?
Mr. Winters. No, it is not.
Mr. Soskin. While there are occasionally some transparency
challenges, we are confident we have been able to share the
information, particularly with Congress, that we need to share.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Absolutely. I mean, the Department
definitely has its privileges. We have had issues around
cybersecurity discussions, that sort of thing. But I have never
felt it inhibited our oversight or ability to be transparent
with our stakeholders here or the public.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mr. Quigley.
Mr. Quigley. Thanks again, Chairman.
Ms. Davis, if only to afford you the opportunity perhaps to
do a deeper dive involving disaster recovery oversight. As you
know, it has been 2 years since Congress provided long-term
housing and transportation disaster relief. This is in the wake
of 2023 and 2024 disaster from Francis Scott Key to Maui, major
hurricanes in the South, tornadoes in the Midwest. No shortages
of disasters in these last few years.
I would like to hope that, working on a bipartisan basis,
as that trip to the Key Bridge demonstrated, we will come to
terms with that.
But, given the role HUD plays in long-term recovery of
communities, housing, schools, or rebuilding its businesses,
what do we need to know about your office's needs and
resources, particular to that and given the numbers that we are
going to be seeing on a continually growing basis?
Ms. Oliver Davis. I appreciate that question. I am
certainly grateful that the subcommittee is attuned to our need
for resources. Any time we see a supplemental come out to
address disaster, we hope to see funding certainly for our
oversight.
The one thing I would add is the money takes a while to get
spent. That is the nature of disaster recovery. It is also some
of the challenges in getting the money out the door as well as
having the grantee spend the money effectively and expediently.
So often we are looking at years following with our own
oversight. So having funding that is not tied to a particular
fiscal year, giving us a little flexibility, is often a very
good thing.
Yes, that would be very helpful. Thank you.
Mr. Quigley. And you were talking before about fraud
detection and other aspects. What are the unique challenges
associated with this that your office faces?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Well, frankly, our office has limited
resources, and we are in a bit of a follow-the-money, chase-
and-pay situation with our oversight.
The main recommendation we have made there that I think
would be most helpful is if the Department, the policymakers,
those administering the programs would get in front of the
fraud.
We are looking for them to do fraud risk management on the
front end, particularly with the level of grant funding that is
going out through the Department. We are hoping to see a top-
down approach to that within the Department. We are seeing
progress. This has been an ongoing conversation for us.
We did a look at HUD's fraud risk program Department level-
wide, and found it to be ad hoc or, you know, just beginning,
just starting. We have historically seen that the Department
looks to grantees to manage the fraud.
Something that is happening there in our portfolio that is
really interesting, a strategic thing we have done is we are
now taking those fraud risk management audits to the grantees
themselves.
You mentioned disaster relief. We just looked at the Puerto
Rico grantee, given it is the largest. And we found that they
too have an ad hoc, or just very beginning fraud risk
management program.
So that is where we are at with fraud risk management. We
want it to be at the department level. We want it to be early
and often, and we look for that to mature.
We are seeing maturity at the Department level. They have a
policy now. They are incorporating fraud risk management in
their front-end assessments of programs. So we are hoping that
will just continue to mature.
Mr. Quigley. No. I mean, disasters bring out the best and
worst of us. We saw in the Midwest after tornadoes that the
fraudsters move in the next day to exploit those who have been
through horrible situations. So I appreciate your remarks about
front-ending this and being aware, incorporating it into all
their practices as we go forward.
So I appreciate that.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Thank you.
Mr. Quigley. Mr. Chairman, I will have other questions. I
yield back on this.
Mr. Womack. All right. I recognize the sheriff for 5
minutes.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that.
And I want to say thank you to our three witnesses here
today. Thank you all for what you do. It is extremely important
to folks around the country.
I want to ask a very parochial question here, if I might.
Ms. Davis, does the OIG--I am from Florida, and we have had
some issues with the CDBG-DR money that is block granted to the
State. And we have had some issues with not only our HUD
properties, but also individual property owners.
And I know the State is trying to work through this with--I
think they had a subcontractor that failed to follow through
and do their job.
So my question is, on a CDBG grant, once we block grant
that to the State, does OIG still maintain some investigatory
responsibility for that?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Yes, sir, we do. We follow the money, so
to speak. If the money goes to the grantee, we have the
authority to audit that grantee, investigate the use of funds.
Something we are looking at now with respect to grantees is,
you know, outcomes. We are trying to do more outcome-based
work. So yes, we do.
Mr. Rutherford. Even when the State's doing the
contracting?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Yes. Yes, absolutely. And, actually, it
is a challenge certainly, because we--we see grantees--the
money goes beyond the grantee to subrecipients, contractors.
Often we have trouble getting that data, and that is a lot
of times where we see the fraud and improper payments. So yes,
but we do attach to that still.
Mr. Rutherford. Excellent. Are you familiar with what is
going on in Florida with the RMO (ph) CDBG, the RMO?
Ms. Oliver Davis. I know there are challenges with CDBG in
general, yes. And if there is more that you would like to raise
my awareness to, I would be happy to meet and discuss those
things.
Mr. Rutherford. Love to. Okay, thank you.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Yes, thank you.
Mr. Rutherford. Let me jump over to Mr. Soskin. I want to
talk a little bit about ATC staffing. In the spring, the
chairman had hearing with Secretary Buttigieg, and he talked
about hiring 2,000 more controllers in 2025. That is really
important to me because, again, I am from Jacksonville, and our
air traffic control center is in that funnel. And we have had
300 staffing triggers, which means delays, you know, planes are
diverted, that sort of thing.
Can you talk about this--I know one of the things that FAA
is talking about doing is trying to move some of their
training--and I assume that is the ground training that they
are doing--to universities and others outside of their own
academy.
Can you talk a little bit about that? Do you have any
concerns and how is that going?
Mr. Soskin. Well, the Jacksonville facility that you
mention, that is one that we are familiar with. We highlighted,
in fact, in our audit report a year or two ago about air
traffic controller staffing issues, the extensively high number
of staffing triggers there and the bottlenecks in air traffic
controller training that have developed, in part, as a result
of limited capacity at the FAA Academy and part as a result of
a number of protracted pauses that were put in place on
training, both at the Academy and then the field training that
takes place in control towers and air traffic control
facilities themselves as the pandemic continued.
That has led to a real staffing backlog. The program that
you are describing--the program to allow students graduating
often with degrees in air traffic control from certified or
recognized air traffic control colleges and universities to
then move more directly into the in-the-field training--is a
tool that the Department feels holds extensive promise for
unblocking some of that backlog of training.
But what is important is that it won't be a swift process
for a controller to be fully effective in all situations that
air traffic controllers encounter and that it not be a drain on
the time of trained controllers to carry out that training.
That is a process that will take years.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you very much. I really hope we can
stay on top of that with the colleges and make sure that it is
a smooth transition, but I thank you for that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Real quickly on that subject. With colleges
involved in the training, is there any kind of accreditation
process that--I will leave it with that question, you know,
accreditation issues associated with farming out that training?
Mr. Soskin. Yes, Chair Womack. I can follow up specifically
afterwards, or have our staff follow up with some of the
specific requirements, but the FAA's in-college or college
training initiative does involve certifying individual programs
to participate. So schools that currently have degrees are not
automatically advancing their students, their graduates, to be
controllers. They actually have to be certified as part of
this.
I had an opportunity to visit Embry-Riddle Aeronautical
University in Florida last year. Their facilities to begin that
controller training process are quite remarkable. I understand
in the past, they have had a very high success rate of their
graduated controllers then going on to successfully complete
the FAA Academy.
Mr. Womack. Thank you.
Mrs. Torres.
Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Soskin, I am really glad to hear about you looking into
the controller issue, training for them and including other
opportunities so that people don't have to fly out out of State
in order to get the proper training that they need.
Ms. Davis, thank you for being here today. My questions are
going to be to you.
I want to emphasize also the importance of the following
points I am going to make. Properties involved in HUD programs
must be completely free of dangerous materials, contamination,
and toxic chemicals. However, despite HUD's efforts to
eliminate hazards in its assisted properties, there are still
several safety and health issues that need to be addressed.
In your testimony, you highlighted that your office
oversees State and local governments that receive Federal
funding. You also note that your office prioritizes oversight
work aimed at reducing environmental and public health hazards
in HUD-assisted housing.
The Housing Authority of the city of Los Angeles has
received Federal funding and requires increased oversight. I
will make that point again. The Housing Authority of the city
of Los Angeles has received Federal funding and requires
increased Federal oversight.
Since 2004 that I am personally aware of, this agency has
endangered the public health of the communities that it serves
and its employees.
An article in the L.A. Times from that year described
workers being forced to remove tiles containing asbestos
without proper protection or equipment. Subsequently, Cal/OSHA
investigators found concerning issues related to asbestos in
Housing Authority properties. And in 2005, after many attempts
to get them to correct these problems, they issued a willful
violation for their negligence.
I want to know how is it that agencies communicate to you
when they fail to comply with minimum standards, protections
for their tenants, for their workers? Recently, it was reported
that an investigation will be conducted in Watts after a study
revealed several homes with lead contamination in the water
supply.
According to the study carried out by the Better Watts
Initiative, 21 out of 540 water samples from verified Watts
addresses, including single-family homes and public housing
units, contained lead.
It is unacceptable that the poor working-class people are
forced to live in dangerous conditions by an agency receiving
the bulk of its money in Federal dollars. And I demand to know
how housing providers are being held accountable for complying
with environmental laws and regulations to protect the health
of low-income households and vulnerable populations and to
correct housing injustices.
The mayor at the time, by the way, sent a letter requiring
a medical surveillance program be instituted to follow those
tenants and those workers. That was never done.
So how does your office ensure that the Federal funds are
being used to address this negligence, focusing on housing
authorities?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Thank you for that question. You have hit
on a part of our portfolio that is taking up a remarkable
amount of our resources and our time, because it is a very
challenging part of the HUD portfolio.
Everything you are talking about, asbestos, you didn't
mention infestations but there are plenty of those, lead paint,
all of that falls squarely under my Environmental Justice
Initiative.
We have a robust audit side of the house that is doing a
remarkable amount of work in that field. We are going out into
communities with our investigators. We have teamed up with DOJ
and U.S. Attorney's Offices, and we are doing community
outreach. I just was in Richmond, Virginia, two nights ago with
the U.S. Attorney and our staff.
And we are telling community groups what we want to hear
from them. And we are learning while we are there. Often, I am
talking about lead, certainly unit conditions and how people
are suffering. And they are raising our awareness and telling
us about more things we didn't know.
Mrs. Torres. So why don't we follow up with you, because we
are really out of time, but I do want to leave you with this:
To the record, I want to enter an L.A. Times, ``Asbestos
Removal Lacked Safeguards, Workers Claimed'' in Los Angeles as
well as all of those willful violations that they have received
back in 2004 to 2008 period of time, which has triggered, for
me, the issue that I want to hear directly from you: How is
this agency able to continue to perform so poorly and continue
to receive Federal dollars without being held accountable for
the injustices that they are creating targeting people of
color, by the way?
And I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Without objection, the material is added to the
record.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.096

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.097

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.098

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.099

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.100

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.101

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.102

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.103

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.104

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.105

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7284A.106

Mrs. Torres. Thank you.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Valadao.
Mr. Valadao. Thank you, Chairman.
I appreciate all of you taking time to testify today.
Ms. Davis, good to see you again. We spoke last year about
sexual abuse in public housing, and you touched on it again
this year in your testimony.
We agree that HUD tenants should not have to choose between
having a roof over their head and being sexually harassed or
assaulted by their housing provider.
Can you go into a little detail on your actions, on the
actions your office is continuing to take regarding sexual
harassment or sexual assault in HUD programs, and what have you
learned over the past year and a half?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Thank you. This is a very important
initiative to me. One thing I have learned is that this is very
much a deep-seated program. I think this--deep-seated problem
that I believe has been a part of these programs for quite some
time.
We have landlords, management companies, people in
positions of power over tenants. We certainly have vulnerable
individuals that are being housed in HUD housing. And often,
the landlords know about these vulnerabilities. They know what
these people are facing.
They are willing to evict them, ruin their credit, do all
sorts of horrible things to them in exchange for sexual favors.
It is a remarkably difficult thing to hear about. And we have
opened, I think, 50-plus complaints and investigations since we
started this initiative.
Again, I just mention we are going out in the communities.
When we go out to the communities with DOJ and our U.S.
Attorney partners, we are talking specifically about sexual
misconduct.
I have talked about some of the successes, unfortunate
successes that we are having in this area, but we brought $4.3
million back to victims in one of our cases in New Jersey,
$175,000 in, I believe, Ohio.
We have an ongoing effort here. It has caused us to
stretch. I mean, our agents are taking trauma-informed
training. It is an entirely different way of operating. But it
is something that I feel very passionate about. It is something
that we are going to commit resources to and continue to work
on.
Thank you for asking about it. I appreciate it.
Mr. Valadao. I appreciate that answer. If there is
something we need to be doing more from the legislative side,
obviously, we want to be active on that front.
And last, I wanted to ask you about your audit of the
California Department of Housing and Community Development in
August of this year. I saw that the Department was not prepared
to adequately detect and prevent fraud, which is not a new
issue in California.
Can you briefly explain what you found in your report, and
have any steps been taken to fix the issue?
Ms. Oliver Davis. In terms of steps to fix the issue, that
is something I will have to follow up on. But we have looked
beyond the HUD level down into the grantees, looking to see how
they are preventing fraud, because we have seen at the
Department level, the attitude typically has been fraud is not
something the Department needs to address, but something the
grantees need to.
I don't think the requirements are being put on the
grantees to do this. I don't think they have some of the
training that they need to do this, or the capacity at times,
but they are struggling. A lot of times we see that the
approach is reactive.
So we are looking for them to do things like best
practices, put hotlines in place, put controls in place to
prevent fraud. We want to do what we can to protect the funds.
Yes.
Mr. Valadao. Since I have got time for my third question, I
also wanted to touch on a report that your office issued in
January of this year regarding systematic challenges with
improper payments.
This report highlighted HUD's continued inability to
complete a compliant estimate of its improper payments for the
seventh consecutive year.
Can you explain in more detail how this has been allowed to
occur for so long, and does it appear HUD is making an honest
attempt to fix this problem?
Ms. Oliver Davis. This is an area that we continue to see
the Department struggle with. And, again, as you mentioned, it
is tenant-based rental assistance. It is project-based rental
assistance.
It is over 60 percent of HUD expenditures. It is upward of
$46 billion. The last time they had a significant estimate,
they were able to arrive at an estimate, I think, for 2016. It
was $1.7 billion at the time.
So they are missing an opportunity to be transparent with
the public about a risk that they have in their grant systems.
What we have seen is problems collecting the information.
We have seen problems in arriving at a sound methodology.
Often they want to look at their first level of transaction
payment out. We want to look all the way down. Where's the
money going after it goes out HUD's door?
I think in terms of project-based rental assistance,
multifamily is making some progress. They are at least--they
have a plan in place they are talking to OMB about. We haven't
seen it, so we can't judge the methodology. We don't know if it
is going to be sound or not. And I believe they are going to be
doing manual collection of the information. That is
challenging.
In terms of PIH and tenant-based rental assistance, they
are going to invest their time they have told us in getting
their IT in place, which will certainly help them collect. It
is an ongoing conversation they are having with the Department,
and it is absolutely a challenge.
And the biggest issue is if they can't do this, they can't
put corrective action in place. And if you look at this through
the lens of fraud risk management as well, they could be
protecting the funds better on the front end and they could be
estimating the improper payments on the back end much better.
So yes.
Mr. Valadao. I am running out of time here, so I appreciate
that. And hopefully, I will have more time to talk a little bit
about this, because getting that data is obviously vital. So
thank you.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Valadao.
Mr. Gonzales.
Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman, for holding this. I am
actually very frustrated with HUD right now for a couple
different reasons.
My question to you, Ms. Davis, is, when was the last time
you visited San Antonio?
Ms. Oliver Davis. I was just in Houston, but I have not
been to San Antonio yet.
Mr. Gonzales. I love Houston. Houston is not San Antonio.
Ms. Oliver Davis. No.
Mr. Gonzales. San Antonio is the seventh largest city in
the United States. I am Hispanic. It is predominantly Hispanic.
We are having a growing issue with housing. On May 1st, the
Secretary came before this committee, and I asked to host her
in San Antonio. She agreed to that, and I have yet to hear
anything from them.
I mention this because a lot of these issues that we talk
about are very prevalent in San Antonio. Once again, we are not
talking small little off the beaten path. Everyone goes other
places. They do not come to San Antonio.
Also, you know, I would love to host--I am not trying to be
confrontational here. I am trying to highlight the issues that
I am seeing in my community--I represent about 40 percent of
Bexar County--and bring to light on how we can fix some of
these very long-term systemic issues.
You are talking tens of thousands of people that are on the
HUD waiting list. You are talking about very old
infrastructure. I am willing to help out, you know, from being
on the Appropriations Committee and this piece to it, but there
has to be a partnership.
And I am not seeing a partnership here, and I do not
understand why. Once again, I hear the administration always
talking about equity, equity, equity. Well, guess what? This is
an Hispanic community that needs help.
My first question is to Mr. Soskin, and this is about Del
Rio International Airport. Earlier this year, I supported the
FAA reauthorization package, which addressed critical needs
across our aviation infrastructure and safety programs.
I would like to raise with you Section 570, which requires
a report examining and providing recommendations for restoring
small community air service. I have worked with the City of Del
Rio to ensure Del Rio International Airport is given full
consideration as a potential community to be included in this
report.
IG, can you speak to whether FAA is on track to implement
Section 570?
Mr. Soskin. Representative Gonzales, we haven't done any
work yet related to Section 570 of the Reauthorization Act.
With regard to Del Rio's incorporation among the seven
airports in that provision, three of which I think are
specified in the legislation, I encourage you to reach out to
the OST and FAA regarding their decision-making on that.
Mr. Gonzales. Once again, another frustration I have, Del
Rio, Texas, is home to Laughlin Air Force Base. Every Air Force
pilot in the U.S. Air Force gets trained at Laughlin Air Force
Base.
And when we don't have airport services to this small
community, small but yet important, guess what? Our military
readiness falls further behind. Eagle Pass, Texas, is in the
Del Rio Sector of the Border Patrol sector there, one of the
hottest, most contentious parts of the country during this
border crisis.
When CBP, Customs and Border Protection, do not have access
to fly into that airport, it hurts our national security. I
bring these things up, because, you know, whether it is a small
little town, like Del Rio, which ain't that small, or whether
it is a big old city like San Antonio, I am very frustrated
with the level of engagement.
I am trying to engage here. I am trying to figure out how
we solve some of these problems. Leaving these small little
towns out to dry not only hurts those small towns, it
undermines our national security in many different cases.
And, with that, Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Mrs. Watson Coleman, 5 minutes.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I apologize. I had another obligation this morning, so
I missed testimony, but I do have questions.
So this is for you, Inspector General Davis. Oliver Davis,
is it?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Davis is fine.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you.
My understanding is that we have heard your testimony
regarding an account of a property owner falsely affirming that
he had no knowledge of lead-based paint, or lead-based paint
hazards in the housing.
In New Jersey, our children are living--you know that--in
housing that was built before 1950 and, most likely, are at
highest risk for elevated blood lead due to the potential
presence of lead paint. I am concerned about property owners in
my State who would falsely affirm their records.
So can you describe what resources HUD needs to better
audit these inspections, and if there is more that you need
than what you have?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Well, thank you for drawing our attention
to the lead-based paint problem. And you mentioned the age of
housing. That is absolutely a top risk factor. And we have
looked at this program--I mean, this problem at the program
level. We have looked at PHAs and how they are handling lead-
based paint. We found that HUD doesn't have even the basic
information as far as the number of units that are facing lead-
based paint.
They are not tracking elevated blood levels appropriately.
They have a tracker that has been moved to a new platform,
which is a good development, but there are still variances to
that tracker.
So they have to know about the problem in order to react to
it. We are seeing at the grantee level a lot of lack of
communication between PHAs and reporting elevated blood levels
to the departments, the local health departments, or to HUD.
That communication has to happen in full in order for
environmental investigations to happen, or for there to be some
kind of remedy.
In terms of needs, it is a remarkable problem in terms of
HUD's oversight. They have tens of thousands of program
partners that carry out there housing assistance programs,
rental assistance programs, and they all are accountable for
lead. And we see a real struggle with accountability there and
a real struggle with oversight at the Department level.
In terms of our needs, you know, this again fits squarely
in my Environmental Justice Initiative, which I am committing
resources to. I have a whole audit team devoted to it, and I
have special agents and 1811s that are out there on the streets
looking for bad actors in this area.
We could always do more with more. We are scratching the
surface in terms of lead and in terms of unit conditions in HUD
housing. We would love to be getting out all over the country
and looking at these risks.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So HUD actually provides resources to
local entities that should be following up on this at their
level, right?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Well, we are talking basically about, you
know, the grantees, the PHAs and their contractors and their
management companies. All that money, of course, flows through
the Department. And then the accountability should be from the
Department. They should be holding them accountable.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. What about inspectors? What about
local housing inspectors and health inspectors? Do they have a
role in this?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Yes. They are part of it. I mean,
certainly we have seen REAC inspectors have gone in. And we
have NSPIRE. Of course, that is emerging. All of that involves
inspections.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So does HUD give resources to these
local entities to carry that out?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Yes, I believe. I don't know if the money
would flow directly to the inspectors from HUD or if it would
go through the PHAs and the landlords. I would need to follow
up on that with you, but it is all a part of an accountability
issue, yes. And I have to acknowledge a capacity issue as well.
You know, there are 3,000 PHAs out there alone, not to mention
all the landlords. That is a remarkable lift.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. It is. But it is really important that
our children are not exposed to the lead----
Ms. Oliver Davis. Oh, absolutely.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. And we need to figure it out.
I can't believe I have 29 seconds. So let me just--I wanted
to ask Mr. Soskin, you are responsible for the oversight of the
implementation of the Infrastructure Program, right?
Does that include oversight into who is getting contracts,
that the President's goal for the utilization of MBEs and
women-owned businesses and others are being included?
Mr. Soskin. Yes. And in particular, our investigators have
carried out numerous investigations with successful outcomes of
people who misrepresent themselves as eligible to participate
in women-owned and disadvantaged business and small business,
veteran-owned business programs.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I will have questions if we have a second
round, if we have a second round.
Mr. Womack. Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am, of course.
Mr. Diaz-Balart, 5 minutes.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
And to all of you, the work that you and your teams do is
so hugely important. So thank you. Thank you for your service.
A couple questions if I may, Mr. Chairman.
General Soskin, Mr. Soskin, Inspector General Soskin, your
office released an audit report on June of 2023 regarding fraud
risk assessment processes for the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act.
There, your auditors found that--and I am going to kind of
quote it here. Without expanding its fraud risk assessment
process, quote, ``DOT may not be optimally positioned to
comprehensively identify, properly assess, and appropriately
prioritize resources to address the full spectrum of fraud risk
across all of its programs.''
I know that DOT concurred with your two recommendations,
but yet, about a year and a half later, neither requirement--
again, requirements of assessment nor mitigating fraud, to my
understanding, has been closed.
A couple questions on that: How would meeting these two
recommendations help ensure that funds spent in that program,
you know, the surface transportation projects, are spent
appropriately and as intended?
And two, have you got any indication that there is a plan
to complete these recommendations? Is it a high priority for
the Department? What is your view on those?
Mr. Soskin. Well, thank you for your attention to that
audit, which is the product of excellent and painstaking work
by a number of our auditors.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. And deals with a lot of money.
Mr. Soskin. And it deals with a lot of money.
So we did make the two recommendations that you are asking
about. And the first of them is really important, because what
we recommended essentially is that people who are knowledgeable
about each of these programs or the program areas for something
that is a new program under the IIJA, those people should be
engaged in the process of thinking about the program and its
design, thinking about how bad actors might exploit the program
or seek to exploit it.
And then, based on a risk assessment that involves the size
of the program, its maturity, and the types of risks that those
knowledgeable people have identified, the operating
administration should determine how much in terms of resources
to dedicate to ameliorating those fraud risks and how best to
protect against them.
I mean, it is really no different than a physical security
assessment we might do on a building or a cybersecurity risk
assessment.
And our second recommendation there is essentially that,
while we have operating administrations, such as the Federal
Transit Administration, the Highways Administration, the Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, the Department, as a whole, at
the DOT level, should help across the operating
administrations, help them be consistent in their approaches.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. How much are you seeing--because, again,
my understanding is it has not all been implemented. Is this a
priority? I mean, I know it is your priority. You all have done
the work, but from the Department?
Mr. Soskin. So relevantly, last month the Department
circulated a draft order within the Department, and that draft
order would, when implemented, establish policy and guidance
Department-wide, specifically on fraud risk assessment.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. Great.
Mr. Soskin. We expect that process to be completed by the
end of calendar year 2024, with the new order going into effect
and implementation shortly thereafter.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. So I guess better late than never, but at
least I guess there is some light at the end of this tunnel,
correct?
Mr. Soskin. We certainly appreciate the Department's
actions.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. And we would love if you would just kind
of keep us in the loop as much as possible just to let us know
how that is going.
Mr. Soskin. Absolutely.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. Some question, Mr. Chairman, which I don't
necessarily expect an answer today, but let me--I don't know if
this is for you, sir, or for maybe Mr. Winters. So in the so-
called bipartisan infrastructure bill, you know, that was about
$660 billion to DOT over five years, but there is $27 billion
specifically for programs to reduce emissions. $27 billion.
Now, do we know--do you know, because every time we spend
money, we are supposed to get something for it, right? Do we
know--the goal of that is to reduce emissions to lower the
temperature of the planet. We know that is the goal. So do we
know how much that will reduce--how much--how many degrees,
parts of degrees that will lower the temperature and by when?
Mr. Soskin. Representative Diaz-Balart, our office has not
done any work into looking at the potential impacts of
emissions reductions.
Mr. Diaz-Balart. And that is fair. The problem, Mr.
Chairman, is that we keep spending all this money, taxpayer
money on--supposedly to, you know, to stop global warming, and
yet I have yet--I am not blaming you all, by the way, I have
yet to get one answer from those either pushing it or those
trying to implement it as to how much it will actually cool the
planet.
And it seems that if we are spending billions upon billions
of dollars, we should know what we are getting for it. And I
have yet to get that answer, and I will continue to pursue it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. And you are asking lawyers for that.
They are not scientists. I guess they would argue.
Mr. Ciscomani, five minutes.
Mr. Ciscomani. Well, thank you, Chairman, and thank you,
Inspector General Soskin and Inspector General Oliver Davis and
Mr. Winters here for testifying before our committee today.
Inspector General Soskin, since the COVID-19 pandemic, we
have noticed a disturbing uptick in large scale theft due to
organized crime in both the trucking and freight trail
industries so much so that the second leading category of
insurance claims for freight rail is theft-related--theft-
related claims. This issue poses a major threat to the supply
chain, especially for a state like mine in Arizona where we
depend heavily on this.
Has this issue come to the attention of your office and
what is being done to address it?
Mr. Soskin. Representative Ciscomani, this has absolutely
been an area that has come to our attention. In the last five
years we have had 29 complaints that our investigators have
opened on cargo theft and related brokering topics, and most of
those complaints have, in fact, been in this last year
consistent with the uptick in attention and incidents that you
are describing.
Cargo theft and abuse of brokering systems is an issue of
incredibly important relevance to the motor carrier industry,
especially to independent owner operators that depend on
brokering services where they may not have direct insight into
who is transporting those loads, and we have engaged with
leadership at the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
and our law enforcement partners, including with prosecutors at
the Department of Justice, to be able to bring cases in this
area and hopefully to deter wrongdoers in the future.
Mr. Ciscomani. What kind of progress have you seen on that
due to your efforts? And I appreciate the efforts on this.
Arizona is obviously a state, like I said, that depends heavily
on this.
We are competing also for the international trade, and for
Arizona that is a 17 plus billion dollar relationship that we
have with the Country of Mexico alone in terms of two-way trade
and imports and exports. When safety is an issue for cargo,
that can be impacted. It impacts the economy. No question it
impacts the safety of those involved as well.
So I am very interested not only in the efforts but in the
result of those efforts.
This has been an ongoing issue, like I said, since the
pandemic. It heightened--it had always been an issue, but now
it is to the point that it is being brought to my attention by
practically everybody on the table involved in this issue, so
what kind of progress have you seen on there and how do we, you
know, curve the other direction here? Because it is not
trending in the right direction still.
Mr. Soskin. I wish that I could brief you on the progress
of ongoing investigations. Of course, that is not something
that I can do, but we would be happy to----
Mr. Ciscomani. I am not asking for that. I am asking have
we seen a decrease in any area? All the numbers that I see is a
continual increase in theft, and like I said, insurance claims.
Have you seen your efforts pose success to the point that we
are seeing to reverse the tend where this is going? That is the
nature of my question.
Mr. Soskin. I don't think we are at the point of reversing
that trend yet.
Mr. Ciscomani. When do you expect something to happen so I
can answer to my constituents and say help is on the way, this
is being done and we have seen some progress in this area?
Mr. Soskin. We look forward to hopefully being able to
announce indictments and then convictions for you to showcase.
Mr. Ciscomani. I think that is very important. I think when
people start seeing that this is being penalized heavily and is
being prosecuted and is actually being convicted, then that
will deter behavior of individuals considering engaging in this
kind of activity, so I look forward to working with you on
this.
As you can see, it is very important to my state and it is
very important to my district, so I want to be a partner to you
all and help not only with the process and whatever it is that
is needed, but also in highlighting what is being done there.
I will move over to another quick question here. In terms
of--General Oliver Davis, for you--the lack of affordable
housing supply is also of particular interest in my district in
southern Arizona and America overall, but we are facing an
unprecedented housing supply shortage. I believe that HUD
should partner with private sector to address this issue.
My legislation, the Super Demonstration Act, proposes a
pilot program through HUD that will streamline the construction
of affordable housing through investment and the elimination of
certain regulatory requirements. Does your office have any
recommendations for HUD to partner with the private sector on
this and does HUD have any existing collaborations with the
private sector that would also be good for performing?
Ms. Oliver Davis. May I answer?
Mr. Womack. Yes.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Thank you for the question about
affordable housing. You know, we see that struggle throughout
HUD's portfolio, everything from maintaining what they have in
place to the fact that something like project bank rental
assistance is limited to a certain number of contracts that HUD
can't extend, so we always look to see what initiatives they
have going to extend housing. Certainly RAD, certainly rental
assistance is something we are very interested in.
You have mentioned your legislation. I would be happy to
meet with you and discuss that. Happy to offer technical
assistance in that way because it is a very challenging thing
throughout the portfolio. Of course, we are looking at any
grants that flow through the department that will increase the
housing supply and looking at those outcomes and looking how to
improve that performance.
So I think there is certainly existing collaborations in
place, but I am always available to talk more about what you
have in mind.
Mr. Ciscomani. I would love to chat more about that. I do
think it is very important, so thank you for being on the right
track on that.
Mr. Chairman, I yield.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Cline, 5 minutes.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Inspector General Davis, good to see you. In your testimony
you provided several examples of harassment cases you have been
able to investigate and refer to the Department of Justice,
including a case in Virginia. You answered some of Mr.
Valadao's questions about that. Would you mind explaining to
the committee the process from opening a case to referring it
to the DOJ.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Sure. It is--my colleagues and I all
experience this, and having been at DOJ myself, I know how this
works, but it can work a number of ways. In this case, you
know, we are listening for complaints, listening for
whistleblowers, individuals that are coming forward to tell us
about bad actors and wrongdoing, and sometimes we take that
directly to DOJ and see if they are interested. Sometimes we
look it up and then take it to DOJ, but we partner with them
and they ultimately make a decision about what is brought in
court and who will be--who charges will be brought against.
Mr. Cline. In the Newport News case that you highlighted,
you mentioned incidents of the landlord improperly collecting
COVID-19 relief funds. Can you explain the steps either the IG
or DOJ takes to recoup improper payments like seen in this
case.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Well, in this case, and it is ongoing,
although we have--we do have a guilty plea in that matter, and
that was in a first--a case of first impression for us in that
it was criminal racial interference with housing. In terms of
recouping funds, you know, looking at prior cases like Centanni
that we had in New Jersey, you know, there was a fund available
at the end. There was a monetary penalty, and that went--almost
all of it, I think we had a $4.5 million penalty in that case,
and 4.3, as I said, went directly to victims. So there are some
great outcomes.
And also a part of that agreement was getting the bad actor
out of the programs, having to divest--the individual having to
divest himself of ownership of the properties.
Mr. Cline. What is the greatest barrier that your office
faces when it comes to investigating cases of fraud, waste, and
abuse?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Oh, gosh. I would say resources. There is
a tremendous portfolio on HUD. You know, I was--I have--my
staff tells me all the time about the numbers. You know, some
of our grantees have seen, you know, 2,000, sometimes 3,000
percent increase in the funds that are flowing through them. We
had 15,000 hotline complaints last year. I have 520, 530 people
at any given time and about half of those have law enforcement
authority.
So we are challenged certainly by our own resources, so we
have to make very strategic decisions about what we are going
to pursue. I feel very good about what we are doing right now,
but there is enough fraud to go around always at any given
time, and enough bad actors, unfortunately.
Mr. Cline. Thank you. Inspector General Soskin, I-81, which
runs through my district, is one of the most used interstates
in the country for passenger and commercial vehicles.
According to VDOT, more than 2,000 motor vehicle incidents
take place on I-81 in Virginia every year. To address this,
Virginia implemented highway safety corridor programs in 2003
back when I was in the state legislature. Does your office look
at state plans like Virginia's highway safety corridor program
to see if it could be mimicked or somehow enhanced as a
national plan under USDOT?
Mr. Soskin. Well, Representative Cline, let me first say
that Interstate 81 is one of my favorite Virginia interstates
to drive along, notwithstanding the traffic and occasional
safety challenges out there. We haven't had the opportunity to
do any work that looks specifically at state programs or
specifically the Virginia I-81 corridor program. Each state,
you know, not only takes its formula fund grants and creates
its own often bespoke programs to make use of those funds, but
they often pair that with state funding as well.
That said, about $100 million of the funding for the I-81
corridor program is through a TIFIA grant, and we did--I
suppose it is a TIFIA loan guarantee. We did an audit a few
years ago looking at the Department's oversight of TIFIA. In
addition, we have a recent audit looking at the Department's
oversight of state transportation improvement programs, the
STIPs that they are required to complete to establish
eligibility for Federal grant funds.
Mr. Cline. Okay. One of the amendments that I submitted
this year didn't make it in the bill regarded DOT creating a
standard for marijuana impairment. I am noticing that DOT has
released an anti-impaired driving campaign that promotes the
use of marijuana as long as you are not driving. So it says
blaze your own path, just don't drive high. Can you talk about
the thought behind this campaign and whether the administration
thinks it is wise to advocate that taxpayer dollars be used to
promote drug use?
Mr. Soskin. Representative Cline, we will be happy to take
a look at that. That is the first that this campaign has been
brought to my attention. I have taken the opportunity of
NHTSA's programs on many occasions to encourage our staff to
refrain from any dangerous driving activities as well as any
violations of the law, including our drug laws.
Mr. Cline. Thank you. Yield back.
Mr. Womack. We have got time for another round if members
will respect the time of our witnesses and can be pretty quick
about it.
I want to go back to improper payments. You issued a
management alert back in January. As you said in your
testimony, there is $1.7 billion. I think that estimate was
back in 2016. That is quite a long time ago. When we had Acting
Secretary Todman in, she specifically said given the deadline
for coming back with a plan, monitoring plan, that it would be
done by the end of the year. Her words. Based on what you have
seen, will HUD be able to meet the deadline? And what, if any,
steps have been taken so far?
Ms. Oliver Davis. I am not necessarily optimistic that they
are going to meet that deadline.
Mr. Womack. Are you pessimistic? I will take that as a yes.
Ms. Oliver Davis. We are talking to the department about
this constantly and collaborating, and we are certainly here to
help. I believe the collection of data is something the
department has struggled with and we have one housing program
doing it manually. Another trying to improve their IT situation
so they can perhaps take the information on, secure the PII
through their technology. We also have questions and have had
ongoing questions for quite some time about the methodology. We
haven't seen the methodology yet for the multifamily side of
the house, and PIH, if they are working on the technology can't
be working on the methodology.
So I am not confident we will see that by the end of the
year, but if we do, I will be excited to review it. My team
will take a look at it. It is certainly an opportunity for the
department right now.
Mr. Womack. You know, we are hearing a lot about AI and its
ability for us to be able to do some predictive analysis and
make some better judgmental decisions based on this artificial
intelligence phenomenon. Is that a solution here? Is that
something that is being implemented? I know I am asking an IG
for something pretty technical, but should--surely there is a
way for us to be able to do a better job of tracking.
Ms. Oliver Davis. I appreciate that suggestion. That is
something I will certainly take back to my team. And I know
that the department certainly has an AI initiative. The CFO is
in charge of that. We consult with him ongoing about it. You
know, in the past we have seen the department take on robotics,
robotics automation.
I don't know if that can be implemented here or not. We
have pointed out some problems in the past, but I think we want
to give the department some room to try things out, to, you
know, do some experimenting, if you will, in the realm of AI.
So we are having those discussions, but I would be glad to take
that idea back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. General Winters, we still recognize
that you are here. We are not purposely leaving you out of the
discussion, so I want to come back to you--Acela, the overhaul
of the Acela program. You released an audit last September.
This $2.3 billion overhaul of the northeast corridor's 20-year-
old Acela fleet. It was initiated in 2014. Service launch
planned for 2021. Today these trains are still not in service.
Help me sort this out.
Mr. Winters. I will attempt to. Acela really revealed a gap
in Amtrak's management. On one hand, if you recall in my
testimony, Amtrak has a very daunting task of running a
railroad, 24/7 operations, about 30 some million passengers
this year, 500 destinations, weather. That is difficult in and
of itself.
And they had that capability down pretty well. There is
gaps, of course, and things that go wrong, but their ability to
deliver capital programs such as Acela has been something we
have been critical of for over ten years in various things like
Moynihan Train Hall, the Unified Operations Centers as we point
out that there are fundamentals that are missed in getting
these things done on time and on budget.
Acela seems to be in the forefront of that. Until recently,
there wasn't an organization within Amtrak's management that
was dedicated to these high-visibility, high-dollar programs to
deliver them on time and budget. And back when you said in
2014, there was no entity within Amtrak that was dedicated to
this practice as it is today.
So now in 2022, Amtrak, sensing that they would get some
real money to address their undercapitalized assets, dedicated
a section called the Capital Delivery department to do just
this. These are acquisition professionals like we experience in
military programs that know how to run programs, track costs,
set business cases, budgets, and accountability going forward.
That didn't occur when Acela first was launched. It used to be
named Acela 2021. That has kind of come and gone. Now it is New
Acela.
So where we are now is they have--they have contracted for
28 train sets. Fourteen of them have been built by the
contractor Alstom. The problem, however----
Mr. Womack. In 8 years?
Mr. Winters. Yes. So the problem, Mr. Chairman, though, is
that there is still not an approved computer model by the FRA
that would allow these trains, the prototype to go into
testing. Accordingly, there is risk there that the ones that
are already built and sitting in various train yards will have
to be retrofitted.
Mr. Womack. I think the taxpayers are in hope that as
Amtrak embarks on one of the largest rolling stock purchases in
history that these lessons learned help us do a better job.
Mr. Winters. That is a very important point. One of the
recommendations we made in that audit is that Amtrak have a
repository for just that, for lessons learned in these major
acquisitions. They have done that. And in fact, the long
distance teams, the ones who are doing the very large
acquisitions are relying on the lessons learned from New Acela.
Mr. Womack. Mike.
Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Chair. Thank you all again for
being here. I am the vice chair of the quiet skies caucus.
Airport noise, a critical issue not just for me but for many of
my colleagues. It is not just nuisance. This is Harvard and
Boston University studies found that aircraft noise faces--
those addressing it face increased risk of being hospitalized
for cardiovascular disease.
FAA, a long and spotted issue of--history of addressing
this, but they have done some work to survey communities,
request input on aviation, noise research, but little has
materialized. The noise studies in the past were delayed.
Results not necessarily particularly valuable and questionable
as to how they went forward.
General Soskin, can you give us an update in terms of your
assessment of this and how they have done and where we are now
after all these years.
Mr. Soskin. Ranking Member Quigley, although we haven't
done any recent work specific to FAA's handling of noise
complaints, we have carried out related audits. One of them
looked at the $2.2 billion that FAA has provided since 2005 for
land acquisition, including for projects to mitigate noise
levels created by airport operations, and we noted that in many
cases the noise exposure maps are out of date, that many
airports do not have up-to-date inventories of that noise land,
and that FAA's monitoring of how the noise land is disposed of
and how revenues from disposal are put to use in particular
perhaps to undertake other noise amelioration activities that
their monitoring of that is incomplete.
I would note, and this is small consolation to those of
your constituents who are--or others in the caucus who are--
experiencing noise issues now, that there has been a
substantial drop over the last few decades in the number of
Americans who were exposed to aircraft noise under the FAA's
measures.
By one statistic cited in one of our audits or maybe GAO's
work on the area, it has gone from about 7 million 40 years ago
to just over 400,000 today. But some of those who continue to
be exposed are exposed more frequently because of greater
frequency of----
Mr. Quigley. I would suggest the 400,000 are all in my
district. Whatever progress we might have made is largely
because of the airlines buying quieter planes, but you must be
aware of the studies that were done, you know, trying to
address what was clearly an arbitrary assessment of what was
tolerable, right? And those studies we still don't have clear
answers on, and there were questions about the methodology
there and whether that was accurate putting off now for years
whatever progress that we would like to make on this issue. Are
you aware of these shortcomings that we have faced as well?
Mr. Soskin. I am not familiar with the specific studies
that you are referring to, but I would be happy to give them a
read and discuss them and the issue with you further.
Mr. Quigley. I mean, there was a 2023 report your office
issued that identified another point, nine recommendations for
the FAA to strengthen its oversight of AIP grants for noise, so
if at some point you can give us a detailed update on what work
you have done to address these recommendations and how the FAA
is working to do better on this.
Mr. Soskin. All of them are currently open. The target
action dates are the end of this year, and we would be happy to
provide you with a further update once those recommendations
are acted on.
Mr. Quigley. Please do. And General, I do--we know you must
be doing such a great job. We have fewer questions for you, but
I do want to ask one. In February your office initiated an
audit of how Amtrak is dealing with customer service, the
experience for passengers with disabilities. Can you give us a
little bit of info of why that was initiated, what prompted it,
and how well you are working with Amtrak on it?
Mr. Winters. We are very committed to enforcement of the
Americans with Disabilities Act and making sure that all
Americans have access to transportation. And so our customer
service job focuses on those tenets that we think are important
in terms of making sure transportation is available to all
Americans.
Mr. Womack. Mr. Rutherford, bring us home.
Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Davis, first I
want to thank you all for your focus on HUD safety and our
abilities, but I do want to bring up Eureka Gardens you may be
familiar with. We had a HUD-assisted property there which was
plagued by health and safety issues. Finally resulted in a gas
leak that had an explosion.
In your written testimony, you mentioned HUD lacked a
standard protocol for its offices to ensure life-threatening
deficiencies are addressed at HUD-supported housing units after
a REAC inspection. How can that possibly be? When you are
dealing with life threatening findings, are they not speaking
to local code enforcement? This is--well, first let me ask you
this, because that was May of last year. Do we have a protocol
now?
Ms. Oliver Davis. We have made that recommendation. You did
a great job of addressing that part of our portfolio.
Mr. Rutherford. Is that a no?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Much of that work is based on the tragic
circumstances that you are talking about. We are--they are
working towards--HUD is working towards migrating to a central
location and a way of dealing with these multifamily
complaints, because as you said, our work----
Mr. Rutherford. What you are telling me is right now it is
a no.
Ms. Oliver Davis. My understanding is we don't have that
yet and my understanding is it could be dependent on funding is
what I am learning. It is something we continue to push on. It
is a priority recommendation for us.
Mr. Rutherford. You know, sometimes--you know, even you
mentioned the numbers that your people are dealing with.
Sometimes I wonder if HUD has just gotten--do you think HUD has
just gotten too big?
Ms. Oliver Davis. I think--in terms of too big or too
small, I don't know. I look at--I have to look obviously at
what is in front of us and whether or not there can be
accountability in these programs. I do think we have a struggle
with capacity at the department. That is something that we have
tried very hard to reflect in our Top Management Challenges
report. We see it throughout the portfolio. HUD's
decentralized.
Things flow through the department out to the program
partners and out into your communities where your constituents
are, and there is risk involved in that. And there has to be
accountability, and we do see a struggle with that, yes.
Mr. Rutherford. Right. So is REAC, do they--after an
inspection, do they actually present any of those findings to
structural issues, gas leaks? Do they present those things to a
local code enforcement?
Ms. Oliver Davis. I confess I don't know the interaction
between local code enforcement and REAC. You know, we all know
REAC has struggled. We have all--I think I probably speak for
all of us, we have been happy to see a reassessment of REAC and
the idea of NSPIRE being introduced. Conceptually, I think
NSPIRE has some great concepts and things that we hope to see
implemented and carried out. Because that was--NSPIRE, one of
the things they are trying to do is put a greater emphasis on
the unit conditions and the health and safety of the tenants.
Mr. Rutherford. The health and safety issues, I mean, that
ought to be paramount. And I will close with this, because it
is 11:30. Do we have--do you know, does HUD have the capacity
to do 100 percent? And if not 100 percent, what percent are
they able to do REAC inspections on properties across the
country?
Ms. Oliver Davis. Well, as we know, REAC has been
traditionally a sample of properties, and that is why the
additional requirement that landlords do a self-inspection
every year has been so important. We have yet to see how NSPIRE
will address this. The compliance date, I believe, is October
2025 for compliance with NSPIRE. I look forward to seeing how
that is implemented and to see if we see any changes.
Mr. Rutherford. Okay.
Ms. Oliver Davis. Capacity is a struggle. It is absolutely
a struggle.
Mr. Rutherford. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Womack. Thank you. Now bringing us home is Ms. Watson
Coleman. Sorry. I missed you earlier.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Chairman.
Ms. Davis, when Marcia Fudge was the undersecretary, she
wanted to make sure that more disadvantaged businesses and
community-based businesses got 50 percent or 51 percent of the
work in areas where they are resettling properties, changing,
and things of that nature. Do you have any idea where we are in
that?
Ms. Oliver Davis. I feel like I am omitting a fact that I
can't recall, to be honest.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. CDBG funds.
Ms. Oliver Davis. I don't recall. That is something I would
be happy to get back to you on.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Okay. That may be a capacity issue
also.
Mr. Winters, I am going to ask you a question about this
summer and the shutdown that we had that affected the northeast
corridor. Was that all about equipment that failed? Was that
Amtrak's equipment that failed? Was that some other?
Mr. Winters. We haven't specifically examined those delays,
but we are very aware of them. It is our understanding it is a
combination of factors that caused it. One of them, by the way,
was excessive heat. And it involves technologies and
interoperability between two railroads, New Jersey Transit and
also Amtrak's.
While I am not a catenary engineer, it has to do with
electrification of the trains from the pantographs and the
catenaries, the wires that are above the trains, and there were
some, we believe, interoperability issues.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Have you all had any opportunity to
assess the financial impact that has had on Amtrak?
Mr. Winters. We have not assessed that, but that is in our
audit cue to perhaps look at.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Soskin, I still am on this question about MBE, WBE, and
other sort of underutilized businesses having access to
contracts as well as employment on these various projects. I go
up and down 95 and I see--I don't see a lot of minorities. What
is it that you all are doing to ensure that the measures that
were suggested or recommended or asserted by the President are
being met? And what is the course correction if they are not
being met? And if you can't answer that now, can I have a
specific response to it soon?
Mr. Soskin. I think much of that is a question for the
Department, which is charged with meeting those criteria. I
know that from the access that they have provided to us in
their meetings for planning, the use of IIJA funds is an issue
that they have taken seriously. They have engaged in technical
assistance to both grantees and to potential bidders who fall
into the categories of disadvantaged businesses. Importantly,
when the Department measures its progress on the Justice40
Initiative that the Administration has in some of its areas,
Congress has legislated that underserved communities be defined
to include rural communities as opposed to ones that fall into
demographic categories.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I guess I am asking you, because you
have oversight whether or not the department is doing the
things that it is supposed to do. So--right? Including this. So
yeah. So I just need to know, is the department successful in
meeting these goals and objectives? And if not, what is their
course correction?
Mr. Soskin. We haven't carried out any recent audit work in
that area. I haven't seen any information to suggest they are
not meeting those goals.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Well, there is a lot of chatter in the
various communities that it is not, and I don't want there to
be an oops situation where we are--we have completed the
program and those businesses that have been traditionally
underutilized are not utilized appropriately with this
opportunity, so I would appreciate it if you would have someone
look into it and get back to me. With that, I yield back.
Mr. Womack. Thank you, Ms. Watson Coleman.
Mike, any final comments?
Mr. Quigley. No, Mr. Chairman. Thank you so much. Good
hearing.
Mr. Womack. I want to thank our witnesses from Amtrak, DOT,
and HUD IGs for being here today. Your testimony is very
helpful to this committee. We are trying to get back into some
oversight after quite a long period without, so we do
appreciate you coming in today and sharing your insights with
the committee. And with that, this hearing is now adjourned.
Thank you.

GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FIRMAT