H-17.3: National Housing Trust Fund Expansion Act (Passed)

[Sirius_]

I agree with Razze's sentiments, I will support this bill. I disagree that raising corporate tax rates will lead to lay-offs as long as their not massive increases. On the flip side the evidence of lowering corporate tax rates and creating jobs has very little correlation and proof.

My issue is that we see this "add 1% to the highest rate" on many, if not most spending bills these days, and it isn't sustainable to do that every time in the long run.

[tmthforu94]

Quoting a question posed by Sestak when this was debated in the Senate:

I am still waiting for the sponsor to provide further evidence that this program can scale and why it's the best use of federal dollars even just related to housing.

I'm not contending that there isn't a need for affordable housing, but is this the right way to go? My understanding is that this money is just block granted to the regions and they get to determine the best ways to spend it.

[Sirius_]

Alright sorry about the delay. The sponsor has withdrawn his amendment and accepted the counter amendment.

Section 1; Title
1. This legislation may be cited as the National Housing Trust Fund Expansion Act.
Section 2; Expansion of the National Housing Trust Fund
1. Funding for the National Housing Trust Fund is increased to $5.0 billion annually.
Section 3; Funding
1. The top marginal rate of corporate tax is increased by 0.5%. This act shall be funded by the following:
a. Eliminate all Offices of Civil Rights under the Department of Internal Affairs and replace with one Office of Civil Rights under the Department of Internal Affairs.
b. Reduce funding for the Economic Research Service by 25% and transfer to the National Institute for Food and Agriculture
c. Transfer the following administrations to the Food and Drug Administration:
-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
-Food Safety and Inspection Service
-Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
- Label and Grading services
d. Reduce funding for the Agricultural Research Service by 25%
e. Making the following changes to the National Institute for Food and Agriculture:
-Eliminating ethanol research
-Reducing funding for education programs by 10%
Reducing funding for extension services by 10%
f. Making the following changes to the Agricultural Marketing Service:
-Reducing funding by 25%
-Eliminating "organic" certification
g. Making the following changes to the Risk Management Service:
-Capping annual per-customer payouts at $250,000
-Means testing premium support for farmers with income exceeding $1 million annually
h. Making the following changes to the Farm Service Agency:
-Means testing Emergency Conservation Program payments for incomes above $1 Million
-Ending subsidies to farms which are profitable without them
-Prohibiting farmers from participating in both federal crop insurance and ARC or PLC programs
i. Transferring the Natural Resources Conservation Service to the Subdepartment of the Interior
j. Transferring the Rural Housing Service to the Subdepartment of Housing and Urban Development and reducing its funding by 5%.

Section 4; Implementation
1. This legislation shall take immediate effect.

Feedback: Friendly
Status: 24 hours to object.

[Vern]

Once the 24 hours is up, I motion for a final vote.

[Pericles]

I had trouble finding sources on the trust fund but did find some stuff, though haven't yet found an up to date assessment of the program's effectiveness but instead these sources are from the time of passage. I'm not sure if you will all be able to access them, I will quote the conclusion in any case.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25782830.pdf?casa_token=np_gtoZZD2gAAAAA:JZ4vlTczctX8RoJOLPkMCT4lfysyaS2jy1aUbLEVGfJYivzBucLZbPf1w6NxeKFNCwZUqtN4SefFQUOkydkY__F1-HeGXfzhfmiDxSOobOtdky3QuxYMUg

As comments about the increasing severity of the subprime mortgage
 crisis demonstrate, a national consensus is emerging about the need for expanded federal participation in the housing market. The successes of state
 and local housing trust funds have bolstered congressional support for a
 national affordable housing trust fund. At the same time, the limitations of
 these local funds, particularly the disparities in funding between different
 states and localities, demonstrate the need for a broader, federalized fund.
 Given this background, H.R. 2895 represents an important opportunity for a renewed federal commitment to affordable housing production
 for lower-income families. The bill's income targets include populations
 that have historically fallen below the levels assisted by HOME and other
 federal programs, while explicit preferences for firefighters, first responders, and other public servants may increase the bill's acceptance among
 broader segments of American society.
 The creation of a dedicated revenue source is equally critical for three
 reasons. First, it provides the financial stability necessary for long-term
 planning, particularly with regard to construction projects. Secondly, this
 stability comes without jeopardizing Congress's ability to exercise its fiscal oversight over housing programs. Because the dedicated funds represent only a small percentage of recent housing appropriations, federal
 housing programs will remain highly dependent on congressional action.
 Finally, the trust fund derives its income from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,
 and the FHA, all federal housing entities, creating a reasonable relationship
 between the source and use of the funds. Rather than creating arbitrary
 constraints on congressional spending, the dedication represents a rational
 recommitment of funds to similar housing-related activities.
 Despite the importance of creating a dedicated revenue source, how
 ever, opponents of H.R. 2895 are correct that creation of a new block grant
 program for affordable housing will create unnecessary duplications with
 the HOME program. Rather than creating a separate program to administer
 the trust fund, a stronger proposal would locate the dedicated fund within
 HOME, to be distributed through existing channels, and according to the
 income guidelines established in the existing bill. Such a proposal would
 reduce the administrative costs associated with devising new rules and
 distribution guidelines, leaving more funding for housing. It also would
 continue to protect the dedicated funding by allowing it to remain apart
 from annual appropriations battles. At the same time, preserving the bill's
 original block grant structure will preserve spending flexibility, one of the
 elements that has made both HOME and the state and local trust funds so
 effective. Even in its current incarnation, however, H.R. 2895 represents an
 essential dedication of federal funds to support long-term housing projects.
 As such, it deserves the support of the current Congress.
 Additionally, H.R. 2895 possesses tremendous symbolic importance
 as a demonstration of expanded federal participation in the provision of
 low-income housing. As one of the first expansive housing measures in
 almost twenty years, the bill signals a renewed federal concern for the
 housing needs of all Americans, particularly those not served by traditional
 market forces. At the same time, establishment of a trust fund reflects the
 understanding, captured by state and local trust funds, that housing is a
 long-term capital need that requires long-term financial commitments. Finally, while H.R 2895 alone will not solve the national affordable housing
 shortage or the subprime crisis, as Representative Lee-Jackson argues, "this
 legislation is an important step toward these important goals."

Note this does seem to vindicate YE's concern about block grants and suggests a possible alternative course.

The conclusion of the second source(https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25781122.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ae2395770d915ad0bdb84a94f92dd5d7f) is less useful but does vindicate the idea of the fund being valuable.

The current state of the housing market underscores the need for avail
 able soft gap financing, particularly financing that works well with existing
 subsidy programs. The trust fund is a long-fought-for attempt to bridge
 chronic financing gaps for affordable housing development. Although advocates have secured several positive programmatic features for the trust
 fund in this authorizing legislation, several more nuances will be revealed
 with the promulgation of implementing regulations. Although current
 funding levels suggest that the trust fund will have only a modest initial
 impact, the stability and permanence of the program provide a good foundation to support future growth. If allowed to grow, the trust fund may
 prove to have a lasting and significant impact on the country's housing
 needs.

If you can access the source I would advise you to try and look through the rest of it as well, I haven't had the chance to read them fully. I also found this article (https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R40781.html#_Toc452047689), which may be even more useful and provides arguments for and against (such a balanced take tends to be hard to find). My take would be that this fund is valuable as it is a more targeted way of helping those who really need it. Please note that the Fannie Mae and Freedie Mac issue doesn't seem to apply here with this bill. Hopefully this is helpful, if you want I'll try and find some more information for you.

[Sirius_]

The amendment is adopted.

[Sirius_]

A motion for a final vote has been made. 24 hours to object.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Yeah it's about time this got to a vote.

[Sirius_]

A final vote is now open on H-17.3. Representatives have 72 hours, please vote AYE, NAY, or ABSTAIN.

[Sirius_]

Aye

[Wikipedia delenda est]

Aye

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

Nay!

[Vern]

Aye

[Coastal Elitist]

Aye

[CMB222]

Nay

[JGibson]

AYE

[Sirius_]

This bill has enough votes to pass. Remaining representatives have 24 hours.

[alancia]

Aye

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Aye

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Aye

[Sirius_]

Aye (7): Ninja, Wallace, TPH, JGibson, Alancia, Razze, TSA
Nay (2): LT, CMB
Abstain (0):

This bill passes

[Sirius_]

A SENATE BILL
To expand the National Housing Trust Fund
Be it enacted in both Houses of Congress

Section 1; Title
1. This legislation may be cited as the National Housing Trust Fund Expansion Act.
Section 2; Expansion of the National Housing Trust Fund
1. Funding for the National Housing Trust Fund is increased to $5.0 billion annually.
Section 3; Funding
1. The top marginal rate of corporate tax is increased by 0.5%.
Section 4; Implementation
1. This legislation shall take immediate effect.

People's Regional Senate
Passed 4-0 in Atlasian Senate Assembled,


As Amended:
People's House of Representatives
Passed 7-2-0 in the People's House Assembled,

[Sirius_]

My apologies for the error, here is the correct house amended version:

A SENATE BILL
To expand the National Housing Trust Fund
Be it enacted in both Houses of Congress

Section 1; Title
1. This legislation may be cited as the National Housing Trust Fund Expansion Act.
Section 2; Expansion of the National Housing Trust Fund
1. Funding for the National Housing Trust Fund is increased to $5.0 billion annually.
Section 3; Funding
1. This act shall be funded by the following:
a. Eliminate all Offices of Civil Rights under the Department of Internal Affairs and replace with one Office of Civil Rights under the Department of Internal Affairs.
b. Reduce funding for the Economic Research Service by 25% and transfer to the National Institute for Food and Agriculture
c. Transfer the following administrations to the Food and Drug Administration:
-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
-Food Safety and Inspection Service
-Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
- Label and Grading services
d. Reduce funding for the Agricultural Research Service by 25%
e. Making the following changes to the National Institute for Food and Agriculture:
-Eliminating ethanol research
-Reducing funding for education programs by 10%
Reducing funding for extension services by 10%
f. Making the following changes to the Agricultural Marketing Service:
-Reducing funding by 25%
-Eliminating "organic" certification
g. Making the following changes to the Risk Management Service:
-Capping annual per-customer payouts at $250,000
-Means testing premium support for farmers with income exceeding $1 million annually
h. Making the following changes to the Farm Service Agency:
-Means testing Emergency Conservation Program payments for incomes above $1 Million
-Ending subsidies to farms which are profitable without them
-Prohibiting farmers from participating in both federal crop insurance and ARC or PLC programs
i. Transferring the Natural Resources Conservation Service to the Subdepartment of the Interior
j. Transferring the Rural Housing Service to the Subdepartment of Housing and Urban Development and reducing its funding by 5%.
Section 4; Implementation
1. This legislation shall take immediate effect.

People's Regional Senate
Passed 4-0 in Atlasian Senate Assembled,


As Amended:
People's House of Representatives
Passed 7-2-0 in the People's House Assembled,