Department of Housing and Urban Development Reduction Bill

[Ebowed]

The Elimination of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act

1. The Department of Housing and Urban Development is hereby eliminated.
2. Any laws relating to the Department of Housing and Urban Development are repealed.
Sponsor: Sen. DanielX

[CheeseWhiz]

I read a little about this Department, and I don't see any reason we need to keep it.  Anybody got a reason besides that we should be looking out for the common man or the like?  No offense to those that do believe that, I’m just looking for a reason besides that one.

[The Duke]

Here's one: If you like having angry homeless people living on your front lawn, abolish the DHUD.

[Emsworth]

Here's one: If you like having angry homeless people living on your front lawn, abolish the DHUD.

They are fully entitled to rely on private charities.

[CheeseWhiz]

Here's one: If you like having angry homeless people living on your front lawn, abolish the DHUD.

You know, I really do respect your opinion, but that’s exactly what I was trying to avoid.  I’m asking if there’s anything we, as in the Government, need from this Department.  I will consider the other concerns later, but I’d like that question answered first.

[The Duke]

Here's one: If you like having angry homeless people living on your front lawn, abolish the DHUD.

You know, I really do respect your opinion, but that’s exactly what I was trying to avoid.  I’m asking if there’s anything we, as in the Government, need from this Department.  I will consider the other concerns later, but I’d like that question answered first.

I thought you had said that you were looking for reasons to keep HUD aside from helping others for the sake of helping others.  I provided one based on narrow self interest instead of general charitable feelings.  I suppose I didn't understand the question.

Here's one: If you like having angry homeless people living on your front lawn, abolish the DHUD.

They are fully entitled to rely on private charities.

Yes, they are.  And will these private charities be able to fulfill allfunctions currently filled by HUD?

[Jake]

Yes, they are.  And will these private charities be able to fulfill allfunctions currently filled by HUD?

Obviously. Simply because the funds we get back from this can go into tax cuts which will so drastically affect our society and bring prices that all those without homes will suddenly be capable of affording one. Oh yeah, and every charity for the poor will find two tons of gold bars in their bank vaults.

[The Duke]

Yes, they are.  And will these private charities be able to fulfill allfunctions currently filled by HUD?

Obviously. Simply because the funds we get back from this can go into tax cuts which will so drastically affect our society and bring prices that all those without homes will suddenly be capable of affording one. Oh yeah, and every charity for the poor will find two tons of gold bars in their bank vaults.

Private charity is the new deus ex machine.  It resolves all worries without premonition, no matter what kind of bind we get into, I suppose.

[jokerman]

I ask that one of my Senators move to table this horrendous bill.  Such a socially-darwinistic proposition deserves no consideration from a sane legislature and should be dismissed imediately.

[Emsworth]

Yes, they are.  And will these private charities be able to fulfill allfunctions currently filled by HUD?

No. I was just pointing out that government is not the only source of help or charity.

In any event, I must note my profound opposition to this bill. I greatly respect Senator DanielX's intentions, but I think that this bill does not take into account the grave implications of abolishing this department outright.

Firstly, the Federal Housing Administration (a part of HUD) is responsible for insuring home loans for several people across the country. If we simply abolish the FHA, then existing mortgages will be affected. Some people might have to be thrown out of their homes. This bill, however, includes no transition provisions to protect these individuals.

Secondly, this bill would simply kick several people out of homes in which they currently reside. I think that such an action would be grossly unfair. To subject anyone to such severe upheaval seems unconscionable.

[Jake]

I ask that one of my Senators move to table this horrendous bill.  Such a socially-darwinistic proposition deserves no consideration from a sane legislature and should be dismissed imediately.

I agree, though I abhor the tactic of tabling. I do offer an amendment however:

The text of the bill is to be stricken and replaced with the following:

1. The funding under Personell and Administration for the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be cut by 10%.

[© tweed]

Does anyone actually believe these libertarians have a heart?

[Emsworth]

Does anyone actually believe these libertarians have a heart?

Better heartless than mindless.

But there are, as I said before, very good reasons for opposing the outright elimination of HUD.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Besides the FHA (and GNMA and oversight of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae) there's also the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity which handles those portions of the civil rights laws relating to housing and the Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control which mainly deals with remediation of past use of lead-based paint, and several other minor functions relating to improving home design and construction.

If the goal is the elimination of public housing assistance, eliminating the Office of Public and Indian Housing would do the trick without disturbing the rest of the department's functions.

[CheeseWhiz]

Thank you, Ernest and Emsworth, that's what I was talking about.  You see, John, Jake and Boss?  They made me change my mind on this bill, something your ranting would never do.  There's much better ways to convince people of your point.

If the goal is the elimination of public housing assistance, eliminating the Office of Public and Indian Housing would do the trick without disturbing the rest of the department's functions.

That would be good   So, how about this amendment:

All mention of "Department of Housing and Urban Development" shall be stricken and replaced with "Office of Public and Indian Housing"

Any thoughts, ideas or suggestions are welcome

[MasterJedi]

I support Jake's amendment do this bill.

[CheeseWhiz]

I support Jake's amendment do this bill.

And what about my amendment?  Do you think we should keep the OPIH, or have you not seen it yet?

Also, this question is for anyone, which amendment would save us more money?  I'm just wondering.

[MasterJedi]

I support Jake's amendment do this bill.

And what about my amendment?  Do you think we should keep the OPIH, or have you not seen it yet?

For some reason I missed your amendment, we could do both now you know as well, put a 2 in front of it and write it out so we could do both.

[DanielX]

Thank you, Ernest and Emsworth, that's what I was talking about.  You see, John, Jake and Boss?  They made me change my mind on this bill, something your ranting would never do.  There's much better ways to convince people of your point.

If the goal is the elimination of public housing assistance, eliminating the Office of Public and Indian Housing would do the trick without disturbing the rest of the department's functions.

That would be good   So, how about this amendment:

All mention of "Department of Housing and Urban Development" shall be stricken and replaced with "Office of Public and Indian Housing"

Any thoughts, ideas or suggestions are welcome

I support this amendment.

[minionofmidas]

Also, this question is for anyone, which amendment would save us more money?  I'm just wondering.

That depends how you define "us" (it's not as if a cent of HUD expenses went to people who are not, as it were, us, after all) and how far reaching consequences you are willing to take into account in your calculations, obviously. Not to mention which model you're going to believe.

[CheeseWhiz]

I support Jake's amendment do this bill.

And what about my amendment?  Do you think we should keep the OPIH, or have you not seen it yet?

For some reason I missed your amendment, we could do both now you know as well, put a 2 in front of it and write it out so we could do both.

If Jake doesn't have a problem with it, we could join forces and propose this:

The entire bill shall be stricken and replaced with:

The Reduction of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act

1. The funding under Personell and Administration for the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be cut by 10%.
2. The Office of Public and Indian Housing is hereby eliminated.
3. Any laws relating to the Office of Public and Indian Housing are repealed.

If he doesn't support my amendment, then I will wait and see if his amendment passes first, and then either propose the amendment I posted before, (if it fails,) or this: (if it passes)

The following shall be added to the Bill:

2. The Office of Public and Indian Housing is hereby eliminated.
3. Any laws relating to the Office of Public and Indian Housing are repealed.

So, there, whatever happens, you will know what I want to propose

[Ebowed]

This bill is giving me a headache.  Also, someone needs to take over as sponsor for the bill as DanielX has resigned.

[Ebowed]

BTW, I think the Office of Public and Indian Housing has already been ruled unconstitutional by Bono v. Atlasia II.  All of the ethnicity-based public services were ruled unconstitutional then, IIRC.

[CheeseWhiz]

This bill is giving me a headache.  Also, someone needs to take over as sponsor for the bill as DanielX has resigned.

I will

BTW, I think the Office of Public and Indian Housing has already been ruled unconstitutional by Bono v. Atlasia II.  All of the ethnicity-based public services were ruled unconstitutional then, IIRC.

Go Bono!

[Jake]

(BS Proposal)

No, your amendment is abhorrent.