Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Marcia Fudge testified before the House Appropriations Committee on April 18, defending President Joe Biden’s 2024 budget requests for the agency.
Biden’s budget proposal includes $73.3 billion for HUD, which is around $1.1 billion more than the funding level in 2023. The measure is also asking for $104 billion over 10 years for “new mandatory affordable housing investments,” Fudge said.
“Together, this suite of funding and tax credits aims to tackle the nation’s housing affordability crisis by making a historic investment in lowering housing costs to further the administration’s commitment to rebuilding America from the bottom up and middle out,” said Fudge, a Democrat who served as U.S. Representative for Ohio from 2008 to 2021.
If HUD has to operate on a continuing resolution instead of the requested budget, there would be negative consequences, she noted.
Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) is vice chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development.
“I do think it’s fair to say we’re unlikely to be able to give you the increase that you want, but I want to start in a place where I hope we have common ground,” Cole told Fudge before asking the HUD secretary her view on “the consequences of a continuing resolution” for her department.
“First thing, I'd say that we would probably lose housing for about 125,000 people we are currently supporting,“ Fudge explained. ”We would be about $500 million short.”
HUD would lose contracts related to its projects-based rental assistance program and would serve “about 32,000 fewer people experiencing homelessness.”
Fudge also expressed concern that HUD would not properly maintain its IT systems, and private information would be at risk.
“As you know ... housing is a crisis in this country. We would not even know how many people we could serve without certainty as to where we are headed,” Fudge said.
Importance of a Timely Bill
In opening remarks, Cole said, “We all recognize the importance of having a timely full-year appropriations bill. For HUD and the government as a whole. We know the consequences of not responsibly governing year to year.“As we hear testimony from the Secretary about the President’s budget request, we need to come together to ensure that communities receive the support they need, while also making sure that we’re not contributing to surging prices and out-of-control deficits through irresponsible fiscal policies,” he added.
Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development. At the hearing, he praised the 2024 proposed budget for HUD, telling Fudge that “your proposed investments would ensure millions of Americans remain stably housed and [can] access the support they need to build a stable, safe, and thriving future.”
“More funding and greater flexibility are critical to preserving and expanding our affordable housing and sustaining our communities,” Quigley said. “The alternative is taking a step back on the progress we have made to address homelessness, safety, and community revitalization.”
Quigley added that “the broad reach” of HUD’s investments “can be seen in my own district.”
“Just last month, you traveled to Chicago to announce a $60 million award to address unsheltered homelessness,” Quigley told Fudge. “This grant will allow housing organizations to provide over 700 units of permanent supportive housing, 50 units for rapid rehousing, and expanded supportive services and street outreach.”
“There are some who want to drastically reduce funding for critical public investments,” Quigley said. “I believe we have to be clear-eyed about what this will mean for HUD’s programs and can make a difference between having a home or sleeping on the street for tens of thousands of families.”
Fudge was asked if a 20 percent budget cut would be worse than a continuing resolution.
“They’re both bad. But that'd be significantly worse,” Fudge said, explaining that they would not have been able to complete “simple things” like inspections on housing properties.
“Public housing is bad now. But you know, it would get worse because we could not do the capital improvements we need to do,” Fudge said. “We could not recover from COVID, which has destroyed a lot of the payment plans and public housing.
“We’re looking at what might be as many as 640,000 people that would lose housing if we go back to the 2022 levels,” Fudge explained. “We would serve maybe 5,000 fewer people who are experiencing homelessness.”
House Appropriations Committee member Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.) told Fudge that “the federal government was operating under fiscal year 22 numbers, really, through December of last year. So, in four months, now we’re hitting fire alarms?
“If we have to go back to those numbers, hundreds of thousands of people are going to be out on the street?” he continued. “I don’t know that I agree with those numbers totally.
“I know we all share a desire up here to get a full-year appropriation. We'd like to do it by the first of October. I have my doubts as to whether that can be done or whether it will be done in FY22 levels,” Womack said.
“But I just want to make the point that we were on those numbers all the way up until we passed the fiscal year 2023 omnibus package, which happened in late December.”
