Tenant-Based Section 8 Block Grant
For the interest of all Executive Council members, NAHMA’s Board of Directors has voted to strongly oppose the Administration’s proposal to convert the tenant-based Section 8 program to a block grant to states. A key concern expressed by the Board was that the funding for the block grant would not keep pace with the costs of providing rental assistance.
A forthcoming NAHMAnalysis will explain the President’s proposal and NAHMA’s reasons for strongly opposing it in detail.
2004 Budget
This week, the Senate completed work on its version of the 2004 budget resolution, S.Con.Res. 23. The final vote was 56-44. Substantial differences between the House and Senate resolutions will have to be resolved in a conference committee. The statutory deadline for Congress to adopt a budget resolution is April 15.
One of the biggest differences between the two versions is the size of the President’s “job and growth” tax package. The House resolution provides for the entire $726 billion package. However, in a major blow to the President’s plan, the Senate adopted Sen. John Breaux’s revised amendment to limit the package to $350 billion. The Breaux amendment also redirected $396 billion to a reserve fund for Social Security, using savings from the President’s tax plan and from some other tax cuts called for in the resolution.
Another key difference between the resolutions concerns the cost of military operations in Iraq. The House budget makes no assumptions on or specific provisions for the cost of the war. The Senate retained an amendment offered by Sen. Russ Feingold which transferred $100 billion from the President’s tax plan “to set aside a reserve fund for possible military action and reconstruction in Iraq.
Finally, S.Con.Res. 23 does not include the House-passed 1 percent across the board spending reduction.
FY 2003 Supplemental Appropriations
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees held hearings on the President’s $74.4 billion supplemental appropriations request. The money was requested to fund military operations and reconstruction in Iraq, homeland security needs, and foreign aid for our allies in the war effort.
Supreme Court Ruling on the Cuyahoga Falls Case
On March 25, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in the case of
City of Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio Et. Al. v. Buckeye Community Hope Foundation Et. Al. Buckeye, a non-profit organization, sought to build a LIHTC property in Cuyahoga Falls. Plans were interrupted when a public referendum rejected the development, and building permits were subsequently denied. The court
unanimously rejected Buckeye’s claim that Cuyahoga Fall’s public referendum process and refusal to issue building permits violated the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses and the Fair Housing Act. For more information on the details of this case, please see:
https://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/02pdf/01-1269.pdf.
