Congress of the United States Additional Views on the FY2001 Administration Budget Request for the Fiscal discipline is the one of the most important responsibilities of the Congress. Keeping this responsibility in mind, it is vital that the resources provided to the Department of Housing and Urban Development are used in the most effective and cost efficient manner possible. Hence, the Committee notes that since 1994, the General Accounting Office [GAO] has termed HUD a "high-risk" agency - meaning it is exceptionally vulnerable to waste, fraud, and abuse. It is the only entire cabinet-level agency to hold the designation. A number of examples have arisen that indicate this continues to be a problem at the Department. In its report on improper payments from October 1999, GAO noted that excess housing subsidy payments totaled $857 million for fiscal year 1998. In addition, since 1997, due to poor bookkeeping and financial management, $15 billion in excess budget authority has been found in the Section 8 Assisted Housing program. A significant failure to heed warnings of potential abuse occurred last year with Intown Management Group, a HUD contractor. In 1998, GAO warned that HUD did not have adequate systems to oversee contractors who were responsible for maintaining its inventory of properties. In September of 1999, Intown, having been awarded 40 percent of the contracts to sell HUD property, went bankrupt leaving most of its 11,000 properties unsold and debts to a number of small subcontractors. When HUD loses such a large amount of funding to waste, fraud and abuse, it is unreasonable for them to request and expect to receive a funding increase of the magnitude requested. The Committee finds that HUD's request for a 22 percent increase in their discretionary budget authority over FY2000-a total budget request for $32 billion-is unreasonable and urges the Budget and Appropriations Committee to oppose this increase. Additionally, the Committee urges HUD to return its focus to properly running the programs already authorized by Congress rather than continuing to create new programs. Furthermore, the Committee and Congress should use all available resources such as the General Accounting Office and the Inspector General of the Department to explore methods by which HUD's systems and efficiency can be improved. ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS TOM BLILEY, VIRGINIA, CHAIRMAN W.J. "BILLY" TAUZIN, LOUISIANA JOE BARTON, TEXAS FRED UPTON, MICHIGAN CLIFF STEARNS, FLORIDA PAUL E GILLMOR, OHIO JAMES C GREENWOOD, PENNSYLVANIA STEVE LARGENT, OKLAHOMA CHARLIE NORWOOD, GEORGIA TOM COBURN, OKLAHOMA RICK LAZIO, NEW YORK BARBARA CUBIN, WYOMING JAMES E. ROGAN, CALIFORNIA JOHN SHIMKUS. ILLINOIS HEATHER WILSON, NEW MEXICO JOHN B. SHADEGG. ARIZONA JOHN D. DINGELL, MICHIGAN HENRY A WAXMAN, CALIFORNIA RICK BOUCHER, VIRGINIA FRANK PALLONE, JR. NEW JERSEY SHERROD BROWN, OHIO BART GORDON TENNESSEE KAREN MCCARTHY MISSOURI TED STRICKLAND, OHIO DIANA DIGETTE, COLORADO BILL LUTHER, MINNESOTA CHARLES W CHIP PICKERING, MISSISSIPPI LOIS CAPPS, CALIFORNIA VITO FOSSELLA, NEW YORK ROY BLUNT, MISSOURI ED BRYANT, TENNESSEE ROBERT L EHRLICH, JR., MARYLAND JAMES E DERDERIAN, CHIEF OF STAFF The Honorable John Kasich Chairman Committee on the Budget 309 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Dear John: U.S. House of Representatives Room 2125, Rayburn House Office Building Pursuant to clause 4(f) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 301(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, I am transmitting the views and estimates of the Committee on Commerce on the President's budget for fiscal year 2001. As is the custom of this Committee, the Minority will be transmitting their views under separate cover. Should you have any questions about this submission, please direct them to the Committee's Parliamentarian, Mr. Hugh Halpern, at extension 5-2927. |