Price statement at subcommittee markup of FY2017 Transportation-HUD Appropriations bill

Mr. Chairman, as I did last week, I want to begin by commending you for the open and bipartisan process you have led this spring, which has culminated in the fiscal year 2017 T-HUD bill before us.  In your tenure as Chairman, you have continued to accommodate Subcommittee Members—both Republicans and Democrats—and it’s been a pleasure working with you again this year. 

As you have already stated, this year’s mark includes $58.19 billion for critical transportation, housing, and community development programs at DOT, HUD, and related agencies.  This represents an increase over last year’s funding level and reflects a much more favorable allocation than last year.  Although I don’t agree with everything in this bill—and I plan to offer an amendment to strike several problematic policy riders—I’m supportive of the Chairman’s mark. 

Again, I want to thank the Chairman for including $450 million for the TIGER program and $100 million for the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative.  Both programs remain critical in our efforts to improve and modernize our nation’s transportation and housing infrastructure, and I look forward to working with the Chairman as well as our Senate colleagues to ensure maximum funding for these programs as the process moves forward.

I’d also like to highlight substantial increases in funding for several other important programs under our Subcommittee’s jurisdiction.  First, the Federal Transit Administration’s Capital Investment Grants program would receive $323 million over last year’s funding level, allowing us to fund all existing grant agreements.  Meanwhile, HUD’s Homeless Assistance Grants program would receive $237 million more than last year’s enacted level, which will provide a significant boost to local anti-homelessness efforts across the country. 

The bill before us also provides notable funding increases for lead hazard prevention, housing counseling assistance, and consumer safety and recall activities at NHTSA.  Further, the bill provides full funding for the FAA and ongoing NextGen implementation; it ensures that Amtrak is adequately funded; and it guarantees that all existing tenants in HUD-supported housing can continue to receive assistance. 

As I said in advance of our Subcommittee mark-up, there are still areas of pressing need.  Having a modest budget agreement that avoids the worst impacts of sequestration is better than the alternative, but it is not enough.  We still have a massive public housing capital backlog, decaying highways and bridges, and congested roads and airports.  We have not constructed new rental units for the elderly or the disabled under sections 202 and 811 for several years.  And we are still far short of the comprehensive neighborhood renovation HOPE VI used to make possible.

We can never make the bold investments that are necessary to address these problems without a comprehensive, bipartisan budget deal that addresses the main drivers of our deficits—namely, tax expenditures and mandatory programs.  It is the height of folly to continue mindlessly squeezing discretionary spending under these circumstances: it fails to address our fiscal challenges, while making impossible the investments our country requires.

As a veteran of the successful effort to balance the budget and achieve surpluses during the 1990s, I know from experience that both parties must take ownership—and bear the political consequences—of a comprehensive deficit reduction plan if it is to have any chance of enactment.  The basic elements are clear: targeted discretionary spending reductions coupled with new tax revenue and reforms to preserve the solvency of entitlement programs. 

This isn’t ancient history, and isn’t rocket science.  What is required is the political will to make difficult choices.  This must be high on the agenda of the next administration and the new Congress.

Of course, this problem is beyond the scope of the Appropriations Committee. Given the fiscal constraints we are under, it’s a welcome development that this bill not only maintains core programs at both DOT and HUD, but also provides targeted funding increases for a number of important programs.   This is both a testament to our Subcommittee Chairman’s hard work and the more favorable allocation we received this year.

The Chairman has made reasonable efforts to accommodate Democratic priorities, and I look forward to working closely with him as the process moves forward.  Aside from certain objectionable policy riders that I will discuss in more detail shortly, I’m pleased to support the bill in its current form and hope that my colleagues will do the same.