Barney Frank

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1515) to amend the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to treat certain communities as metropolitan cities for purposes of the community development block grant program.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the prime author of this bill, who is a very vigorous advocate for one of the communities he represents, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello).

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this is a bipartisan bill that passed our committee unanimously. It addresses a series of glitches which have resulted in the communities of Alton and Granite City, Illinois, losing their status as entitlement communities under the community development block grant program. These are both cities that have done a very good job of using these funds. There is no reason why they should not continue to be allowed to enjoy this. The events which led to this having happened are complicated, and even more relevant, quite boring, so it does not seem to me that the House would much care about them. The relevant point is that there is a unanimous view on the part of our committee, and this has been urged on us by the gentlemen from Illinois, Mr. Shimkus and Mr. Costello, that we should restore Alton and Granite City to their rightful places as entitlement cities, and I hope the House will do that. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, last Friday, while we were in recess, the Massachusetts Lions Club held a very well-deserved testimonial for Armand ``Skip'' Becotte, Jr., who lives in the town of Fairhaven, Massachusetts, in the district I am privileged to represent. Madam Speaker, as many Members know, the Lions Club has made as its highest priority helping people deal with health problems, particularly in the area of eyesight. They have also worked on hearing related issues. Personally, Skip Becotte has taken as his motto the words of the great Helen Keller, in her address to the Lions Club, ``Help me hasten the day when there shall be no preventable blindness; no little deaf, blind child untaught; no blind man or woman unaided. I appeal to you Lions, you who have your sight, your hearing, you who are strong and brave and kind. Will you not constitute yourselves Knights of the Blind in this crusade against darkness?'' Currently Skip Becotte is the District Governor for the Massachusetts Lions District 33S, which includes much of Southeastern Massachusetts, including all of Cape Cod and much of the district that I represent. During his governorship the Lions in District 33S have given nearly $200,000 to the Perkins School for the Blind, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary. Joslin Diabetes Center, New England Eye Center, Schepens Eye Research Institute and many other institutions. Madam Speaker, Skip Becotte--winner of the Melvin Jones Fellow Award for outstanding service in 2001--is an extraordinary man. A retired police officer and father of five, his life exemplifies service to others. I congratulate the Lions Club for honoring this man and I am glad to share with my colleagues the story of his work because it is an inspiration to all.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I will withdraw it, but I am not sticking around to make it again. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the request, and let it stand uncorrected.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to correct a clerical error in the passage of the recommittal amendment to H.R. 1227.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I will explain it. We had talked to members of the minority. In the engrossment of H.R. 1227, the Clerk made some clerical errors. We were notified; the staff of the Committee on Financial Services talked to the minority staff. This is a request to correct some errors that were made in the recommit. It is not in any favor to us. If you want the thing uncorrected, go ahead and object.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Well, I don't expect the gentleman to recall it. I did not recall it either. We didn't know they made clerical errors. They didn't tell us they made clerical errors.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield to me, I don't know what the clerical error was. We were notified that there was an error in the transcription. We did not know what the error was. Members of our staff spoke to the minority staff on the Financial Services Committee and explained it. I don't know how they mistyped it. I wasn't there when they did it. I don't know what the clerical error is. I wasn't particularly concerned. We thought it was routine. If the minority wants the bill to go uncorrected, that is the minority's choice. We did speak to the staff beforehand.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, is it in order to move that the gentleman from Mississippi's right to address the House be restored?

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I move that the rights of the gentleman from Mississippi to speak during the remainder of the day be restored.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, is it not the case that the vote did not overrule the Chair? Is it not the case that the Chair's ruling that the words were out of order was not challenged, and was it not the case that the motion was simply to restore the right of the gentleman from Mississippi to speak and in no way overruled the ruling of the Chair?

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Point of order, Mr. Speaker. The gentleman has not stated a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, having as the manager of the bill seen the motion to recommit about 8 seconds ago, I reserve a point of order until we get a chance to know what is in it.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. No, we object to that, because we just got it, and it would be inappropriate in 10 seconds to be able to read it.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman. Let me ask the gentleman from Louisiana, we have been reading it over, and I do regret the fact that we got this a couple of minutes ago. I am going to check with Valerie Plame, I don't think there was anything secret in here. I don't know why it had to be withheld so we couldn't have a sensible analysis, but maybe there is one possibility. Could the gentleman tell me what in here changes existing law? Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Lousiana.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Does this change existing law? The housing authority, by the way, so people can understand, the housing authority that we are directing here is otherwise known as HUD, because HUD controls this housing authority and has for some time since before the hurricane. But does this change existing law affecting housing authorities?

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. In what areas does it direct them? My understanding is that, for instance, the work requirement they have already got, the housing authority, that the restrictions on people with criminal backgrounds are already there. In what way does this recommit? Which I am sure the gentleman has seriously studied and is very familiar with it. He wouldn't legislate unseriously. Could he tell me what in this changes existing law? I will yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The question is, in what area, since in the work requirement they don't have discretion. Check with whoever you have to check with. In what areas are you changing it from discretionary to mandatory? I will yield to the gentleman from Lousiana again.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Well, the point that we are directing the housing authority to give preference to people who follow existing law; Mr. Speaker, I wish we had had this before, we might have been able to understand it better. It appears to me to be simply a restatement of existing law. And apparently Members on the other side are afraid that HUD, which is the housing authority, won't follow existing law. And I do have my own doubts about this administration's predilection for following existing law.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. No. I tried five times. I give up. announcement by the speaker

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I just have got to comment that some of my friends on the other side appear more concerned about enforcing the rules strictly than at other times. I asked several times to get an answer. I don't think the answer is over there. I don't think this is very well considered. It does not appear to me to change existing law. And to say that we are going to tell them that they have to follow existing law, it seems rather odd. If it is so important, you know, if this had been offered as an amendment, we argued successfully all the subsequent amendments would be in order. To the extent that it changes anything, it changes only for New Orleans. So this is only for people whose houses were washed away. Now, I don't know how it makes any change. I will take on faith the gentleman's assertion that it makes changes, even though he couldn't tell me what they were. But I would then say, why would we say only if your house had been washed away would you be subject to some restriction? Mr. Speaker, I will now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Melancon).

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The gentleman is probably trying to figure out what the amendment says, and that is a hard job. I will then repeat what he said to me, which is, and read this, this I do know, ``it is for New Orleans only.'' Now, we could not amend it for the whole area. What about Mississippi? I mean, was the gentleman afraid that if he included Mississippi, the gentleman, Mr. Taylor, would challenge him to come to Mississippi? I think the gentleman from Louisiana has already been to Mississippi. He wouldn't have to change his travel plans the way the gentleman from Georgia would have. Why should only people who have suffered this enormous trauma, who live in New Orleans, be subjected to a special set of rules? By the way, we will send the Members long lists of rules already on the books, statutory and regulatory, that prevent public housing authorities from allowing people with criminal records to come in. You have the ``one strike'' situation where they can be easily evicted. So this does not add, as nearly as we can tell, to the restriction on letting people in. To the extent that it imposes a greater work requirement, we are talking about people whose homes were destroyed, whose jobs may have been washed away, who may be trying to find additional housing.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for so has my patience.