Gary Miller

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Bryant Ranch School in Yorba Linda, CA, for exceeding the President's expectations in fostering a positive learning environment and building a solid foundation for our future leaders. The school recently received the coveted Blue Ribbon distinction by the U.S. Department of Education. Bryant Ranch is more than just a school; it's the pride and joy of a community that comes together to raise and educate its children. The school has excellent teachers who go the extra mile to make a difference in the lives of their students. It has parents who are willing to get involved in school activities. It has administrators who give the teachers the flexibility and support they need to cater their curriculum to their classroom. And it has students who understand the importance of learning and the value of a proper education. Mr. Speaker, Bryant Ranch has brought all these elements together to build a first rate educational institution. President Bush has distinguished this school as a model for others to follow, and this Congress should commend the teachers, parents, administrators and students for this accomplishment.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1985, the FHA Multifamily Loan Limit Adjustment Act of 2003. This legislation is really critical to make sure we provide affordable rental housing in this country. I applaud the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank). He and I have a passion on this issue. We have been working on this for a while, and we continue to look for areas that we can impact in this country to make sure that housing is available to those who need housing most. I think our goal is to make sure that everybody in this Nation has an opportunity to own or rent their own home, a place they can call theirs. I would like to commend the chairman of the Committee on Financial Services, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), for his efforts in this. The gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Ney) has been very, very good about making sure that this was diligently processed through the committee, and I want to thank him very much for that. When it comes to high-cost markets, where land and construction costs are significantly higher than in other areas in the country, there is no question that FHA multifamily mortgage insurance limits are not keeping pace. The fact is that in high-cost areas, the land is continually growing in value. People are actually able to auction it off, and the rates they are getting for it are increasing rapidly, and the construction costs are increasing the same way. The slowdown in affordable rental housing production has resulted in a significant gap between the demand for and the supply of rental housing. This is a problem we have to come together to solve today. The FHA Multifamily Program provides mortgage insurance for multifamily developments, particularly serving low- and moderate-income families. In our most expensive cities, it is very difficult for these families to find affordable rental housing in the communities where they work. Today, many public servants in my district, police officers, firefighters and teachers, are not able to live in the community in which they grew up and work today. And if Congress does not act to promote affordable rental housing, things will not get easier for families in my district and the Nation as a whole. Orange County, California, had the third largest rent increases out of 25 of the largest metropolitan areas in 11 Western States. Thirty- three percent of the renters in Orange County sent 35 percent or more of their income to their landlord. The FHA Multifamily Mortgage Insurance Program has operated for over 65 years, working with private sector partners to expand the supply of rental housing. This public-private partnership has leveraged more than $100 billion of private sector investments to provide rental housing for more than 4 million families and the elderly throughout this country. The problem is that, according to HUD's data, no multifamily loans were FHA insured in high-cost cities such as New York, Philadelphia, Seattle or Los Angeles in 2003. The entire State of California only had one multifamily development that has been built and insured by FHA. These are the same areas of the country in which there exists a wide availability gap of affordable rental housing. The problem is in California and many high-cost States, Massachusetts is a great example, you cannot find a rental available. They are just not available. The costs are escalating so rapidly. The developers are simply unable to provide affordable housing units in these areas because the current statutory mortgage limits for FHA mortgage insurance are unrealistically low. We have to get the rates up to keep up with the demand out there. I have a letter from an individual who is a developer in the Boston area, and this gives you an example of what developers are going through today in this country. He said, ``I am currently in the planning stages of developing 180- unit, garden-style, walk-up apartments located in Burlington. Twenty percent of the units will be affordable to seniors with incomes of 80 percent of the area median, and the rest will be at market rate. The units range in size from 700 square feet, one-bedroom units to 1,200 square foot, two-bedroom units.'' He has been planning this for quite a few years. ``However, I may not be able to actually obtain the FHA-insured loan. My total development costs are $176,000 per unit, which exceeds the high-cost limits. The figure is actually somewhat low because I bought the lands many years ago for $15,000 per unit. The land is currently worth $50,000 per unit.'' In nexus, what this gentleman is saying is if he cannot get this loan, which is not competing with the private sector, it is a loan for FHA for these income houses, he is likely to have to sell this property off to a developer who will not build it for low-income people, who will build it for at-market rates, whether it be multifamily, condos or townhomes. The problem is that does not do anything to remove the problem we face today, but makes it worse. We are not giving grants and that is the key, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) tried to say. This is not a government giveaway. Whether you are a conservative or a liberal should not impact anybody. This is a loan that is made to an individual that is a very safe loan. In fact, the government makes money off these loans. It is very seldom we can bring a bill to this floor that not only deals with the housing crisis we face in this country, but actually does not cost the government a dime. Nobody is given anything, it is just a conduit between the builder and the people who need a place to live. This is a good bill, I see no objection to it, and I ask for unanimous approval of this.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I really want to commend the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Harris) for doing this. This is a really, really, really good bill. I had been a builder for over 30 years in my real life before coming to government. The gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley) really has a passion for this issue. The gentleman from Massachusetts (ranking member Frank), a good friend of mine, has really done everything he can to look for opportunities to really help people get into homes, and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), who chairs the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, just has a supervision and really looks for things that are good. Some would say, why are we doing this? I am a conservative Republican, and one would say, well, why is the government getting involved in this issue. Some real good reasons. The average homeowner has assets totalling about $70,000. Yet the average low-income renter's assets are below $1,000. Most of these people that are going to benefit from this program are already on Section 8 housing vouchers or they are in some type of government housing. So how do we create an environment where people rely on themselves and count less on government? That is to get them in a home. If we leave people in Section 8 housing, they are going to be there. They cannot get out. They do not have the downpayment, the necessary wealth to be able to move into society, as we would say it, and have the experience of the dream of owning a home. There is nothing like selling a home to somebody, watching a person and a family move into home, they have dreams, they have anticipations, they make plans for the future. This is a good bill. Imagine if we get a family into a home that is now receiving government subsistence, at a point in time they no longer need help from the government because they have acquired wealth in their own home. When they buy that home, their rent remains consistent. When they take and rent a home, whether it is through Section 8 or a government home, the rent increases as the years goes by. So look at a situation where a family moves into a home, 10 years from now, they are going to pay a lot more than they currently pay if they are renting a home, but if they own that home, they are paying the same 10 years from now as they are today. Our goal in government should be to do everything we can to create the best economic environment we can for the citizens. The best way to do it is to get people into their own home. There is nothing, nothing like moving people into something that they consider their own, rather than something they consider somebody else's they are allowed to rent. We have a situation growing in this country that I consider the new homeless, and these are people who have good jobs, the husband and wife both work, the husband might be a policeman or a fireman, the wife might be a nurse or whatever or a schoolteacher, and yet they cannot afford to live within the community within which they work. How many people do my colleagues know whose children were raised in a community they cannot afford to buy a home and live within the city in which they spent their life growing up because it has become so expensive? In many cases, government has created so many roadblocks, they have increased the cost of housing, that we need to look at every opportunity we have to eliminate the roadblocks, to decrease the restrictions and to do everything we can to move people into homeownership. There is a huge shortage of Section 8 housing and government housing for low-income people. People are on waiting lists, and the reason is the people who currently live in those homes cannot afford to move up to the next level. They are relegated to that, and we have to change that. This is a great opportunity. It is a bipartisan bill, and I would strongly encourage a yes vote.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special recognition to Ms. Julie M. Austin. On July 30, 2003, the Foothill Transit Executive Board will wish a fond farewell to Ms. Austin, who is leaving her position as Executive Director of Foothill Transit and Vice President of Transit Management for ATC/Forsythe & Associates, Inc., a post she has held since 1997. Foothill Transit was created in 1988, making it one of the largest public-private transit partnerships in the United States. Since this time it has delivered cost-effective, safe and efficient bus service to commuters and residents in the San Gabriel and Pomona Valleys, located in the eastern portion of Los Angeles County in southern California. Foothill Transit now operates on 32 routes with nearly 300 buses and almost 17 million annual boardings, a marked increase from the 9.5 million boardings at the time of the creation of the transit agency. As Executive Director, Ms. Austin is responsible for implementing Executive Board policies, developing policy recommendations and providing leadership and vision for the nationally recognized Foothill Transit. Throughout her tenure with Foothill Transit, Ms. Austin has ensured that southern California commuters are provided with the safest and most efficient transit system possible. Under her leadership, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) recognized Foothill Transit in 2001 with a ``Bus Safety Gold Award,'' dubbing Foothill Transit the safest transit agency of its size. Foothill Transit was also named ``Outstanding Transit System'' of its size by APTA in 1993 and 1995. The Greater Los Angeles Chapter of the National Safety Council recognized Foothill Transit in 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 2001 with first-place awards for its safety programs. Ms. Austin was also instrumental in both expanding and modernizing Foothill Transit's mode of operations. In 2002, Foothill Transit opened a new era in fuel-efficient technology by beginning its conversion to a compressed natural gas (CNG) fleet with plans to have an all-CNG fleet by 2011. That same year, Foothill Transit opened its second operations and maintenance facility in Irwindale, joining its first agency-owned facility in Pomona, which opened in 1997. She has contributed to the success of public transit in Los Angeles County as Director of Management Support from 1993 to 1995 at the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and as Senior Transit Analyst/Manager of Transportation Policy from 1989 to 1993 at the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, where she oversaw a three-year evaluation of the Foothill Transit Zone. She also worked for the Southern California Association of Governments for three years and spent several years as a transportation consultant. A resident of the City of Monrovia, California, Ms. Austin has a bachelor's degree in journalism from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She is active in the American Public Transit Association (Legislative Committee), California Transit Association (Executive Committee), San Gabriel Valley Commerce and Cities Consortium Board, Women's Transportation Seminar, San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Transit Committee, and West Covina Chamber of Commerce. I ask all Members of Congress to join me today in honoring this truly remarkable leader in the field of public transit and to wish her all the best in her future endeavors.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. The argument is we are dealing with reimportation, not drugs manufactured in Canada. Ask yourself the question, why are there no major manufacturing facilities in Canada? The reason is they invest billions of dollars in these drugs to save our lives. Of every thousand they work on, seven hit the market place and one makes a profit. Now, ask yourself the question, Canada represents 1 percent of the marketplace. That is all they represent. Do you believe that U.S. manufacturers are going to ship enough drugs to Canada to sell them back at less prices in the United States to fill the volume that is needed in the largest market in the world? When people get sick in Canada and they are seriously ill, they come to the United States. Why? Because we have the best health care and the best treatment forms in the world. It is already legal to reimport if you can prove safety, but they cannot prove safety; and you know it. And they will have that same difficulty in the future. So do not believe there is some manufacturer in Canada who is just arbitrarily going to ship drugs here. Our companies do not meet the demand.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 1472 and H.R. 20.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the Children's Creative Festival of Orange County, California and support their efforts to educate and enlighten the community. Last month, the Children's Creative Festival wrapped up their weekend-long street painting festival, Fun with Chalk. Hundreds of artists from around the world descended on to my district to transform the streets around the Mission Viejo, California civic center into a colorful, interactive art gallery. The art of street painting and the carnival that follows it dates back to sixteenth century Europe when villagers decorated the cobblestone paths surrounding their town square to celebrate a harvest or other important occasion. The Children's Creative Festival continues this tradition as a way to educate, entertain and inspire young people, and to foster a small town atmosphere reminiscent of old Europe. The Children's Creative Festival uses funds raised at this annual street painting faire to help local schools with art education and other cultural activities. Last year, more than 79,000 children benefited from year round programs and classes sponsored by this all- volunteer organization. The Children's Creative Festival was also the key sponsor of my 2003 Congressional art competition, which awarded scholarships to five young artists. Dr. Frank Lieberman and his wife, Elaine, founded the Children's Creative Festival five years ago to inspire creativity, teach art appreciation and provide supplemental funding for quality visual and performing arts experiences for school children, thus developing creative and imaginative adults. I believe they have achieved their stated goals and wish them and their organization continued success in future endeavors.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the author of this resolution.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of this resolution expressing support for Congress Building America and for increased affordable home ownership opportunities. This country is home to people of many different origins, but everyone seems to have the same dream, to own their own home. This dream means many things: Independence, financial security, geographic stability, the ability to accumulate personal wealth, a place to raise a family, or simply a place to go after a long day's work and find peace. As a homebuilder for over 30 years, I enjoyed watching many people achieve this dream. One could always see the excitement and anticipation in the face of a home buyer. The Congress Building America program will offer every Member of Congress this opportunity to experience how the dream of homeownership builds hope in their communities and across the Nation. I feel very strongly about this issue, because homeownership is the key to personal wealth in our country. When someone buys a home, they purchase an asset which will grow over time. I started the Building a Better America Caucus, BABAC, when I arrived in Congress 4\1/2\ years ago, because I thought it was important to provide a forum for us to start addressing issues that impact homeownership. One of the objectives of BABAC is to help cultivate an environment where more Americans turn the dream of homeownership into reality. When I first started my business, I had an old van that used more oil than gas and a cardboard box which held every tool I owned. I started small. Over 30 years, my business grew, but with each passing year, I saw the impact of government on the housing industry. With each year came government laws and regulations making it harder to build homes. The red tape kept increasing costs. In business, these costs are passed on to consumers. Homes kept getting more expensive. It is very important that Congress start talking about how the government is impacting home prices. In some parts of the country, my district in southern California is one of them, the heavy burden of Federal, State and local mandates is creating a generation of people who cannot afford to live in the communities where they work and grew up. I call these people the new homeless. Exactly who are these new homeless? In my district, it might be a couple. The husband is a firefighter and the wife is a teacher. They have a good job and they make a good living, but the combined income does not enable them to purchase a median priced home in southern California which costs over $300,000 today. This is a national problem, and Congress must work expeditiously to address it. I encourage all my colleagues to become active members of BABAC so we can do something about the housing affordable crisis in this country. BABAC provides Members a forum where we can discuss ways Congress can increase homeownership in America. The Congress Building America program provides Members the opportunity to personally help make homeownership a reality for a family in their district. The Congress Building America program will give every Member of Congress a chance to express their commitment to affordable homeownership by picking up a hammer and nails and building alongside Habitat for Humanity families to make the American Dream of homeownership a reality. The goal of this resolution is to encourage Members of Congress to participate in Congress Building America events with Habitat homeowner families and local Habitat affiliates in their districts or States during the 108th and 109th Congress. This new initiative is a partnership program between Habitat for Humanity International, the United States Congress, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and national corporate sponsors. I urge each Member to support this resolution and to personally join with the Habitat for Humanity affiliates in their districts to help low-income families realize the American Dream of homeownership. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this legislation.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Reclaiming my time, if we look prior to 1948, the tax revenues in this country generally went to cities. It started to change after 1948. The State started taking more and the Federal Government started taking more. About 1972, it got so bad that locals were being deprived of so much money they could no longer afford to put the streets and the sewers and the storm drains in necessary to build homes. Why? Because the Federal Government and the State government got greedy and started taking the money from the people who need it, the cities. What we have done is create a situation where now the tax dollars are not put in the infrastructure; the builder puts in the infrastructure. Plus he pays for all the local mitigation and impacts that the community might face in some fashion, even if it is a signal 5 miles down the road that might be impacted in some fashion because this tract of 80 people living in it might impact that intersection. But we have got to look at what government has done. Government has changed to such a degree that we have taken the money, become greedy; and now we do not want to address the problems we can address.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I take back my time. What I said is a cost-benefit analysis. If you can do something and determine that there is a benefit in the regulations you are placing on affordable housing, that is fine. But for us to sit here and say, oh, we need to have more government programs and more government funding and yet we do not get to the core problem of affordability, you have to get to the core problem of affordability. There is no difference from us saying, let us, the Federal Government, fund housing but you have got to have everybody in agreement we are even going to put it there. The problem you have with section 8 housing, and the gentleman from Massachusetts knows this to be a fact himself, is you go to many communities and you say you are going to build low-income housing and the whole community is in an uproar because they do not want it in their community because they start saying, you are going to have gang violence, you are going to have problems, you are going to have transients. They do not want it in their communities. I am not saying that it is bad; I am saying that is just a fact. It is this NIMBY, not in my backyard attitude. That is a problem we face in this country, unless you will change the laws to where a builder has a reasonable time to process a subdivision. Yes, let us look at the environmental impact that might be placed on the community of a project; let us look at the environment, if there are any species that are going to be harmed there. But let us do it in a reasonable span of time, not 3, 5, 10 years. I told the gentleman from Massachusetts of a project I owned for 12 years that I finally ended up selling to the city because nobody wanted it built, yet there was not a bit of flora or fauna that was in any way impacted, nor was there a species out there that was on the endangered species list. Let us look at the problem and let us work together to see that we are not overturning local rights, but let us work with the local communities.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I enjoyed the one comment: ``This resolution is here so Republicans can just talk about affordable housing.'' The gentleman from Massachusetts and I, we do agree on one major issue: there is a huge shortage of affordable housing in this country. I believe we both have a passion in common to try to resolve this problem. Earlier this year, I brought a bill up before our committee on brownfields. Brownfields are contaminated sites within inner cities where the infrastructure is in place and the need for affordable housing is there. The gentleman from Massachusetts has worked hand in hand with me to bring this to the floor; but because of a lack of agreement on his side of the aisle, none to his blame, we are unable to do that because one Member wants to define brownfields using an EPA definition. The gentleman from Massachusetts and I realize that if you do that you eliminate petroleum sites which are 50 percent of the half million sites in this country. So he and I have worked to resolve something and others are giving lip service to this issue. There has been much talk about subsidies. We deal with section 8 housing and the need for section 8 housing. We come to an agreement that there is a need for that. But in Los Angeles County, we had the housing authority here, I asked them the question of what is your occupancy rate in California, in L.A. County? They said, we are 97 percent occupied. That means 3 percent of the units that are not occupied are under renovation. Basically, they are 100 percent full. They have no available section 8 housing for people to go to. We can increase section 8 vouchers causing more money to chase no product, and all it does is increase the cost of the product. But there have been things that have been said here today. We need subsidies which we do provide some. The President has come up with a great idea. He said, let us allow people to take section 8 vouchers, up to 12, and apply them as a down payment to buy a home. That is a great idea. I hope the appropriators this year will fund that program. What we are saying is people who have been locked into section 8 housing can now take the money they would have received in 12 months and put it as a down payment to buy a home, so 10 years, 15 or 20 years from now their payment is the same as it is today, not rising as it does in rental housing. We need to create homeownership rather than just create renters in this country. There has been a comment made about we need a housing production program. We have that in this program. It is called the Building Industry Association. But government does everything it can to stop builders from providing affordable homes in this country. We have so many mandates on builders. I remember 30 years ago when I entered the industry, you could go out within a matter of 2 months and make application on a tract map to build a tract of homes, whether it be five, 10 or 15; and in 60 days you had entitlements, yes or no. They had to do it because on day 59 you were approved by law. I talk to builders today that have been 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 years processing subdivisions trying to provide affordable housing for the people of this country and they cannot get through the process. I spend more time helping builders with Fish and Wildlife and Army Corps of Engineers issues. One thing I wish the other side of the aisle would agree to do and that is reform the Endangered Species Act. In Colton, California, there is one project that has 3,000 homes on 3,000 acres. They are only wanting to develop about 300-and-something of those acres, but they happen to have a rat on that property. It is called the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. It is becoming extinct. People who love rats want to set aside habitat for these rats, but they always want to set the habitat aside on privately owned property. That means somebody who owns a piece of land, all of a sudden the government determines that they own habitat that this rat should live on. The problem with the San Bernardino kangaroo rat is it only lives in washes, which means every time it rains during the winter, the little critters drown and the reason they are becoming extinct is the little critters are too stupid to get out of the wash that they are drowning in and go somewhere else. So no matter what we do, those little critters year after year after year are going to continue to be less in population than they are today because they are too stupid to move out of a wash. There is another great one in California called the Delhi sand-loving fly. I remember years ago when our parents ran this country, we used to swat flies and poison rats. Now we set aside habitat for them on privately owned property. Something is wrong with this country. I think it is incumbent upon us to change it. It is nice to give lip service about affordable housing, and I believe many of my colleagues who spoke today are genuine about a passion; but this resolution allows Members of Congress to actually do something besides give lip service, lean over and pound some nails, finish some concrete, hang some dry wall, put some roofing material on, put some plumbing in, run finish on electrical, paint, hang doors, run casing and base. We can actually do something besides talk about it. Yes, it is a small gesture; but if you look at the problems we have caused because of the stupid laws and regulations we have placed on the building industry today, anything we do, even if it is small, will help. If we are really talking about helping people get into affordable housing, let us do something genuine about it. More government is not going to solve anything. Yes, more government has created a problem and some believe that government money now should resolve that problem and that is wrong. If we would just step back at the Federal, State and local level and say, how do we reduce the regulations placed upon the building industry so a person can go out and reasonably buy a piece of property and in a given span of time can build homes instead of 3, 4, 5, 10 years of process. When you take 3 years to get an entitlement, it is costing somebody a lot of money to buy the property and hold it and pay all these consultants to work on the property. In California, we require builders to go through title 24. That is energy efficiency, which means a home must be airtight, no air infiltration. They even limit it in most fireplaces you can put in that are man-made because they do not want air infiltration in a home. When you have water and no air infiltration, what do you get? Mold. One of the problems we are facing in this country is that insurance companies do not want to write policies because of mold. If we did not have the policies we have today dealing with energy efficiency, perhaps we would not have some of the mold problems we have in this country. When we talk about affordable housing, let us talk about it in reality. If you are going to have section 8 housing that is available, you have got to have an affordable move-up marketplace, and it is not there today. People in section 8 housing receiving government assistance cannot afford to move out of that house because there is not an affordable unit for them to move into. So if we really want to help people be able to get out of section 8 housing, to actually attain the rights that we believe they should have of homeownership and the luxury that goes along with that, with building assets and everything else, if we really want to do that, then let us look at the structure we have created. Let us pass a law that says any regulation at the State level or the city level that has any negative impact on the cost of housing must have a cost-benefit analysis and you must be able to determine that it is really beneficial to do that, not just something that makes people hug each other and feel good and pat each other on the back. Let us change the way we do business in this country.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 43) expressing the sense of Congress that Congress should participate in and support activities to provide decent homes for the people of the United States.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association's (AOPA) Airport Support Network to save general aviation public use airports in California and across the entire United States. AOPA is the world's largest civil aviation organization, representing over 395,000 members who own or fly general aviation aircraft--more than half of all pilots in the United States. Public and privately owned general aviation airports across the nation have fallen victim to mounting pressures for closure and restrictions; California airports are no exception. These community airports play a critical role to provide general aviation access to the San Diego community and the entire national air transportation system. AOPA has pioneered two critical programs that work to protect and preserve safe and secure access of general aviation pilots to the nation's airspace and airports--the Airport Support Network and the Airport Watch Program. The AOPA Airport Support Network provides a vehicle for pilots to communicate with AOPA. The program establishes an early warning system to alert AOPA and local communities of any efforts that may threaten airport viability. AOPA's Airport Support Network uses pilots as the ``eyes and ears'' at every public use airport, to preserve general aviation airports and their role in the national air transportation system. The Airport Support Network has been very successful in my home state of California. AOPA efforts have produced successful steps toward the preservation of two very important California general aviation airports--Oceanside Municipal and Montgomery Field. The Airport Support Network encourages communication and activity that most recently resulted in the city council of Oceanside supporting an airport master plan that will ensure continued operations at the airport. I am encouraged by these efforts and believe that the Airport Support Network will help ensure that our system of general aviation airports remains protected and viable. Airport Watch Program, formed out of a partnership between AOPA and TSA, was created to keep these viable airports safe and secure. Pilots and members of the general aviation community are being instructed in what to look for in the manner of suspicious activity at their airports. Educational materials have disseminated throughout the aviation community. Pilots are instructed to either contact local authorities or report suspicious activity to a nationwide toll free hotline--1-866-GA-SECURE. Airport Watch is a great example of AOPA's efforts to promote security while preserving the freedom of the skies. Again, I want to commend the AOPA and the over 49,000 members residing in the great state of California. I strongly support keeping general aviation airports open and will continue work with them in their efforts towards this end.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise to recognize Kenneth Banks, Jr. of North Hollywood, California for his service to the community and this nation. Ken is a long time member of Rotary International and is retiring from his post as a regional governor for Southern California. Rotary International was founded on three key points: Provide humanitarian service, encourage high ethical standards and build goodwill and peace in the world. During his tenure as governor, Ken worked tirelessly to promote these principles and encouraged others in the community to join him. And he always followed the Rotary motto: Service Above Self. Ken and his wife, Shirley, have three children and six grandchildren. He enjoys spending time with his family and makes that a priority even with his demanding schedule. He loves the community that he serves, and will continue to serve even in his retirement.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, we all know that home equity appreciation is one of the most important drivers of wealth creation in the United States. By helping people become homeowners, we promote long-term economic stability for our Nation. It is for this reason that I rise today to urge my colleagues to cosponsor H.R. 1276, the American Dream Downpayment Act. This important legislation sets first-time, low-income homebuyers on the path to homeownership by providing help with downpayments and closing costs. One of the primary barriers to achieving the ``American Dream'' of homeownership for low- and moderate-income people is the lack of accumulated wealth and disposable income. Downpayments and closing costs are traditionally the most significant obstacles that would-be homebuyers face. In order to accumulate enough to cover downpayment and closing costs, households must consume less and save more or receive assistance from relatives or other benefactors. With rent prices skyrocketing, it is very difficult for a family to have enough money leftover for a downpayment after paying for basic needs such as shelter, health care and food. This bill attempts to assist those who have not been able to save enough money upfront but who are earning enough to make the monthly mortgage payments. Downpayment assistance programs are proven successful in expanding homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income families. And the truth is, the private sector has been working, without government intervention, to assist individuals and families who lack the necessary funds for downpayment and other related costs become homeowners. I would like to talk about one such program, based in Rancho Cucamonga, CA. The Housing Action Resource Trust (HART) was established in 1995 and began its Downpayment Assistance Program in July of 1998. HART is an established non-profit housing organization with a proven track record. The HART program has partnered with builders and listing agents to assist prospective homebuyers across the nation who qualify for a first mortgage loan, but fall short of the downpayment and other closing costs essential in purchasing a home. The HART program has been recognized as one of the top downpayment programs in the country. The HART program has helped 40,000 families who rent across the country realize their dream of becoming a homeowner. The American Dream Downpayment Act will complement the tremendous work programs such as HART are doing to help build communities. I urge my colleagues to make the dream of homeownership a reality for even more Americans by supporting this legislation.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, one of the main barriers of homeownership today is the down payment requirement from individuals that do not have the money. Do down payment assistance programs work? They do. One example is in Rancho Cucamonga, California. The Housing Action Resource Trust, called HART, was formed in 1995; and in 1998, they started giving homeowners down payment assistance, and it is all private funds. Not a dollar of it is government funds. What they have done is help 40,000 families actually achieve homeownership, and it is significant. Like I said, not a dime of it is government funds. The HART gift funds can be used for down payment, closing costs, prepaid payments that can be used to remit buy-downs; and the main obstacle we have for moving people from apartments and rental units to housing is basically they do not have the money. There are programs that do work. The government needs to look at participating in this.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to include extraneous material thereon.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 659) to amend section 242 of the National Housing Act regarding the requirements for mortgage insurance under such Act for hospitals, as amended.