MAXINE WATERS, CA CHAIRWOMAN United States House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services PATRICK MCHENRY, NC RANKING MEMBER 2129 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 May 10, 2019 The Honorable Benjamin S. Carson Secretary U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 7th Street S.W. Washington, DC 20410-0001 Dear Secretary Carson: The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) proposed changes to Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980 (Section 214) are consistent with the Trump administration’s previous egregious attempts to intimidate immigrant communities, separate families, and undermine American values. If implemented, this rule would put tens of thousands of families who are living in public housing or Section 8 project-based rental (PBRA) assistance or receiving a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) at risk of eviction, homelessness, and family separation despite existing requirements that prevent people with ineligible immigration status from receiving HUD subsidies. We urge you to immediately withdraw this proposed rule. Current laws and regulations already prohibit federal housing programs from subsidizing immigrants who are undocumented or otherwise have ineligible immigration status, while ensuring that families with mixed immigration status can stay together and get the help that they qualify for. Under existing requirements, eligibility for federal housing assistance is restricted to U.S. citizens with narrow exceptions for certain immigrants who are legally residing in the U.S. such as refugees.1 If a family includes individuals with varying immigration statuses—often referred to as a mixed status family—rental assistance is prorated to ensure that individuals who are not eligible for housing assistance do not receive a subsidy. For example, if a family consisting of two parents and one child receives a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher, but only one parent and the child are U.S. citizens while the second parent does not have eligible immigration status, that family of three’s rent would be calculated to fully account for the incomes of both parents and then prorated to ensure that the parent who does not have eligible immigration status does not receive assistance. Therefore, the family pays a larger share of their rent than they would if all three family members were eligible for rental subsidy. Prorated rent ensures that the family members who are eligible can receive the housing they need while not also receiving a subsidy for the non-qualifying family member. It also preserves family integrity by allowing mixed status families to live together under the same roof. In sum, HUD’s proposed rule is unnecessary to achieve the purported goal of ensuring that federal housing programs are not subsidizing persons with ineligible immigration status due to existing requirements that already prevent this. Despite existing requirements that ensure that people who do not have eligible immigration status are not receiving federal subsidies, HUD’s proposal would unnecessarily target mixed status families, putting them at risk of eviction, homelessness, and family separation. Under the proposed rule, every individual who is independently receiving public housing or Section 8 PBRA or HCV assistance, or is included in a household that is receiving such assistance would be required to verify their immigration status even if they are not personally receiving a federal subsidy. These households would face termination of benefits if every person in the household does not have eligible immigration status. Families facing termination of benefits as a result of the proposed rule would be forced to make an impossible and heart wrenching choice to either forfeit critical housing assistance, which could put them at risk of eviction and homelessness, or separate their family to ćƇpʫù ǧ ȤĠķ ʫð Žǁh ʫăÆʫò ʫ þĖʗʫàÝʪʫâÛßêʫ ĀBw ʫ@ʫ v 4ʫ ŏʒĸDŽɲ! ʫP Cq˜Ɂʫ ʫł ʫ ʫ > ʫ ǎ " İ ʫƷP‡ Ǩʫ ¤ ʫ ʫ –0 -ʫ¢Ȓʫ q Ⱦª ʫɍ pʫūǖǏ ³ ʫ ǐƲ" ı 5JZʘʫŴȥʫ ƈ£ ƿ"ʫ( f `ʫö ʫǗ ʙʫ $ʖrDʫ ¤ ʫŞĦ)%# ʫ«ƉsU ʫžH ʫ 51. ʫ ʫċÇcÈʫ/ ʟՈɂ¸ʫ y ʫȖ— !ʫĹƊ' " ʫ Éʫ ŀɳNŃʫǘ ħʫ SĪ' ʫ ɴ ʫŁ 5D- ǩʫŽ Ǚʫɬ Ƣ ʫSġ ǪɎ ʫ Ȧʫ >ƹŠ"ʫɏƋFQʫʉƳ ƌʫ ʫ^B°ʫ ʫ ʫɭ ʫj ǫ Ű& ʫ ɐƍő ʫTɵ' v?ʫŵ aʫĄƣ *(ȧDžʚ¹ʫŶ ʫşĥ ƴʥ ʫ ʤʫ¬ Ȩ ʫ ʫ š ‰n,Ģ<  ʫhȸ ʫČÊAËʫ ƤʠŒ+ ºʫɑƛXʫ £%mʫ Ǭʫ ȗ W ɒ ʦʫ ʧʫ ɓ t ʫŪȻ Pʫ )˜ʫ ȩ Ĥ ȹ Ìʫ 26 0H 9 N?"$;N57151< N8E) N 2E* N'- I 9? ,@)LN! 7+N ,NG-A2* N-F+ :N3 N N %B( ,;NK"2N 2N .4CN# J N =>ND2NB" N/ << 9MN 2 G+ ,D @&2- NčÍąÎʫlK&#ʡ ʫ 4> ʫ ɶC% /ʫƟȔɷ ƥ6"ʫ ʫc ĺɔ ǭʫéʫāñĂîʫ9-ʫ úóđʫ # & 6 ʫ ȕʀ !ʫ ī _ʫŬĻ ʫ& †ƦǮ([ ʫ ŠʫIJ űɕ ʫƧšʫ z ʫ i86Ȅ ʫ ʫ\,ʫʊM Ǝʫ Ə ʫ œ EɌ ėɀʫ ńȅ ¥Ǧ Ęɧ4 ʫ ȆʫȘ ‘ʅ ʫ )Ȫʫ J ǀ ›Ɯș`ʫĕíǾ0ʫĎÏĆÐʫ/#ɖJʣ ȃʫ';Ț*®#Ȃxʫŷ ʫƐ \Ƀ}ǯ ʫ X4 6 ʫ :ɸ Ņʫ N ʫij ʫɱ ņʫ į ʫŸȫʫ* ǂëʫ Ţʫґ ʑȁ + ɗ “ »ʫʐơ ʫ­ ¥ 0ʫ1 ,- < ~ ǰę dž ʫ ʫ ʫ ʫĴ . śʫ ʫƑ = $ ʫŹȬʫ Ʉȇ+Ʌʫ ŔʓțrȺ F 7Gʫ ǚ 5 Š Y ʫʋy ʫ9ſ ʫD ʫDZ’ ʫHe© ʫĚʫ¬ ʛʫ “ʫ ɹ< ®ʫ ʫ ʁ ʫ1 =Q Dzɘ ˆaʫĒ ʫz ʆ ʫ ‹ʫ əKǛŕʫĨmʫ ǜ ʫfƁ ƨŒʫ I( ʫ Ů < Ɇʫ ’ʫƩ 9 ʫ 2 7&ƵŲ Ÿƽ +ʫ tTɺ dz ɇʫź ʫ „ ƻ8Gʫ ěɨ ǴXʫ ª ʫ ň~œ .9ȜÞáɚ ǵ * ʫ ų !ʫ ʫ> ʫ:ţʫ; ȝLJ ʫ:Ťʫ ȱÙ2ʫ AL†4 ĬLj ¼ʫ ƒŜ ʫeU ʫ Ȳ+ ʫɛ ɜ½ʫɝȈʫ ʫ ʔɞ ʫZƠ ʫZ ʫ ;ȳȓ, 2ʫ ] ʫ G © N¯ʫƪRS ʫďÑdÒʫ ƫ ƬʢŖǶ ¾ʫ ɟʫ«€ Oʫn$ – • — ) lj ʫ ǝ ļɠʫ; Ȟ% ʫ ťʫ ƒ” Óʫ ĈƓ ʫȟ › 1ʫ ʂ ʫƭ ʫ? ʫ( ɮŝʫ V ʨ NJʫžȉRʫüʫ¨ ʼn Vʫ_ ʄʫ Bō ȭɈ{L,ʫ I ʫƀǷ! O… ʫ ĽȊǸ ȴ Ŏ$ ɉʫ Ɣ ʫ w ‰ ´ ʫǞ ǹʫ±žȋʫkȮ ʫ ¡ ǺƂ¿ʫ ¦ ŸĜ 8 CNjEÀʫ /ǑɻɊ ʇ ʫ ǥʃɩ$ ʫĝǻoʫȢɼ ǒ€ ¯ʫ ŦŻWŊ ĵ ʫ ƕȌQFYʫż ʫ „ƒÚ²ʫĉƝ ʫ ɿ njʫʩ Žŋʫ 2%ŗ ʫ ȯ )7 ʫ ŧʫɋɡȵ]ƃƄǓ Ǽƅʫƾ Ɔ ʫŭǟ}% 3œʫȍȀ ʫľ ɰ Ķ=ɢ3 ʫɣȎʫH$ Ƽkʫ ȠĞɪ[Řȿ ʫ:ŨʫM sT= *ƺ ?Áʫ^ƞ ʫ\ǔ[Ʈ‡'  _ʫ{ƶ72 ™ʫ IřʫĐÔAÕʫ § Ư xʫǠĭǃ ¡ʫĩoʫìR M ʫ ȏǡʜÖʫ÷ Wʫ Ɩ3 ʫ ȰuĮ ǽ Âʫʌ ʫ§. 3ʫ° ¨ʫ ʫƸǣǤ 0 …ʝʫ^ ¢ !ȶğʍʫɤ ʫ•V” ŌʫȽ]Ǖ ×ʫýũʫ? ɽʫ ʈ ʫi ʞʫȣ¦ ɥ Yʫ j ɾ ʫ Ɨư ʫ šÃʫ ȡ u ʫ ɦ Ŀ ʫïK ʫøƱ U™ȐʫʎLɯʫôƘ ‚ȼ­ Ǣ ʫē & µʫ ɫůʫ ʫ¶@Üb·ʫãbçÅå@æèØʫ d ǿl ȷ O Äʫ Ċƙ ʫû 8ȑ-ģǍ ʫÿ ʕ#ŒŚʫĔ E. ʫ õƚg‚ ʏ g‹ʫ The Honorable Benjamin S. Carson May 10, 2019 Page 3 of 4 (� � v <;-�{& 1Ji111_� lilo..tv CC: The Honorable Patrick McHenry ' I I The Honorable Benjamin S. Carson May 10, 2019 Page 4 of 4 Endnotes 1 42 U.S.C. § 1436a(a); 24 C.F.R. § 5.506 2 See e.g. Zoltan L. Hajnal, Nazita Lajevardi, and Lindsay Nielson, “Do Voter identification laws suppress minority voting? Yes. We did the research.” Washington Post, February 15, 2017.