PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2009
Requires the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, upon the request of a public housing agency (PHA) which has a Moving to Work agreement (under the demonstration program authorized by the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996), to extend it for a 12-month period under such terms as are, or were, in effect upon the agreement's expiration.
Requires, for a PHA that previously received an extension of its agreement and entered into a subsequent agreement after January 1, 2009, the Secretary to, upon the PHA's request, invalidate such subsequent agreement and extend any agreement in effect as of such date for a 12-month period under such terms as were in effect as of that date.
Prohibits the Secretary from extending a Moving to Work agreement if a PHA is noncompliant with its agreement's terms.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the maximum number of PHAs authorized to participate in the Moving to Work demonstration program should not be expanded until the demonstration program has been reformed and permanently authorized through enactment of a federal law.
People & committees
Rep. Sires, Albio [D-NJ-13] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Feb 6, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1099 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1099 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1099 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1099 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.