PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2015
Moving to Work Reform Act of 2015
This bill prohibits the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) from entering into or extending any Moving to Work agreement for any public housing agency (PHA) for participation in the Moving to Work Demonstration Program, unless the agreement is subject to specified terms and conditions set forth by this Act for its entire duration.
(Under the Moving to Work Demonstration Program up to 30 selected PHAs, including Indian housing authorities, may administer the public or Indian housing program and the Section 8 housing assistance payments program in ways designed to reduce costs and achieve greater cost-effectiveness in federal expenditures, provide incentives for heads of households to become economically self-sufficient, and increase housing choices for lower-income families.) Under such an agreement a PHA:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
may not establish any new rent policy that raises rent burdens for a significant portion of participating families, or causes specified other results, unless certain conditions are met;
may use funds appropriated for renewal of tenant-based rental assistance only for payments assisting eligible families with housing costs;
shall receive funding for renewal of tenant-based rental assistance under the same formula applied to nonparticipating PHAs;
must provide ongoing housing assistance to substantially the same number of eligible low-income families as it could assist ordinarily but with average cost burdens no higher than those of families assisted under Sections 8 (low-income housing assistance) and 9 (Public Housing Capital and Operating Funds) of the United States Housing Act of 1937; and
develop and implement a plan to expand families' access to neighborhoods with low crime, high-performing schools, or other indicators of high opportunity, if a disproportionately low share of PHA-assisted families lives in such neighborhoods.
HUD may not waive specified housing-related requirements.
HUD must conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the Demonstration Program to:
analyze the risks and potential benefits of expanding it to additional agencies; and
identify reforms, and selection criteria in case the Demonstration Program is expanded, that would improve its effectiveness in testing innovative policies while minimizing adverse effects on low-income families and ensuring efficient use of federal funds to meet the most pressing housing needs.
People & committees
Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43] · D–CA
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: Aug 12, 2025. 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.3424 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.3424 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.3424 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.3424 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.