PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 19, 2012
Vulnerable Veterans Housing Reform Act of 2012 - Amends the United States Housing Act of 1937 to exclude as family income for Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) housing assistance purposes any Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) payments made to veterans in need of regular aid and attendance for expenses related to such aid and attendance.
Prohibits, in determining the monthly rental assistance payment for low-income families, the amount for tenant-paid utilities from exceeding the appropriate utility allowance for that family unit size as determined by the public housing agency (agency), regardless of the size of the unit leased by the family. Requires the agency, upon request by a family that includes a person with disabilities, an elderly family, or a family that includes a person less than 18 years old, to approve a higher utility, except that, in the case of a family with a disabled person, the agency shall approve the higher amount only when needed as a reasonable accommodation to make the unit accessible to and usable by that person.
Directs the HUD Secretary to regularly publish data regarding local utility consumption and costs in order to establish appropriate allowances for tenant-paid utilities for assisted families.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the VA Secretary to establish a pilot program to award grants to nonprofit organizations that primarily serve veterans or low-income individuals. Requires such grants to be used to rehabilitate and modify the primary residence of disabled or low-income veterans. Limits grant amounts to $1 million per organization. Requires such Secretary to direct the oversight of grant fund use. Requires a minimum of 50% matching funds by participating organizations. Requires an annual pilot program report from such Secretary to Congress. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Heck, Joseph J. [R-NV-3] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6121-6122)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6121-6122)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6361.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6121-6124)
Mrs. Biggert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.6361 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.6361 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.6361 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.6361 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.