The SCHIP vote got a lot of attention over the last couple of weeks, but the House of Representatives was busy with other projects, too.

Among them was HR 2895, the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007. The bill would "establish the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund in the Treasury of the United States to provide for the construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of decent, safe, and affordable housing for low-income families." A summary from the Congressional Research Service, via GovTrack.us, may be found here.

The bill explains its own purposes:

`(1) to address the national shortage of housing that is affordable to low-income families by creating a permanently appropriated fund, with dedicated sources of funding, to finance additional housing activities, without supplanting existing housing appropriations or existing State and local funding for affordable housing;

`(2) to enable rental housing to be built, for families with the greatest economic need, in mixed-income settings and in areas with the greatest economic opportunities;

`(3) to promote ownership of one-to-four family owner-occupied housing by low-income families; and

`(4) to construct, rehabilitate, and preserve at least 1,500,000 affordable dwelling units over the next decade.

The bill passed, 264 to 148. Forty-one Republicans joined a united Democratic caucus in supporting the bill.

As one might expect, Congressman Tim Walberg voted No. Michigan Republicans Fred Upton and Candice Miller joined the majority.

As Michigan Liberal user phikapbob says, after voting against SCHIP, apparently some Republicans must feel that "poor kids without health care shouldn't have homes either":

Isn't it possible, by looking at the record numbers of mortgage foreclosures this country is seeing, that many families are overextending themselves to pay for adequate housing? What kind of person votes against health care for the poor one week, then follows that up with a vote against providing a roof over those peoples' heads? If this gets through the Senate, does Bush dare veto another bill with strong bipartisan support? The War on the Working Class rages on, my friends.

No real surprise, though. It's been clear from the start that Tim Walberg doesn't vote to help the people that work for a living. He's in it to help his Club for Growth supporters.

Labels: 110th Congress, Affordable Housing, Issues, Poverty, Tim Walberg, Walberg Voting Record