	Introduction

In 1996, Congress enacted the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA; P.L. 104-330 ). NAHASDA also authorizes a loan guarantee program to help tribes access private funding for housing development activities (the Title VI loan guarantee program) and funding for training and technical assistance. Tribes are largely supportive of NAHASDA and the Native American Housing Block Grant. Many of the changes that have been proposed by tribes have to do with streamlining program requirements, particularly when NAHASDA funds are used with other sources of federal funds; providing more flexibility for tribes to make their own decisions about housing programs; and requiring HUD to be more responsive to requests for approvals or waivers of certain requirements. Congress has expressed interest in certain issues related to NAHASDA beyond those raised by tribes. One such issue has been concern about some tribes' accumulated balances of unspent NAHASDA funds. Additionally, some Members of Congress have opposed reauthorization of the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant out of concerns that it could be construed to provide benefits based on race. The authorization for most NAHASDA programs expired at the end of FY2013, although Congress has generally continued to provide funding for NAHASDA programs. The reauthorization process has presented an opportunity for Congress to consider changes to the law and the programs that it authorizes as well as other housing issues affecting Native Americans. However, no NAHASDA reauthorization legislation was enacted by the end of the 114 th Congress. NAHBG Program Requirements

The NAHBG provides formula funding to tribes to carry out affordable housing activities that benefit low-income Native American households living in tribal areas. Many of the changes to NAHBG requirements advocated by tribes have to do with streamlining certain cross-cutting federal requirements when multiple sources of federal funds are used in a project, providing tribes additional flexibility to set their own requirements, or requiring HUD to respond to requests for approvals or waivers in a timely manner. This can create complications for projects that use NAHASDA and other sources of funds. The NHHBG provides funds to Hawaii's Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) to use for affordable housing activities for low-income Native Hawaiians eligible to reside on the Hawaiian Home Lands. For many years, there has been ongoing litigation between the Cherokee Freedmen, the Cherokee Nation, and the United States over whether the Freedmen have a right to membership in the tribe. (The authorization for the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant expired at the end of FY2005.) During the 114 th Congress, the House and the Senate considered separate versions of NAHASDA reauthorization legislation:
In the House, H.R. Both H.R. 360 and S. 710 would have reauthorized a number of Native American and Native Hawaiian housing programs, authorized certain new program demonstrations and set-asides for Native American housing, and made several changes to NAHBG requirements. Both bills addressed a number of the issues described earlier in this report, although not necessarily in the same way. 360 , as passed by the House, and S. 710 , as reported out of committee in the Senate, with each other and with existing law.
The Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA; P.L. 104-330) replaced several existing sources of housing funding for Native Americans with a single block grant, the Native American Housing Block Grant (NAHBG). Through the NAHBG, tribes and Alaska Native villages receive formula funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to use for a variety of affordable housing activities that benefit low-income Native American households living in tribal areas. NAHASDA also authorizes a loan guarantee program for tribes (the Title VI loan guarantee) and funding for training and technical assistance. In addition, NAHASDA (as amended) authorizes the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant (NHHBG), which provides funds for affordable housing activities for low-income Native Hawaiians eligible to reside on the Hawaiian Home Lands.
While tribes are generally supportive of NAHASDA, some have advocated for changes to program requirements. For example, tribes have argued for streamlining certain cross-cutting federal requirements when multiple sources of funds are used in a single project, for more flexibility in setting certain program requirements, and for HUD to respond to requests for approvals or waivers of NAHASDA requirements in a more timely fashion.
Furthermore, some in Congress have expressed concern over certain NAHASDA-related issues. For several years, there has been some opposition in Congress to reauthorizing housing programs for Native Hawaiians out of concern that such programs could be construed to be based on race. Congress has also debated whether, and how, to respond to ongoing litigation between the Cherokee Nation and the Cherokee Freedmen. More recently, Congress has expressed concern about a few tribes that have accumulated large balances of unexpended NAHASDA funds.
The authorization for most NAHASDA programs expired at the end of FY2013 (the authorization for the NHHBG expired at the end of FY2005), although Congress has generally continued to provide funding for these programs. The reauthorization process has presented an opportunity for Congress to consider potential program changes advocated by tribes as well as other issues related to NAHASDA that are of interest to Congress. In the 114th Congress, the House passed a NAHASDA reauthorization bill (H.R. 360), while in the Senate a different bill was favorably reported out of committee (S. 710).
Both H.R. 360 and S. 710 would have reauthorized a number of Native American and Native Hawaiian housing programs, authorized certain new program demonstrations and set-asides for Native American housing, and provided for a reduction in NAHBG formula funding for certain tribes with large amounts of unspent funds (although in slightly different ways). Both bills also included a number of changes to NAHASDA requirements, including provisions related to streamlining environmental review and lease termination requirements when NAHASDA funds are combined with other sources of funding, and allowing tribes to set their own maximum rents for NAHASDA-assisted housing.
Although the House and the Senate reauthorization bills addressed many of the same issues, they did not always do so in the same way. Each bill also included provisions related to certain issues that were not included in the other bill.
Neither of these NAHASDA reauthorization bills, nor any other NAHASDA reauthorization legislation, was enacted by the end of the 114th Congress.