Earlier this month, Cara Abercrombie '97 and I had the opportunity to attend the National Low Income Housing Coalition's Annual Conference in Washington, D.C. As representatives of the Boehm Coster Public Policy Encouragement Program, we were treated to discussions and debates on federal housing policy with the nation's premier advocates, residents and producers of low income housing. We were also able to meet and talk with national policy figures such as Andrew Cuomo, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and Bruce Katz of the Brookings Institute. However, the clear message we received from the conference is that federally subsidized housing for low-income persons is in danger of extinction!
As Congress convenes this month to hammer out the federal budget for Fiscal Year 1998, it will have to address the huge problem of expiring Section 8 contracts. Since 1974, the Section 8 rental subsidy program has been a large success in a sea of housing failures. The program offers two types of subsidies. The first are those subsidies that are attached to specific units. The owner signs a contract with HUD saying that she will rent the unit to a resident needing a subsidy. HUD pays the difference between what the renter can afford (30% of her annual income) and the actual rent. This type of subsidy is called project-based. The second type of subsidy is not attached to a specific unit. The holder is free to use the subsidy wherever she may choose, so long as the owner accepts it. These subsidies are portable, meaning the tenant may take the subsidy when she moves.
The looming housing crisis concerns the project-based ones. When these units were built in the late 1970's, the federal government assigned fifteen and twenty year contracts to the units. These contracts with the owners ensured that the federally subsidized units would be set aside for low income renters. Now, these contracts are beginning to expire.
Faced with severe public and political pressure to balance the budget, Congress must address a disturbing dilemma. In recent past, one of the departments to take a large proportion of budget cuts has been HUD. Now, faced with a Section 8 renewal cost of $9.2 billion, Congress may target this program as a way to save current and future costs. However, the big question is what will be the result of this action.
First, over 3.3 million citizens are living in units whose contracts are expiring. The state of New Hampshire has over 3,000 families living in units whose contracts will expire by the year 2000. The failure to renew the contracts will result in the displacement of ALL these residents.
Second, there are currently 15 million families that meet eligibility requirements for subsidized housing. However, only 4.5 million families receive such assistance. Housing is a national problem right now! The failure of Congress to renew expiring certificates will not only displace the 3.3 million in Section 8 housing, but will also shatter any glimmer of hope of relief for the 10.5 million families who need such assistance, but are not getting it. More than half of these families will begin or continue to pay more than 50 percent of their income for rent.
Third, the Clinton administration is already committed to demolishing 100,000 units of public housing and giving displaced tenants Section 8 vouchers. But how can we expect displaced public housing residents to find units with vouchers when funding for such housing is allowed to quietly expire and vanish? We cannot!
Congress must open its eyes to this looming housing crisis. So-called welfare reform has already had adverse effects on the ability of low-income persons to pay rent for public housing and Section 8 units. The failure to renew expiring Section 8 contracts will only exacerbate this problem while causing the massive displacement and probable homelessness of millions of Americans!
CONGRESS, WAKE UP!
