Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Un-Housing the Poor

By Dan Frosch, AlterNet. Posted June 6, 2005.


The Department of Housing and Urban Development is leading the charge to deny assistance to the families who need it the most.
Advertisement

In December 1998, Tarrah Leach's life finally hit rock bottom. She was barely 17 years old, already a mother of two small infant daughters, and hiding out in a domestic shelter. She'd been married only a year, a difficult year that the teenage couple spent first in a homeless shelter and then in a small public housing apartment in Lancaster, Ohio, a town some 32 miles southeast of Columbus. And though Leach still loved her childhood sweetheart, she could no longer tolerate his abuse and beatings. So she took her kids and walked out the door without a dollar to her name.

"By the time, I’d left him, I had this new family with no money and no home to help me raise them," Leach says.

Help, however, was around the corner. Leach received a fresh start in life courtesy of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The federal assistance program enabled Leach to rent an affordable apartment in a safe neighborhood, a decision that she says saved her life. After waiting for two months, her family was able to move into a quiet two-bedroom trailer, which she rented for a reasonable $100 a month thanks to the HUD voucher, as opposed to the market rate of $425.

The Section 8 program, created in 1974 during the Nixon years, offers poor families a housing voucher to rent an apartment or home put on the market by participating landlords. With the voucher, a family only has to pay 30 percent of their adjusted income toward the rent, with the local housing authority paying for the balance with HUD money. Under HUD regulations, 75 percent of a housing authority’s vouchers must go to families making 30 percent or less of the median income in their area.

The program represents a vital lifeline for families with extremely low incomes who get the opportunity to move their family out of public housing in poor and often dangerous neighborhoods. Currently, more than two million families use Section 8 vouchers to pay a subsidized rent.

The Department of Housing, however, is planning to cut that lifeline.

Last month, Congress began hearings on two bills -- one each in the House and Senate -- that threaten to reorient federal assistance away from the families that need it most. Specifically, the legislation would double Section 8’s existing median income cap to 60 percent, thereby allowing families who earn more to qualify for these vouchers.

It also removes rules which ensure that families in serious need receive the most assistance. Under the new measure, local housing authorities are free to award up to 90 percent of their vouchers to applicants that qualify under the raised income cap -- allowing them to dole out the majority of vouchers to families who earn more and therefore pay more of the rent.

HUD, which drafted both pieces of legislation, is framing this reorientation as a response to the rising costs of a program that has jumped from $11 to $15 billion over the past three years. Last year, HUD cut millions in Section 8 funding but restored some of it after an outcry from housing authorities who said they were being asked operate the program but deprived of the funding required to do it.

If HUD is successful in its latest bid, success stories like Tarrah Leach will likely become a faraway memory. Thanks to Section 8, Leach was able to get her GED even as she worked at WalMart, and later attended nursing school on her days off. She eventually graduated with honors and got her nursing license.

"I still would have been struggling, I wouldn’t have been able to go to school, to get the nursing job I have now—not to mention paying rent, the bills and taking care of my kids," she says. "It wouldn’t have happened without that voucher."

Low-income housing advocacy groups and some members of Congress say that HUD’s proposals will essentially decimate its own program and unduly target the very people it’s supposed to help most. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC), the impacts of the changes would be enormous: low income families in need of vouchers will invariably be passed over by cash-strapped housing authorities who will tend to horde their funds by giving the vouchers to families who make more money. Housing authorities have lost $2 billion in HUD funding over the past four fiscal years and are in the midst of a serious budget crunch.


Digg!

Dan Frosch is a New York-based journalist whose work has appeared in the Los Angeles Times, The Source and the Santa Fe Reporter.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
When costs rise...
Posted by: nanobubble on Jun 6, 2005 6:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
cutting the program that is costing more is such a shame of a solution. It highlights the lack of concern and care towards the people in need, and fails to address the actual issues affecting the Americans in need.

Similar to the retirement and pension issue that is destroying American families today, simply destroying the pension promises fails to address the problem of health care and retirement that is now plaguing America and will continue to induce rot while the actual solutions are not addressed.

Rest assured the criminals of the current White House will not address these issues at their core and make America stronger - they will continue to widdle away the dreams and hope of millions while growing their personal assets like greedy sinners.

It is important to learn and observe these issues and contemplate real solutions and for those who can, to give, while we await sensible leaders of responsibility to replace and restore opportunity to the battered.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: When costs rise... Posted by: SaraO
How can folks...
Posted by: CLB on Jun 6, 2005 8:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
raise awareness and help fight this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Race to the Bottom Looks Like A Land Rush"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jun 6, 2005 9:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Let's see: we'll force down wages by letting in illegal...er...undocumented aliens, export jobs to countries where wages are 10 cents on the dollar, let companies steal from their own pension plans, "reform" away 30% of Social Security benefits, and give big tax breaks to corporations and the wealthy who invest in them. Oh, and we'll let HUD (which now should be renamed, 'Dept. of Homelessness and Underprivelaged Decimation') destroy its own housing program for the poor. With all of these changes, corporations will benefit from even lower tax burdens, the well-off will have more money to spend to shore-up the consumer economy, and the money saved will stave off America's socio-economic collapse for a few more years.

What a business plan. Of course, we run the risk of ending up like some other countries, where even middle-management executives have to live in guarded fortresses and travel to work in helicopters or armor-plated vehicles, and where kidnapping for ransom is the new national sport. But what the hell; at least a few of us will still have enough money to warm our greedy little hearts. For as for the rest of them? Let 'em eat cake. . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Culture of Life
Posted by: johnsh on Jun 6, 2005 9:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Amerikan Motto has always been; LOVE AMERICA, HATE AMERICANS!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Juxtaposing this...
Posted by: Meta4Life on Jun 6, 2005 9:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... with the text from Bill Moyers' speech also here on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org/story/22163 if you surfed in from elsewhere) gives me context for the legislation I wouldn't otherwise have had. The poor and disenfranchised come home after working 80 hours a week, eat their highly processed foods (i.e. affordable but unhealthy) and watch the glitterati on TV telling them how great America is while the rich continue to rob them blind.

Oh beautiful for spacious skies... Jesus. I don't even have the old comfort zone of blaming Republicans solely. Big money Democrats are in on it too. Can it be that I've missed the proper "framing" for this all along? It isn't "Democrats" vs. "Republicans." It's the "haves" vs. the "have nots."

A bit of French Revolution, anyone?

Metaphors For Life -- and Living

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hyenas
Posted by: nakis on Jun 6, 2005 12:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can hear the laughter of the hyenas even now.

The neocons/Republicans have been working diligently on that gap between the rich and the poor. When Junior got into the White House he set up every federal agency with hyenas to devour the corpses(including our intelligence agencies). Every agency that is supposed to serve the people is now serving the wealthy elite. You see people of good conscience suing these agencies trying to defend the American populace.
And the strange thing is the subversion these neocons are pulling off, including feeding on themselves, is being fought against by their own. These policies of feeding ever more voraciously on the people are being seen for the stupid acts they are and other wealthy elites who wish to continue into the future are fighting back. They know these policies are failing. It is hurting their profits so they are either fighting against or working around this administration.
Just how stupid is stupid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush's "Wealthy" and Section 8
Posted by: TheySayImUnamerican on Jun 6, 2005 2:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I recall correctly, not so long ago W made a statement about "wealthy americans, that is, those making more than $20,000 per year." I realize that 60% of the median income is still a little bit short of that $20,000 mark, but it's nice to know that if things continue on this track I can be wealthy and get some help with the rent.
Just when you think things can't get more ridiculous....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Switch & Bait:
Posted by: dennyduke@earthlink.net on Jun 6, 2005 5:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It used to be that the government stole from the not-rich & gave to the rich.

Now they give to the rich first and then steal from the not-rich. They created this fiscal crisis by giving money they borrowed on our card to their rich accomplices, in the form of tax cuts and huge no-bid contracts, not to mention the windfall profits to oil & death merchants with their criminal religious & business wars, so now they "have no choice" but to steal more from the easiest people to rob.

We need to fire them all & take our country back. See my other posts this article for a way to get involved.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Living History
Posted by: dlf on Jun 10, 2005 4:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
History tells us that Affirmative Action was meant to be a reparation (for Blacks) for years of subjugation, within 10 years the courts ruled that U C Berkley was guilty of reverse discrimination. That amounted to the only reparation for Black's condition in this country being a give back. Americans failure to read and understand the history of race in this country contributes to the same issues being revisited over and over.

When a country has no idea about the history of Federal housing, and how it was implemented for the benefit of white people only, tells me that we have come only steps further than where we started. This information is available all over the web and in books. If people really cared they would find out that their/our government has had a plan from the beginning. Because of unforeseen and sometimes seen events, they have had to tweek the plan, but essentially it has remained true to it's core principle, to keep Black people from attaining the rights of citizenship.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The War In America..
Posted by: tbastien06 on May 31, 2006 9:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's funny how we encourage our men to go over seas to fight in a war that was created by a man with no dignity or integrity but forget to tell them that the fight is still here in america. At first I use to think that section 8 was a way to keep the minorities in their area and in their place, until one day I had to become a section 8 recipient. Section 8 was a break for me, being a minority and a mother of four and Even with a husband I still needed a helping hand to keep me and my family from being another homeless statistic. Me and my husband was able to work and support our kids giving them a better life then we both had. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to receive a voucher, because it taught me how to be more independant and gave me a sense of worth. I can not speak for everyone but I can say in my opinion that taking the Section 8 away will not only leave the less fortunate families without help and aid but it will certainly tear this nation apart because so many people depend on this program. For some time now the black community has stayed quiet and watched as the goverment supported illegal import of aliens to the united states, watch them pass out minority grants to them to start there own business and also give them monies to purchase a home. When there are millions of minority citizens born and raised here that can't even get public housing. Where are our grants? This devistation will cause the black community to act in outrage and World War 3 will not be in a foriegn country but in our back yards. If the goverment wants to service minorities, then why not look to the slums they call projects and ghettos that they stick us in to keep us out of corprate americans hair. Black americans are still living poor and depending on the system more because these assets are not giving to us as freely as they are to those from other countries. If HUD wants to focus on something then they should focus on whats actually going on inside of the program. They say this program is to give poor families a chance to live in safe communities, but if the truth be told they allow anyone to put there houses on section 8 that are most all in the ghetto's and ran down. Focussing on the real problems at hand will allow cut backs on a lot of money. Instead of allowing SLUM LORDs to jack up there rent in shabby areas, they should build there own communities in nicer ones. That way the program will have a better success rate and shorter waiting lists. An area a person lives in drives there success. If you live in a nasty run down crime infested area then there is no drive or strive to move forward. But if you place a poor individual in an area where they can grow and live in peace then they will become model citizens. Less fortunate americans are always insearch for better but if they feel trapped in a lowsy area then its like they are working for nothing. The Problem lies within the program, efficient budget cuts should be with the employees because half of the housing athourities are hiring these people who don't really want to work and those with nasty attitudes. Why not offer the housing athourity positions to the families that you help, they have more in common with the new faces coming into the program because they too are from a poor back ground. Utilize the system and make it work for you! This is another way to make budget cuts. Customer satisfaction goes a long way and if the attitude of the employees are not in the best interest of the customer then the company itself suffers. HUD should remember it was the poor people that alotted this opportunity and without the poor people HUD is just another morgage company thats out for the money and not the well being of the people. Its a Good opportunity with a lot of room for improvement. Giving a person a chance to have a place they can call home is the best gift anybody could receive but when it's deadend then the consequences are great. HUD the goal was to help needy families.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]