Untitled Document
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.
"It’s as if HUD figured out the worst possible solutions to low
income housing problems and crammed them into one bill," says Linda Couch,
NLIHC’s deputy director. "The administration’s goal here is
clearly to save cash. And it’s at the expense of the people who need housing
the most."
The people most in need of HUD's assistance are often black and Hispanic families,
who account for 53 percent of all vouchers a year, according to a recent Poverty
and Race Research Action Council (PRRAC) study. Executive Director Philip Tegeler
says the proposed legislation could create a scenario where housing authorities
are denying vouchers to poor minorities while giving them to slightly better
off white families in order to preserve their already depleted coffers. If the
legislation moves forward, PRRAC predicts that the 131,000 families of color
served by Section 8 could quickly be cut in half, and over the next decade,
hundreds of thousands of vouchers would be shifted away from poor black and
Hispanic applicants to less impoverished whites.
"This lifting of the current income targeting is not race neutral. And
so the bill ends up having serious civil rights consequences," Tegeler
says. He also points to the serious implications of another aspect of HUD’s
proposal which would give housing authorities more power in determining whether
Section 8 families can move out of a particular neighborhood -- a process called
"portability." The proposed restrictions will make it much harder
for black and Hispanic families to move from ghettoes into areas with more opportunity,
further entrenching segregation in cities that are already carved up by color
lines.
HUD spokeswoman Donna White does not agree that the proposal will push lower-income
folks out of the program.
"The bottom line is now they have options. If you make 32 percent of the
median income in your area, why should you be cut out of the program?"
she says. "We think that by giving the housing authorities more options,
more flexibility, as opposed to having follow strict guidelines," housing
authorities will be better able to help the families in their area. White also
claims that this increased flexibility could help cut down on waiting lists
for vouchers, which can last up to five years in major cities according to HUD.
HUD's argument, however, does not impress a number of members of Congress who
are opposed to the bill. A May 17 Congressional hearing before the House Financial
Services Committee provoked decided and bipartisan opposition from numerous
members, including Barbara Lee (D-California), Julia Carson (D-Indiana) and
Christopher Shays (R-Connecticut). Shays was one of 20 members of Congress who
wrote a letter on Apr. 29 urging the House Appropriations Committee to boost
funding for Section 8.
"While it is clear we need to take steps to reform the Section 8, we can’t
forget how successful the program has been," Shays said in an email response
to AlterNet. "I’m eager to work with the Financial Services Committee
to craft responsible legislation, but am concerned [the bill] simply passes
the buck to the local housing authorities."
Among those testifying in front of Congress was Leach, now 24 and a nurse at
a convalescent home. She came all the way from Ohio because she couldn’t
stand the thought of another single mother having to endure what she went through
without any help.
"If it had not been for the Housing Assistance, I, as a single mother,
would not have been able to put a roof over my children’s heads. My children
would have suffered because I would have had to work all of the time just to
make ends meet to pay rent and utilities," she told the committee. "I
ask that you consider my story."
Dan Frosch is a New York-based journalist whose work has appeared in the Los
Angeles Times, The Source and the Santa Fe Reporter.