Federal Homeless Policy Update
In late September, the United States Senate Appropriations Committee passed a FY 2005 spending bill for the U.S. Departments of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The differences in that bill and the previously passed House version will now be negotiated and the final outcome determined by a Senate and House joint conference during the “lame duck” session following the November election. Although there is much work to be done, advocates can breath a temporary, collective sigh of relief, as the Senate bill includes $20.7 billion for Section 8 housing assistance, an increase of $2.2 billion over the Bush Administration’s request and roughly $700 million more than the House bill. The Senate Committee also rejected the Bush Administration’s “Flexible Voucher” Proposal, asserting that the proposal would “eliminate the current Section 8 requirement that three-quarters of all vouchers go to extremely low-income families who are often the elderly and disabled, result [ing] in these families and households having to live in substandard housing at unsustainable rents or else become homeless.” These encouraging developments aside, the Section 8 program continues to come under heavy assault through funding shortfalls, rule changes, proposed adjustments in determining a voucher’s value, and a host of anti-Section 8 rhetoric from Administration officials.
In the area of funding for homeless assistance, the Senate HUD bill funds the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Grants at the same level as in 2004, or at $1.26 billion. Put in a local context, last year the City of San Francisco’s portion of the total national allotment was slightly less than $16 million. Beyond the funding level and buried in the bill, however, are sobering reminders of the narrow focus of current federal homelessness policy. Specifically, despite efforts by many national advocates to seek Congressional support for broader, more comprehensive homelessness policies that reflect local realities and include all populations of people experiencing homelessness, the Senate bill report includes language that continues to prioritize the Bush Administration’s “chronic homeless initiative.” As it has done for the past several years, the Committee requires that at least 30 percent of all McKinney-Vento funds go toward supportive housing programs that categorically exclude most populations, aims to ensure that Shelter Plus Care units target “chronically homeless” individuals, and directs HUD to fully assist efforts by the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness to create local and state “10 Year Plans to End ‘Chronic’ Homelessness.”
This continued emphasis on “chronic homelessness” perpetuates a dangerous zero-sum game by addressing homelessness in isolation from its causes and by preventing communities from meeting local needs. In 2003, almost half of the competitive grants, totaling $501 million, were awarded specifically to supportive housing projects, leaving little by way of support services, prevention, transitional housing, or housing for families with children or non-disabled individuals. This is particularly troublesome given that housing for persons with HIV/AIDS, housing for the elderly, and housing for people with disabilities are essentially funded at the previous year’s level in the Senate bill, and dramatically cut in the House version. Thus, while espousing the need to target homeless assistance dollars to people with disabilities, Congress and the Administration are simultaneously cutting permanent housing supports for these same populations, thereby ensuring that more people with disabilities will lose their housing and become homeless. Congress and the Administration’s attempt to “end chronic homelessness” and “emphasize” permanent housing through a small set of emergency assistance programs is therefore a strategy doomed to failure. Advocates are encouraged to call their Senators and Representatives and request that they work for more inclusive and comprehensive anti-homelessness policies.
There has been significant progress regarding the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund bill (H.R. 1102). A discharge petition (HR 748), filed to move the bill out of the Financial Services committee and onto the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote, was introduced by Bay Area Representative Barbara Lee, Vermont Representative Bernie Sanders, and Massachusetts Congressman Michael Capuano on Tuesday, September 21. Despite the widespread level of support for the NHTF proposal, including 214 tri-partisan Congressional co-sponsors and more than 5,300 national, state, and local endorsements, the Republican leadership has trapped the bill in committee and prevented it from advancing to the floor for a vote.
The discharge petition strategy is a further attempt to demonstrate broad based support and requires the signatures of 218 Members of the House to bring the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund bill to a floor vote (as of October 22nd, the petition had been signed by 178 Members). STREET SHEET readers are encouraged to call or write their Representatives and seek support for the petition. To find out whether your Representative has signed the petition, see here
Members of Congress may also be reached here, or
here, or by calling the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121.
Brad