News and Commentary
AEI’s Howard Husock provided testimony before the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs arguing for making housing vouchers more effective. First, he argues that the current system discourages upward mobility since “as voucher or public housing tenants earn more income, they pay more rent—34 cents on each new dollar.” To fix this, he proposes that voucher households be allowed “to sign the same type of rental leases as nonsubsidized households enjoy: a flat rent for a fixed period.” Second, he argues that housing vouchers should be time-limited and prioritize young, married couples so as not to “foster need.” Finally, he claims that previous proposals to use CDBG funding as a bargaining chip to encourage zoning reform will not be effective.
In a report posted on Medium, Bryan Graveline argues that inclusionary zoning is not a cure for exclusionary zoning. He recommends that “jurisdictions hoping to confront issues of housing affordability and residential segregation repeal or refrain from enacting inclusionary zoning ordinances” and “refocus their efforts toward repealing exclusionary zoning and offering targeted financial support to very low-income households that the private housing market will not serve.”
In an opinion piece at Shelterforce, Brett McMillan argues that “Gentrification has become a functionally useless term.” He claims this is so because “the conversation continually repackages a set of debunked theories as reality” and “obscures a set of real crises that need fixing, namely, neighborhood-level inequality, the disappearance of affordable housing, and wages that have lagged behind the rising cost of shelter.”
In a blog post at the Brookings Intstitute, Makada Henry-Nickie, Tim Lucas, Radha Seshagiri, and Samantha Elizondo discuss how policymakers can continue to support low to moderate-income households at risk of falling behind in their pursuit of homeownership.
Loading...