Time to Rethink Federal Housing Programs

Now that a deal appears to be in place for the balance of FY 2011, the discussion will now turn to FY 2012. As President Obama prepares to outline his deficit reduction plan, further cuts to Federal housing programs are to be expected. As a result, families will have to find a way to pay more of their housing costs as local providers struggle to offset budget losses with lay-offs, reduced services and deferred maintenance.

The budget agreement reached last week is expected to receive bipartisan support and is expected to pass. The cuts included in this agreement will be a precursor for what is expected to be deeper cuts in FY 2012. House Republicans released a deficit reduction plan for FY 2012which is expected to reduce funding for the public housing and voucher programs.

To offset these reductions, the structure and funding for federal housing programs need to change in order to survive. Public housing has proven to be a vehicle which has provided low-income families to have a “decent, safe and affordable home.” Former President Jimmy Carter, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Starbucks founder Howard Schultz, and comedienne Whoopi Goldberg are among the millions who spent part of their lives growing up in the “projects”.

To preserve this resource for poor families dramatic changes must occur:

HUD needs to be Re-evaluated

Serious consideration needs to be given to restructure the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). First, its mission needs to be re-evaluated. The department was created in 1965 as part of the Great Society programs founded by President Lyndon Johnson’s administration. According to its website, the department’s mission “…is to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all. HUD is working to strengthen the housing market to bolster the economy and protect consumers; meet the need for quality affordable rental homes: utilize housing as a platform for improving quality of life; build inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination; and transform the way HUD does business.”

It is time to reconsider the department’s role in meeting local needs. As the department approaches 50-years old in 2015, the current budget situation provides an opportune time to look how best to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the department and act accordingly.

Second, the federal entity overseeing housing should have a governing structure modeled after the Federal Reserve Board. Each member of the Board receives a 14-appointment after going through a vetting process. The chairman is appointed by the president to a four year term. This type of governing structure allows for long-term planning, minimizes policy changes which create havoc locally, and minimizes the politics of board appointments. This approach has tremendous political, practical and policy implications and should be carefully thought out. There are many competing forces pulling the department in different directions. A “tenured” HUD secretary can be more effective in bringing these various actors together to work on a sustainable housing agenda.

Change the Narrative

Federal housing programs have an image problem. The public housing and Section 8 programs are considered poorly run programs of little value to the surrounding community. These programs are considered housing of last resort. According to HUD, there are more than 3,000 housing authorities and less than 200 are considered troubled. The vast majority are providing appropriate services to the poor. Unfortunately, perception is reality. The narrative must change.

Public housing has a rich history of providing working families with an affordable dwelling while in pursuit of the American Dream. Advocates have failed to put a “face” to these programs which demonstrate the role it plays in the socioeconomic fabric in society. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is the latest of thousands of former public housing residents who are making significant contributions to society. Their stories need to be the message of public housing.

New Media Strategy

In the age of 24-hour cable and internet the media strategy is different, difficult and complicated. Traditional forms of media to influence policy-makers, i.e., editorial pages and policy television programs have given way to Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rachael Maddow, Steve Colbert and Oprah Winfrey. In order to survive organizations need to understand which news forms are influencing policy and adjust accordingly. While organizations are using various forms of the new media to reach their members and supporters, it is unclear how effective they are in influencing.

Now is the time for the competing housing advocacy organizations to unite behind a single media initiative-- share the costs of an integrated campaign, broadcast nationally via traditional network television, cable television and the Internet. The effort should choose an individual or group of individuals to speak on behalf of public housing. This person should be recognizable and appreciated by both Republicans and Democrats. To be sure that the message resonates with the public, the campaign must be centered on a short catchy slogan that captures the key realities of what public housing means to America.