What will happen to Section 8 now?

[Wordie]

In light of the further hit to the economy posed by the disaster in NO, and the president's comments about "cutting other programs," will Section 8 survive? The current cuts are already draconian. If not, what is going to happen to all those who absolutely depend on the program?

[MichiganVote]

1. It will morph into an entitlement for the disabled only

and participants will both have to supply more proof of disabilty and rent payments will be reduced. Bribes to officials will, however, go up.

[0007]

2. I've it will take a big big hit.

[Wordie]

3. How much more of a hit can it POSSIBLY take? n/t

[Tiggeroshii]

4. I'm sorry. I'm clueless but wanna know...

What's section 8?

[Wordie]

5. Sorry...an explanation:

Section 8 is the HUD program that assists low income and disabled people to afford housing. It does so by providing a subsidy. The family or individual pays 30% to 40% of his/her income for rent and utilities and Section 8 makes up the rest. It allows people to have stable housing, especially in markets where the rents are extremely high.

Bush, however, is attempting to gut the program. He, as you may have heard, favors home ownership. That's a terrific idea, but many people whose incomes are quite low just aren't going to be able to buy, even with some of the very good programs to assist with home purchases. I am not certain if Bush is really clueless about this, or if he is just following the conservative ideological imperitive to dismantle social programs.

[dcfirefighter]

6. Section 8 treats the symptoms

I all for retaining a viable safety net, but no amount of subsidies can make more room in viable areas for housing. IMO section 8 should be retained, but eventually a more sustainable solution needs to exist.

First and foremost, we need to stop taxing jobs via the payroll tax, and the income tax on the first $150,000 of income. This alone would create 15 - 20 million more jobs in the US (currently there are 7.5 million 'unemployed'). Not only would the unemployed be employed, wages and working conditions would have to improve across the board - or employees would walk to the next job.

Second, we need to ensure the economic use of land by taxing it's use, as a percent of it's rental value. While we increase the property tax against land values, we need to eliminate the property tax against building values: people are employed building them, maintaining them, working in them, and people need them to live in.

These two things would nearly eliminate poverty. Coupled with a safety net that provided for those who are unable to be accommodated at a job and a healthcare system that provided for those with mental disabilities and addictions, poverty would be be infinitesimal.

[Wordie]

7. Interesting ideas...I'm not certain I have the economic background

to evaluate.

I do know, in response to the first idea, that full employment isn't even the GOAL of the nation right now. Greenspan's policy has been aimed at not dropping below 5% unemployment. The idea is to keep inflation at bay. That's a laudable goal, but my thought is that if we are going to go that route, then we need to make sure that those who are affected by the policy are not harmed unduly. I've never read much on what eliminating the payroll and income tax as you suggest would do - it sounds like a big change. I'd need to know more to comment intelligently.

Second idea: you know, that sounds workable. It would achieve some of the goals of many planners, who want to see higher densities as a way of protecting some of the little untouched land we have left. (EDIT: I guess I am just presuming here some sort of mechanism to protect pristine and ecologically sensitive land, and I guess that may be reading in a lot to your idea.) Theoretically, at least, it would reduce rents, while not penalizing owners. In fact, it would REWARD those owners who provided the most units, wouldn't it? Where does this idea come from? Is it yours? Is there someplace I could read more about it?

And forgive me, but I have to chuckle at this:
<snip>
Coupled with a safety net that provided for those who are unable to be accommodated at a job and a healthcare system that provided for those with mental disabilities and addictions, poverty would be be infinitesimal.

The reason I chuckled a bit is that you throw that in there almost as an afterthought, but I see it as a crucial piece, not just for people with disablities, but all those who lack affordable health care. Many people have been working for decades just to try to get that much alone accomplished, and we still haven't gotten there. It is, unfortunately, something that we just don't seem to be able to agree upon as a nation. I say, until the cure is actually in place, we DO need to treat the symptoms.

I appreciated your post. It made me think.

[pop goes the weasel]

10. whoa! A Georgian!

Don't hear much from single taxers since, oh, the 1880s. Not that it isn't an idea with potential....

[Traveling_Home]

12. Can you provide some numbers?

How much is the current budget and how much is the projected cut? In Colorado starting about 10 years ago, there have been some banks willing to finance using Social Security as the basis for the loan. You stil have to have good credit, but lower income and small downpayment loans have been available. I wonder how other places have looked at financing ownership by disabled folk?

T

[happyslug]

8. Section 8 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.

It was a program started in the 1970s to permit private companies to provide homes for low income people. They are Five types of Section 8 programs:

1. Section 8 Existing homes, what most people consider "Section 8". This is run by your local Public Housing Authority (PHA). The PHA agrees to pay the difference between the "Market Rent" for a rental unit (Apartment or house) and 30 % of the tenant's income. The Tenant must pay 30 % of his or her income as "Rent" to the landlord. "Rent" includes not only rent but electricity, water, sewerage, and heat. If the tenant pays any of these utilities the amount the TENANT pays as rent to the landlord is reduced to reflect the tenant's paying these costs (In some cases where a house has high heating costs the tenant's rent is reduced to Zero and I have had some clients who received money from the PHA to help them pay their utility bills for such "Existing homes".

2. Section 8- Substantial rehabilitation - Again run by your local PHA, but this time a Landlord is given money to upgrade his rental units upon agreeing to renting only to low income people with the "Market Rent" being paid by the PHA less the 30 % co-pay the tenant has to make.

3. Section 8 New Construction - This is NOT run by your local PHA, but instead run by HUD out of Washington DC. This is where a private company builds low income housing with federal money and agrees for a period of at least 20 years to rent only to low income people. HUD pays such Section 8 New Construction a "Market Rent" based on inflation (even if the market had declined) since the unit was built. Again the tenant has to pay a co-pay of 30% of his or her income for Rent and Utilities (Utilities being defined as Water, Sewerage, Heating and Electricity). After 20 years such housing can be converted to regular housing upon petition to HUD. Since most section 8 housing was built in the 1970s (ending about 1982 Under Reagan) most can convert. Such Section 8 owners must follow a procedure to convert but basically when asked to grant permission to Convert HUD very rarely stops such a conversion (Through not as popular today as when units first became eligible for conversion, Congress passed restriction but most of the remaining Section 8 New Construction projects get higher rents under HUD's "Market Rent" formula than what such Rental units would get under a true "Market" thus conversion are rare today).

4. Section 8 Rural Housing (Formerly Farmer's Home). This is the Same as Section 8 New Construction but run by Rural Community Development Administration (Formerly Farmer's Home Administration). Basically the Same as HUD but run by the Department of Agriculture in Rural area not served by a PHA.

5. Section 8 Indian and Tribal Housing. Similar to Section 8 New Construction but intended for Indian Reservations. I have no Indian Reservations in my area so I am NOT familiar with this program unlike the other four but I do know of its existence.

For more on Section 8:
http://www.nhlp.org/html/sec8/
http://www.hud.gov/offices/pih/programs/hcv/index.cfm
http://www.hacla.org/section8/home.htm

[Sugarbleus]

9. There's also a "portable Voucher/section 8" program which we

use. UNfortunately this program is being cut and/or held down so that person's are threatened in terms of where they can go with it. We once were allowed to use it nationwide--no more.

In the voucher system (as it has been administered heretofore), a family can move into ANY dwelling that an owner agrees to rent via that program. Tenant rents were based on their income--no matter what the actual rent of the unit is. Odd though, under the "voucher" program, if a tenant has to pay utilities, the rent GOES UP (???)--they "punish" the tenants because the "owner" won't pay for utilities. Under section 8, people could ONLY RENT those units that did not go over the "fair market rent ceiling"--which made it difficult to stay out of "projects"/PHAs because the general/local rental market was much higher than HAs "ceiling" formula.

Tenents in the Voucher program can pay from 30 to 40% (now possibly 50-60%) of their income for said unit--or move. Local Housing Authorities are endeavoring to "scratch" all the former rules and principles from this wonderful program. They've already blended it with regular section 8 programs.

Last time I posted in here regarding Housing Issues/Housing Crisis issues, not many paid any attention. The "housing" problem is getting WORSE not better.

I don't know about other states/communities but in mine, the paperwork has increased to hellish proportions. "They" want to know MORE about us....more details, more nosing around. Saying things like: 'You've been in the program for 18 years' (???) We are a disabled household fercrisakes. Did they expect we would be CURED or something? I've been going back and forth with them for three years. This last year was the worst. They are saying that "more people need housing" so we HAVE to raise your rent. Our rent went from $175 (for a DUMP) to $500+!!<-----this is an entire months paycheck of one of us! I got them to reduce it a few dollars to $483 :eyes: I can't WAIT to see what crap they come up with for this years renewal.

The Housing Advocacy agency I've been working with/getting info from in my community put out a mail stating that the "goal" of the Housing Authorities/HUD is to eliminate the poorest of the poor and give vouchers to the working lower MIDDLE CLASS!! If that's not a crisis I don't know what is! A so-called "project" for the very low income families in our area turned out the poorest tenants and started renting to mid-level working class--who never needed assistance before the 1990s; Calling it a "lowered rent" complex where the families now drive MERCEDES and SUVS!!

In the flyer I got from our advocacy org, there is "supposed" to be a positive provision for the disabled and elderly, which is a relief to us (providing there are any "accessible" units left to rent anywhere), but what about all the other people out there at the end of their tether??!! My own daughter at 38 is couch surfing w/o a place to live.

BEFORE BUSH, the HUD/HAs goal was to spread the subsidized families out through the regular neighborhoods instead of coralling them into "ghettos" "projects". Now the reverse is in motion again.

Gone are the days, BEFORE bush neocons and Clinton neoliberals, when a single person could rent, via section 8, a whole, one bedroom apt. In my community, HA has struck that provision and will only rent a studio or sufficiency unit to singles. Hell, when I was a single mother on Welfare for a time, I could afford to rent a cottage w/o a subsidy and have money left over!! Same thing when I started working--didn't have a LOT left over but I could do it. THAT was NOT 100 years ago, mind you.

Now consider those poorer folks who ALSO use Medicare/medicaid with those programs being cut also..... WHADDA COUNTRY! :grr:

[jwirr]

11. I think * will mainly stop further building where he can and

cut section 8 rent vouchers when he can but most of the already existing buildings have signed contracts to provide X number of housing units at 30-40% of income for the duration of the contract. If he can cut the value of their housing and make the subsidy lower it will still be the owners that get hurt. Also he can cut repair moneys so that the owners have less upkeep money. Some states have placed all their housing money in interest bearing accounts and used only the interest for future building - these states will be in better shape than those who spent every cent immediately.