A practical analysis of shared‐appreciation mortgages

Abstract

When the development of large‐scale public housing projects was discontinued in the 1970s in both Canada and the United States, the policy response was very different. This article reviews the nature of the dissimilar low‐income housing policy paths, documenting the role of federal housing policy in the evolution of a significant nonprofit “third sector” in Canada's housing system; the decision of the U.S. federal government to rely on the private sector for subsidized rental supply; and, with very little help from the federal government, the ‘bottom‐up” attempt to develop a nonprofit housing sector in communities throughout the United States. In Canada, a permanent stock of good‐quality, nonprofit social housing was created along with a growing and increasingly competent community‐based housing development sector.

The Canadian experience demonstrates that it takes time to build the capacity of the nonprofit sector. The U.S. experience demonstrates that there is a great deal of community‐based talent ready and willing to provide nonprofit housing if reliable and adequate funding is available. Canada has made outstanding progress relative to the United States in the area of affordable housing supply, creating yet another small but significant difference in the quality of life for lower income households. The general Canadian approach to consistent national support of nonprofit and cooperative housing can be applied in the United States. Canada's relative success is not based on unique structural or systemic differences—that is, it is a matter of political choice and political will. The United States should look to Canada's 20‐year experience to determine whether some of the mechanisms used to support Canada's nonprofit sector might be transferable to the United States.     

State Health Policies, Federalism, and the Elderly

This article examines recent state health policy efforts forthe elderly and their implications for future federal and stateroles. States have been particularly active in creating programsto address the needs of the chronically ill and in seeking tomodify regulatory policies and promote private sector efforts.Those efforts have involved relatively autonomous state programsas well as programs developed within the intergovernmental system.To meet the health policy needs of an increasing elderly population,future federal policies must recognize potentials for significantstate contributions and seek to minimize actions that reducepolicy innovation, while continuing to address the problem oflimited responses in low-performance states.     

Federal housing policy and preservation: Historical evolution,patterns, and implications

Abstract

This paper considers the evolution and patterns of federal low‐income¹ housing policies and programs over roughly the past half‐century. It begins with an overview of the multifaceted involvement of the federal government in housing — only one aspect of which is its intervention in the low‐income sector. This is followed by an overview of federal low‐income housing policy from the New Deal to today. The underlying assumptions and approaches of these policies are then considered with respect to such considerations as the government's presence and role, its targeting of assistance, and the selection of subsidy levels and vehicles. The paper concludes with a brief review of the implications of the historical record for future policy.     

The convergence of nonequity housing models in Canada: Changes to housing policy since 1990

Abstract

This study examines the impact of housing policy convergence on the nonequity housing system in Ontario, Canada. Ontario has four distinct nonequity housing models— public, nonprofit cooperative, municipal nonprofit, and private nonprofit. This article argues that since 1990, housing policy in Canada, and particularly in Ontario, has become increasingly influenced by the neoconservative agenda of downsizing and decentralization of government functions found in the United States.

The findings reveal that changes to housing policy have caused the convergence of nonequity housing models in the areas of management and administration. Drawing on the present findings and on an experimental project in tenant management, this article argues that the trend toward convergence will continue and will likely result in one nonequity housing model in Canada. This pattern is interpreted in light of the neoconservative agenda of both countries that emphasizes private sector solutions to housing low‐income families.     

Public Attitudes toward Climate Science and Climate Policy in Federal Systems: Canada and the United States Compared1

Multilevel governance poses several challenges for the politics of climate change. On the one hand, the unequal distribution of power and interests can serve as a barrier to implementing coherent policy at a federal level. On the other, these features also enable policy leadership among sub‐federal units. In the context of wide variation in climate policy at both national and sub‐federal levels in Canada and in the United States, this paper utilizes an original data set to examine public attitudes and perceptions toward climate science and climate change policy in two federal systems. Drawing on national and provincial/state level data from telephone surveys administered in the United States and in Canada, the paper provides insight into where the public stands on the climate change issue in two of the most carbon‐intensive federal systems in the world. The paper includes the first directly comparable public opinion data on how Canadians and Americans form their opinions regarding climate matters and provides insight into the preferences of these two populations regarding climate policies at both the national and sub‐federal levels. Key findings are examined in the context of growing policy experiments at the sub‐federal level in both countries and limited national level progress in the adoption of climate change legislation.     

Fragmented Welfare States: Federal Institutions and the Development of Social Policy

Despite political scientists' growing appreciation of the ways in which institutions influence political processes, the “new institutionalism” has so far had a limited impact on the comparative study of welfare state development. This article discusses some broad issues concerning institutions and public policy by exploring the implications of one set of institutions — those associated with federalism — for the politics of social policy. Federal institutions encourage three distinctive dynamics: they influence the policy preferences, strategies, and influence of social actors; they create important new institutional actors (the constituent units of the federation); and they generate predictable policymaking dilemmas associated with shared decision-making. Comparisons between social policy development in Canada and the United States are used to demonstrate that while federalism clearly matters, how it matters will depend on the characteristics of a particular federal system and the ways in which federal institutions interact with other important variables.     

Civil Rights,Federalism, and the Administrative Process: Favorable Outcomes by Federal,State, and Local Agencies in Housing Discrimination Complaints

Some theorists argue that cooperative intergovernmental relations are critical to policy implementation in the United States. This assertion is explored in the context of fair housing enforcement by comparing favorable administrative outcomes in fair housing complaints at the federal, state, and local levels from 1989 to 2004. What conclusions can be drawn from this systematic comparison of intergovernmental enforcement in one policy area over an extended period of time? First, cooperative federalism works well in fair housing enforcement. Second, of special significance, state civil rights agencies resolve complaints in favor of complainants nearly as often as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and localities sometimes do so even more frequently.     

Institutions and Ideology: Sources of Opposition to Federal Regulation of Child Care Services in Canada and the United States

This article explores the impact of federal political arrangements and conservative ideology on provisions for regulating child care services embodied in the major proposals for child care legislation under consideration in Canada and the United States during the late 1980s. The initial contrast between the non-centralized approach taken in Bill C-144 (Canada) and the more centralized approach originally proposed in the Act for Better Child Care Services (United States) was a function of differences in the two countries' federal systems. However, conservative preferences and pressures contributed to the eventual adoption of a non-centralized approach in both countries. Federalism facilitated this expression of conservative ideology by providing supporters of a non-centralized approach with resources (constitutional and institutional) with which to pursue their policy preference, and a political rhetoric with which it could be justified.     

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING POLICY AND FEDERALISM

There are widespread misperceptions about the way in which American federalism has worked in the past and is working now. One is the belief that since the 1930s, the federal government has engaged in many new activities. Another misperception is that liberals support centralization and conservatives, decentralization. Actually, most Americans tend to be pragmatic. The vitality of this American pragmatism is seen in state economic development policies. States have provided leadership in initiating new economic development programs in such areas as foreign trade and enterprise zones. Four major patterns in American federalism characterize the emergence and development of most of these programs: responsiveness, elitism, pluralism, and experimentation. Implications for employment and training policy are examined.     

The Provision of Highways in Canada and the Federal Government

This article presents the role of the Canadian federal governmentin the provision of highways since 1867, describes the CanadianNational Highway System, and presents 1989–1998 data onhighway-related revenues and expenditures by the governmentsin both Canada and the United States. The article then examineswhy the Canadian federal government intervention on highwaysis incontestably smaller than that of the federal governmentin the United States. Our hey finding is that the policy ofthe Canadian government in the provision of highways since Confederationin 1867 can be characterized as "no policy." Its interventionsare best characterized by various ephemeral programs, the mainpurposes of which are often other than coordinating or promotinghighway construction.     

Public Opinion on Federalism in Canada, Mexico, and the United States in 2003

This research reports on public opinion surveys on intergovernmentaland federal issues conducted in Canada, Mexico, and the UnitedStates in March and April 2003. In all three countries, respondentsmost often see their federal government as being the least effective,least efficient, and least trustworthy. Respondents from Canadaappear least supportive of their federal government and mostsupportive of their local governments; those from Mexico appearmost supportive of their state governments; respondents fromthe United States appear more "balanced" in their support ofthe various orders of government. Also, far greater regionaldifferences in opinion exist in Canada than in Mexico or theUnited States. Support for more decentralized federalism isfound to be strong in all these federal countries. This researchalso updates long-term trend data for the United States. Comparedwith respondents from previous years, U.S. respondents in 2003showed a measurable uplick in support for the federal government,compared with state and local governments. This support seemsto be a carryover from the terrorist attacks of 11 September2001.     

Housing needs and effective policies in high‐tech metropolitan economies

Abstract

What are the most effective ways to provide low‐income housing to those left behind in new economy housing markets? Do winners and losers in high‐tech competition require federal housing strategies geared to metropolitan differences? This article examines 45 large metropolitan areas grouped along a high‐tech spectrum to see who is dis‐advantaged and to deduce effective local low‐income housing strategies from market characteristics.

Finding affordable housing was, on average, more difficult for low‐income renters and owners in high‐tech economies in the 1990s. Nonetheless, high‐tech metropolitan economies, like other local/regional markets, vary greatly. Sharp differences among and within metropolitan markets make it essential that federal strategies allow local policies to respond to local conditions. To most effectively provide low‐income housing to those left behind in all markets, federal policy should target sufficient resources to severe housing needs through many more vouchers and programs that permit and encourage effective local choices.     

A Historical Assessment of Home Buyout Policy: Are We Learning or Just Failing?

Households face many difficult decisions after a disaster, including decisions about whether to rebuild their homes or relocate to a new area. These decisions are bounded by federal housing recovery policy and the ways it is interpreted and applied. In this article, we examine the use of home buyout programs as housing recovery policy tools and assess buyout policy using policy learning theory. According to policy learning theory, policies should evolve and improve over time. Instead, a historical review of buyouts implemented in the United States suggests that policy learning related to buyouts has been, at best, limited. Rather than showing evidence of learning from one iteration to the next, individual buyout programs continue to reflect unique objectives and features, lacking evidence of an iterative process. We propose a novel typology for organizing buyout programs and conclude by exploring implications of this finding and offering recommendations for moving forward.     

Federalism, Political Structure, and Public Policy in the United States and Canada

Two of the three large countries on the North American continent—the United States and Canada—share a number of similarities that often make it difficult for the untrained observer to differentiate between the two nations. On the surface, the two are structured similarly as federal systems that, by definition, exhibit shared power between the national government and provincial or state political entities.Although there are other important social and economic characteristics of the two countries that help explain differences in policy processes and outcomes, it is the contention of this article that one gets the clearest sense of what Elazar has called thinking federal by utilizing an analytical approach that joins questions related to federalism with some conceptual frameworks of the public policy field. Two frameworks undergird the argument in this article—the Lowi typology of different types of policies and Deil Wright's typology of different models that describe the American inter-governmental system.In both countries, policies must be sensitive to the greater interdependencies between units of government as well as to linkages between policy areas. The mechanisms or instrumentalities for dealing with policy issues are intrinsically complex. It is also clear that the intergovernmental networks that exist in both the U.S. and Canada are composed of an array of actors. The differing political structures of the systems do impact the types of intergovernmental policies that have emerged in the two countries. The executive dominance so imbedded in Canadian governments has contributed to their ability to adopt and implement certain controversial redistributive policies, such as a national health insurance program. By contrast, the fragmentation of the U.S. system makes redistributive policies more difficult.     

The Literature on Nigerian Federalism: A Critical Appraisal

There is a large body of literature on federalism in Nigeriacovering such major issues as the origins of Nigerian federalism,requisites of federalism, federalism versus other forms of association,the number of state units in the federal system, fiscal issues,political parties, distributional issues, and intergovernmentalrelations. However, a number of issues have received relativelylittle scholarly attention, including the economic aspects ofNigerian federalism, population movements and the federal arrangement,language policies, federal ethics, and various critical governmentaland nongovernmental institutions. There is a need to establishinstitutions for the study of federalism in Nigeria and to reduceethnic and ideological biases in research on Nigerian federalism.     

State and local governments: New initiatives in low‐income housing preservation

Abstract

Preservation of the federally assisted low‐income housing stock is a critical issue in housing policy for the 1990s. Most of the low‐income housing initiatives that emerged over the last decade at the local and state levels were in response to changing economies and housing markets, to shifts in composition of the low‐income population, and to cutbacks in federal housing assistance as well as potential losses in the federally assisted housing inventory. The expansion of housing initiatives at state and local levels has critical ramifications for federal housing policy. It is a challenge to the federal government, which has not undergone a similar dramatic change in housing assistance policies. A number of areas of a new “federal partnership” need to be explored.     

Likely effects of devolution on the redistributive character of policy agendas

This article assesses two competing views of the effects federal devolution may have on the future of health, education and welfare programs in the United States. One school of thought argues that devolution of social policy to the state and local level will have negative consequences for the less affluent. A contrasting view maintains that devolution will spur innovations at the state and local level, which in turn will lead to more effective and efficient social programs. Dileo analyzes presidential and gubernatorial speeches over a period of 5 years to assess the state of U.S. social policy. He concludes that the federal government is generally more supportive of redistributive policies than are the states.     

Affordable Rental Housing Development in the U.S. For-Profit Sector: Implications of a Case Study of McCormack Baron Salazar

The question of how to build decent housing that is affordable to lower income households has challenged policymakers in the United States for decades. In response, the federal government has developed a variety of partnership approaches that involve private for-profit developers. Although these entities are currently the major producers of affordable housing in the United States, they have received relatively little attention from the academic and policy communities. This inquiry is aimed at filing a small portion of this gap by presenting a qualitative case study of one of the country’s leading for-profit developers that has a longstanding commitment to affordable housing, McCormack Baron Salazar. Using a modified version of the quadruple bottom line framework as the starting point, this exploration discusses the complexity and challenges facing the affordable housing sector and offers programmatic and policy recommendations that are applicable to both for-profit and nonprofit developers. In view of the results of the 2016 presidential election, and the likely continued retreat by the federal government from supporting affordable housing, the need to better understand, and form productive working alliances and collaborations with, private for-profit affordable housing developers is more compelling than ever.     

Comparing federal institutions: Power and representation in six federations

The study of comparative federalism is often hampered by the diverse range of federal institutional arrangements in practice, as well as the ambiguity surrounding the concept of federalism. This article identifies three main conceptual approaches to federalism – sociological, constitutional, and governmental – then proposes a revised governmental approach that takes account of the institutional effects of federalism, for application in comparative politics research. Minimally defined, all federations are products of institutional rules that create separate territorial spheres of authority. This article compares Canada, the United States, Australia, Austria, Germany and Switzerland along two key institutional dimensions that structure politics in the federal state: resource allocation, and the representation of constituent units in federal-level decision-making.     

Long‐term care reform and the role of housing finance

Abstract

The Clinton administration's recently announced home and community‐based care proposals have potentially important implications not only for long‐term care policy, but also for housing policy in the United States. This article attempts to draw out some of those implications. The first section examines problems inherent in the current “medical/welfare” system of financing long‐term care, which constrains consumer choice by limiting the supply of providers to control costs and by increasing medical professionals’ control over the types of services provided in the name of quality control. The medical/welfare dominance of long‐term care policy has resulted in an overreliance on nursing homes as providers, resulting in both escalating costs and continued consumer dissatisfaction.

The second half of the article looks at recent market and policy developments in response to consumer demand for lower cost alternatives to nursing homes. These alternatives promote more consumer autonomy and control in supportive housing arrangements. A more comprehensive services and housing policy could promote these developments in an approach that combines the security of public financing of supportive services with the benefits of consumer choice, market competition, and legal protections that characterize housing markets. In such a scenario, housing finance institutions—including government agencies, lenders, developers, and investors—could play a pivotal role in the long‐term care debate not only by unlocking substantial financial resources but, equally important, by transforming the provision of long‐term care services to promote consumer choice and autonomy.