Judges as agents of social change: Can the courts break the affordable housing deadlock in metropolitan areas?

Abstract

Nowhere is the chasm between the races more apparent than in the physical division of metropolitan areas between inner‐city poverty and suburban affluence. Thus far, public policy efforts to introduce metropolitan perspectives into local land use regulations have been unsuccessful. The series of New Jersey Mount Laurel decisions lays out a possible path for introducing comprehensive regional planning by deploying the constitutional power of state courts. Relying on the allied professions of economics and city planning, the New Jersey Supreme Court eliminated the legal barriers to affordable housing in the suburbs.

Questions have been raised over courts’ ability to reform local government powers, but many traditional objections to the effectiveness of judicial reform seem to have been overcome in the New Jersey litigations and legislations. State courts can play an indispensable role in solving regional land use problems if they secure the support of community leadership groups.     

Comment on Sandra J. Newman and Ann B. Schnare's “'… And a suitable living environment’: The failure of housing programs to deliver on neighborhood quality”

Abstract

Newman and Schnare provide a useful portrait of where housing assistance ends up geographically. The evidence that certificate and voucher holders are less likely than public housing residents to live in the poorest neighborhoods is encouraging, as well as important for policy decisions. Unresolved in the article, and unresolvable with the data, as the authors themselves note, is the matter of how neighborhood quality is affected by housing assistance. The least popular housing developments have long been relegated to neighborhoods of least political resistance, a fact that constrains most local efforts to deconcentrate poverty. Futhermore, through the tax code, America spends about three times as much on housing assistance for middle‐ and upper‐income households as it does on assistance to low‐ and moderate‐income households. Thus far, we have not applied “fair share” principles either to the location of housing assistance or to its allocation across the income spectrum.     

Housing vouchers versus housing production: Assessing long‐term costs

Abstract

Possibly the single largest debate in the field of affordable rental housing concerns the use of tenant‐based assistance versus project‐based assistance. The accepted wisdom is that project‐based assistance costs anywhere from 50 to 100 percent more than tenant‐based assistance. This premium for project‐based housing is based on a comparison of subsidy costs at the start of a project's life rather than on a comparison of the discounted present value of the costs over the long term.

The subsidy costs of samples of Section 8 new construction projects have been compared to those of Section 8 certificates over a long period of time. The results indicate that the cost premium associated with project‐based assistance may be lower than conventionally believed, around 40 percent, and may get even lower if the cost comparison could extend to longer time periods and could control for the quality of the housing units.     

The Transformation of Israel's Extreme Right

The extreme right in Israel was traditionally defined by its hawkish views on the occupied territories and the Arab-Israeli conflict. The decline of this political camp in the 1999 national elections brought many to the conclusion that the Israeli extreme right had died. The main argument of this article is that the king is dead - long live the king. Despite the popular belief that the extreme right in Israel is on the decline, the second wave of right-wing extremism is already here in a stronger and more prevalent form. By accepting a broader definition of the extreme right, it can be concluded that twenty percent of Israeli parliament members represent ideas similar to those of the European extreme right, especially antidemocracy and xenophobia.     

Deciding how to use scarce federal housing aid funds

Abstract

This paper assesses the major forms of federal housing assistance and compares the relative value of each in meeting the housing needs of the nation's low‐ and moderate‐income households. Programs are first identified and described. A ranking system, based on nine criteria of desirability, is then developed and used to compare the programs. The evaluation system presented in this paper represents one method of determining how to allocate scarce federal housing assistance funds. The subjective nature of the evaluation process dictates that other criteria and weighting systems may be legitimately applied. However, to provide a clear decision‐making framework, any such system should clearly explain its assumptions and rationales.     

Participation in a residential mobility program from the client's perspective: Findings from Gautreaux Two

Abstract

In 2002, the Gautreaux Two housing mobility program provided low‐income families living in Chicago public housing with the opportunity to move to more affluent, less racially isolated communities. This article presents findings on their complex search and moving process. Only about one‐third of enrolled families actually moved through the program ("leased‐up"). In‐depth interviews with a randomly chosen sample of 71 families and an additional 20 “likely mover” families showed that movers fell into four groups distinguished by personal characteristics that made it easier for them to move or by residence on Chicago's North Side.

Nonmovers faced a variety of obstacles, both external (a tight rental market, discrimination, and bureaucratic delays) and internal (limited experience and program comprehension, large household size, and health problems). Also, some nonmovers were too busy with work or school to engage in what proved to be an onerous process of identifying a suitable unit and moving.     

Comment on Kirk Mcclure's “The low‐income housing tax credit program goes mainstream and moves to the suburbs”

Abstract

As McClure's article notes, the Low‐Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program has indeed gone mainstream. Given the tarnished reputation of many other federal low‐income housing programs, this is good news. It is also surprising in some ways considering the many programmatic flaws inherent in the LIHTC program.

As a point of departure, I look at why McClure and others are able to describe the program in a positive light despite its many flaws. I attribute this to the unique political culture of the United States, for which the LIHTC program is well suited. In addition, it sidesteps one of the thorniest problems that have bedeviled low‐income housing programs—the spatial isolation of poor minorities. Until the LIHTC program explicitly addresses this issue, however, any praise must be tempered by a great deal of caution.     

Child characteristics and successful use of housing vouchers: Estimates from the moving to opportunity demonstration

Abstract

Voucher‐based programs have become the most common form of housing assistance for low‐income families in the United States, yet only a slim majority of households that are offered vouchers actually move with them. This article uses data from 2,938 households in the Moving to Opportunity demonstration program to examine whether child characteristics influence the probability that a household will successfully use a housing voucher to lease‐up.

Our results suggest that while many child characteristics have little bearing on the use of housing vouchers, child health, behavioral, and educational problems, particularly the presence of multiple problems in a household, do have an influence. Households with two or more child problems are 7 percentage points less likely to move than those who have none of these problems or only one. Results suggest that such families may need additional support to benefit from housing vouchers or alternative types of affordable housing units.     

The Evolution of Low‐Income Housing Policy, 1949 to 1999

Abstract

The evolution of low‐income housing policy during the past 50 years can be divided roughly into two segments: the first running from 1949 to the 1973 Nixon moratorium on subsidized production programs and the second from 1973 to the present, marked by a diminished federal leadership role and an increased state and local role. After tracing the rise of the federal leadership role represented in the Housing Acts of 1949 and 1968, this article focuses on the development of three important policy instruments that mark the devolution of housing policy: housing vouchers, housing block grants, and the Low‐Income Housing Tax Credit.

The three‐pronged strategy of vouchers, block grants, and tax credits has achieved reasonably good results and attracted an unusual degree of political consensus. A steady expansion of all three offers the most promising path to the “realization as soon as feasible” of the national housing goal.     

“迎法入乡”与“接近正义”——对中国乡村“赤脚律师”的个案研究

在职业法律服务队伍加剧了法律系统与社会生活之间距离的时候,目前在中国一些乡村存在的“赤脚律师”铺设了一条“接近正义”的桥梁。赤脚律师主动的“迎法入乡”,并不仅仅是简单地在农村法律服务体制中发挥拾遗补缺的功能,而且是在乡村社会重建了“法律服务”的概念,即以长远的人情交换而非现时的金钱交易为基础的法律服务。因此,赤脚律师与单求经济利益的黑律师有着本质的差别,他们对中国的法治化进程以及公民社会的塑造具有重要的意义。但由于国家对乡村社会的治理方式与乡村社会自生自发的利益表达方式之间面临着冲突,所以,赤脚律师还面临着一些深层次的困惑,也即所谓“周广立式的困惑”。