As the midnight deadline for public input approaches, New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams is opposing a proposed federal rule to prevent ‘mixed-status households’ – families where not all members are American citizens or have other eligible status – accessing from public housing, as well as other supports such as Section 8 vouchers. In addition to the immorality of denying housing options in an affordability crisis, this proposal ignores the basic realities of these programs' current rules and the broad negative impacts that the change could create.
The Public Advocate urges New Yorkers to make their own voices heard by submitting comments online before midnight on Tuesday.
“This country and our City are in the midst of a housing shortage and an affordability crisis…One thing we should be able to agree upon, however, is that we should not be doing anything that will worsen the problem. However, in addition to multiple other harms, this proposed rule is likely to increase homelessness,” argued the Public Advocate. He points out that under the current system, ‘mixed-status’ families already receive prorated subsidization based on the number of eligible members of a household.
This rule would not only affect people who do not qualify for a subsidy, but it would, obviously, affect U.S. citizens in mixed-status families—citizens will have to either give up their subsidies or separate.
As the son of immigrants, he highlights the cruelty of forcing families to either be split apart or lose their homes, and in response to the argument from some that evicting families from subsidized housing will create new vacancies, said “I reject the cynical concept that forcing some people into homelessness is acceptable, because it “may” lead to others finding housing.”
Read the Public Advocate’s full comment urging HUD to withdraw the rule below, and submit your own here.
Comment on FR-6524-P-01 Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status
I, Jumaane D. Williams, the Public Advocate for the City of New York, am submitting this comment in strong opposition to the proposed rule FR-6524-P-01 Housing and Community Development Act of 1980: Verification of Eligible Status. This rule has been proposed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
I am going to start with an incontrovertible fact: This country and our City are in the midst of a housing shortage and an affordability crisis. Unfortunately, how we, as elected officials, offer solutions to alleviate these crises are matters of opinion that often differ greatly depending on what side of the aisle we are sitting on. One thing we should be able to agree upon, however, is that we should not be doing anything that will worsen the problem. However, in addition to multiple other harms (elaborated on below), this proposed rule is likely to increase homelessness.
According to HUD, this rule, which would apply to Housing Choice Vouchers, Public Housing, and Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance, would “require proof of U.S. citizenship or eligible status for every resident in HUD-funded housing, including ‘mixed status households.’ With this proposed rule, HUD will ensure that taxpayer-funded housing benefits only go to American citizens and eligible individuals for the first time in history.” This statement is at best misleading, and at worst an intentional misstatement of the facts.
Under the current system, when people in federally subsidized housing are of mixed immigration status, the rent is prorated so that the benefit only applies to those who are eligible for it. For example, if there were two families of four (two parents and two children), and the first family consists of one parent and two children who are U.S. citizens, and the other parents is not eligible for the subsidy, they would only receive three quarters of the benefit than a similar household with four U.S. citizens would receive. Thus, the first family would pay more rent than the second family. HUD appears to be arguing that all four members of the first family would be receiving housing benefits, which is not accurate.
According to the Center of Budget and Policy Priorities (“CBPP”), this rule “would force 20,000 families to choose between losing the assistance that helps them pay rent or separating their family.” This amounts to nearly 80,000 people, which includes about 37,000 children, two thirds of whom are U.S. Citizens. As New York City Congresswoman Nydia M. Velázquez recently stated, “This is a cruel and inhumane policy that seeks to force families into the impossible choice between family separation and homelessness. It is designed to terrorize immigrant communities, plain and simple.”
Also according to CBPP, “The rule would disproportionately harm families with children and Latine people, who make up about 86 percent of people living in mixed-status families in the three largest rental assistance programs: Housing Choice Vouchers, Public Housing, and Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance. Among the nearly 80,000 people in over 20,000 households that would be affected by the rule: 96 percent are people of color, including 86 percent who are Latine; 56 percent are women or girls; and 46 percent are children.”
This rule would not only affect people who do not qualify for a subsidy, but it would, obviously, affect U.S. citizens in mixed-status families—citizens will have to either give up their subsidies or separate. The rule, however, requires citizens to prove their citizenship unless they are over age 62. So, this rule’s onerous paperwork requirements could also cause families where all members are citizens to lose all or some of its housing benefits. As the CBPP has also stated, “this new rule would require all housing agencies and participating private landlords to require every applicant to submit documentation, which could jeopardize rental assistance for hundreds of thousands of citizens.” Further, “Research shows that people with low incomes or who have experienced homelessness can have difficulty providing the needed documentation quickly."
CBPP also has found that “[t]he new documentation requirement would disproportionately affect people of color, who are less likely to have up-to-date proof of citizenship.” And, “An estimated 3.8 million adult U.S. citizens lack any form of documentation proving citizenship, and another 17.5 million cannot readily access such documents. People of color are disproportionately likely to lack access to citizenship documentation compared to white citizens.” It is also notable that HUD’s own Regulatory Analysis of the rule states that, “21 million people…do not have readily available documentary proof of citizenship such as passport, birth certificate, or naturalization papers.
HUD refers to the costs of obtaining documents “de minimus” but this is simply not always the case. HUD itself estimates that some citizens who have never had to submit documentation previously would have to spend between $25 to $600 to obtain all necessary documentation.
Going back to my first point, this rule will make the housing crises worse by increasing homelessness. The Public Health Law Center estimates that it could make tens of thousands of people homeless. HUD’s own Regulatory Analysis contains several pages discussing the potential implications on homelessness. HUD determined that the effect on homelessness “may” be offset by other people finding housing because of the vacancies this rule will cause. “There may be an increase in homelessness as mixed families adjust to the withdrawal of assistance, but this effect may be counterbalanced by a decrease in homelessness among eligible households on the waiting list.” Even if this is true, I reject the cynical concept that forcing some people into homelessness is acceptable, because it “may” lead to others finding housing.
For all the foregoing reasons, I urge HUD to withdraw this proposed rule.