Introduction
According to John and Paul (174), it has always been the most important thing in every American adult to own a home of their own. It is reported that over years most Americans with such unfulfilled dreams have ended up paying 30% out of their meager income towards the cost of housing. Many Americans believe that for one to be in line with the so called “American dream”, he or she has to have a house of his own. This dream however is still a dream to many as the living wage is too low to ensure a low class American citizen to affords a house of his or her own. John and Paul further report that since the 1800s the federal policy by the American Government has always helped many Americans realize the dream of owning a home of their own something they value as prove of ones success and independence. It is further reported that U.S. John and Paul has argued that Department of Housing and Urban Development considers a house as the first most import thing before one can access other amenities (174).
It is estimated that housing alone costs the American people a whooping 3Billion annually, Anon 3 reports that hundreds of years ago a house was just but a shelter nothing much was to it as opposed to the modern America where a house has to have all amenities so as to be considered as a house. The electricity, cable TV, washing machines, telephones are some of the important aspect of a modern house. According to Anon (3) the quantity and quality of housing has increased conveniently, Housing has thus become a problem in America as the low income earners are not able to afford decent housing due to the increased cost in the building materials and labor (Anon 3). According to Congress (15051), “By Americans becoming homeowners they can be given a more quality life”.
The American government enacted the Act as Wood reports that after the World War 1 the housing problem had been left solemnly to the factors influencing demand and supply to act (2). It was not until 1917, August that Samuel Gompers brought to the government‘s attention the need to enact a policy to look into this problem. The Government responded by forming “a Sub- Committee on welfare work of the committee on Labor of the Advisory Commission of the council of National Defense “ under the stewardship of Philip Hiss. The housing committee was later established and it recommended that the government issues loans under a lower interest rate to the American people so that they can build houses. According to Wood, this came to be known as the War housing policy (4).
According to Wood (7), about one third of all American live in what she terms to as “sub-normal housing conditions”, She further goes ahead to talk about a tenth that live under what she calls an “Cute menace to health, family and moral life”. The New York Tenement House Act of 1987 in an attempt to address these, it was advocated for the inclusion of running water as a necessity in every decent house. The housing policy that was enacted in 1912 during the National Conference of Charities and Correction at Cleveland seek to address the housing policy problem by stipulating all the necessary items that should be include in a modern house namely; “the standard minimum space for the floor, Windows, size of yard and court, plumbing, cubic air space per occupant, cleanliness and repairs, fire space among others. Under the Housing policy is the social welfare requirement for each family to live in a health surrounding, safe and sanitary home ,Modern and sanitary toilet for its exclusive use, pure and ample running water in each house, adequate ventilation and sunlight, fire protection ,privacy ,collection of all waste materials adequately among others. Wood says that the policy further states that the every family should receive be availed this at a cost not exceeding 20% of their income” (7, 8, 9).
The American Government’s Housing policies and the strategies it has employed in bridging the inequality gap towards the attainment of decent housing
Since the 1880 America has witnessed a vast range of Housing legislation, According to Mason Congress negotiated and debated on the first housing legislation that was comprehensive in nature. Doan (125) reports that the first housing policy that had been a brain child of Cranston Gonzalez was passed and assented to by the then American president on November of 1990.It entailed the government’s commitment in the provision of houses under a subsided rate. The bush administration also put in place effective measures to insuring the success of the Government initiated Federal Housing Administration Mortgage insurance (FHA).President Bush also enacted the HOME Investment Partnership Act (Title 11),this was a grant that was sponsored by the liberal proponents of the Bush’s regime. HOME is a program grant intended at assisting local government and the state to prove cheap and Affordable housing. The fund is further used in the rehabilitation and construction of rental, ownership and tenant-based rental affordable houses (Doan 125).This Act also provided for the provision of assistance for housing to the disadvantages persons such as the homeless and others with special needs. Mason, pp 126 further reports that the Act provided for the modernization and operation subsidies on public housing, this included other programs by the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the handicapped and the elderly thus elevating it to rental assistant and capital grant from a loan program. Mason (127) also talks about the decline in home ownership between 1980 and 1990 among the new buyers. It is also prudent to note that this housing problem was as a result of; an increase in the ratio of rent as compared to income on the side of those renting. Mason gives the figure as 85% drop in the median income renters to that of homeowners in 1950 to about 70% in 1960, and 55% in 1989 (Doan 127).
This policy on housing increased people’s income in 1960-1989 at about 13% for renters as compared to the 50% on the homeowner’s side. It’s further reported that by 1989 about 22% of the population that rented houses was still living below the poverty line. This situation was looked into by the provision of access to non-cash income such as food stamps, Medicaid and school lunches (Doan 127,128).The National housing policy has opened the doors of co-operation between the private and public enterprises that provide housing. Weiss views the success in the 1940s and 1950s American Public policy on the expansion of homeownership as being the greatest. He adds that when the post World War 1 campaign dubbed “Own Your Own Home “was kick started only a third of the American households owned land. It is reported that the presidents Truman, Roosevelt and Hoover form the mid 1990 to the early 90s initiated, series of financing housing, construction, insurance, appraisal, land development, planning and income generation, post W.W.II pent-up market demand aimed at promoting a record breaker in household ownership and regulation. It reported that there was an increase of in House ownership from 1940s 20% to 1960s 60% by U.S non-farm owners. (Doan 127,128).Further statistics by Weiss homeownership rose by 4% in the period between 1960 and 1980.It hit an all time record in 1980 with a 65.5% increased. Marc goes ahead to add that during the Regan and Bush regimes this increase in housing ownership hit a snag with an estimated lag of about 12 years. This was about 64.1% in 1992 (Weiss).
According to the Weiss in 2001 the millennium housing commission was formed to look into the lack of decent, affordable, sufficient quality housing in America. It however produced a report that disfavored the government, as it reported that the government was reluctant to contribute to the kitty that would ensure that Americans are sufficiently, decently and provided with quality housing. Weiss further reports that during President Clinton’s regime he was able to enact 3 notable housing policy initiatives that are still significant to date. These policies include the; National homeownership strategy that was aimed at lowering regulatory barriers to increase the construction of houses. This strategy furnished aspiring home owners in America with the knowledge they needed to access loans and mortgages. This policy further assisted the low income earner by helping them access mortgages at a lower interest rate something that had last been witnessed in 1980 and thus helped in bridging the inequality gap between the rich and poor Americans, this is true since poor, inadequate or lack of access to good housing is an indicator of poverty. Weiss quotes President Bill Clinton’s proclamation speech of the June 5, 1995 as a National Homeownership Day as follows;
“Throughout the more than 200 years since our nation was founded, Americans have embraced the dream of homeownership, strengthening families, establishing communities, and fostering prosperity. Homeownership is the cornerstone between government and industry; the doors of homeownership have been opened to millions of Americans and the United States is the one of the first countries in the world to make homeownership a reality for a majority of its people” (Weiss).
Weiss also talks of yet another Housing policy by the Clinton administration, the continuum of care concept. He adds that this phenomenon of the urban homeless came into play around 1980; this was as a result of the collapse in the federal government’s effort to provide housing, despite the local governments relentless efforts to increase its support for housing, it all become fruitless when the economic recession set in. Weiss further reports that an estimated 600’000 sleep on the streets around several cities in America. This policy was enacted so as to try and provide the homeless with temporary night shelter. The problem arises in that the homelessness is not the major problem but rather the poverty levels, mental problems; drug abuse among others. Weiss further gives praises the Clinton Policy on homelessness and the continuum of care as a success being a success to a larger extent. He cites that during Clintons regime there was an increase in the federal support for local government and the state homeless programs and to the not for profit organizations that supported the homeless by the Housing and Urban Development committee (HUD). According to Wess, “It also initiated long term integrated comprehensive strategies streamlining both private and public interventions that included long-term and transitional housing that was also affordable, job placement of trained homeless people to a number of education, health and human related service activities”. Weiss also reports that the Federal government’s budget towards the programs to address the homeless increase by three times. It is estimated that the number of the homeless persons receiving care rose to about 14 times more in the period around 1990.Weiss notably points out that the Continuum of care approach success earned it the prestigious Innovations in American Government Award of the Ford Foundation conferred by the Harvard University (Weiss).
The HOPE VI program aimed at Transforming public housing is yet another of the Housing policies that has succeeded in America. According to Wess, “Clinton and his Administration created this policy basing on the 1992 survey report by the National Commission on Severely Distressed Public Housing where through this report evidence came out that about 100,000 public housing units were severely distressed in America from the total 1.4 million units”.
It was reported that the housing problem was mostly felt around the high-rise blocks in the heart of the city. “This policy by President Clinton was geared towards demolishing and replacing all the 100,000 units with more livable, mixed income, mixed use, attractive low density communities” ( Weiss). Weiss further adds that under the stewardship of “Secretary Cisneros”, The Housing and Urban Development commission embarked on the design philosophy and planning the movement that was to be known as the” New Urbanism”. It is reported that each HOPE VI project only qualified for 50million dollars from the Housing and Urban Development Kitty. The aim of this project was to breakup the densely populated and isolated low income American’s totally separated from the Metropolitan economy, Mainstream city and society both socially and physically. Weiss continues by writing that the major aim of this project was to re-integrate the residents in public housing with their counter-parts in urban areas. It reported that the HOPE VI initiative of demolishing the 100,000 dilapidated public housing units was achieved.By so doing the HOPE VI housing policy under the Clinton Administration was able to provide the low income earners with decent, attractive, mix-use house units and thus transforming the once defaced community into a “Livable community” (Weiss).
The government’s achievement and failures on the housing policy
It is reported that housing policy that gave birth to the HOPE VI project had outlived its usefulness when it lost the political backing of the conservative who never cared about improving the housing conditions among the low income earners. Weiss reports that this project further increased the Homelessness phenomena as it mostly built modern housing units that become a bit expensive to the former dwellers in the demolished units. As if that is not enough he goes ahead to write about how several people that had been relocated by the demolition of the dilapidated housing units under the Clinton initiated HOPE VI project, were rendered homeless as it came to be discovered that a group of families had not been assigned a housing unit despite the completion of all the 100,000 housing units. Weiss also reported that the HOPE VI project was further paralyzed when the 2005 President Bush’s republican budget cut funding to the same. It is further argued that low income groups began joining arms so as to lobby the Congress to provide funds for the renovation of the existing public housing units rather demolishing them and replacing them with modern units. They also advocated for the budgetary allocation for the building of public housing units that were purely for low income earners. This would combined with the political pressure from the conservative not forgetting the budgetary cut to the HOPE VI kitty dealt a knock-out blow to the Clinton initiated HOPE VI housing project (Weiss)
Way forward towards achieving a full fledged decently housed nation
It is prudent to note that the housing policies to improve housing have outlived their usefulness and thus they need to be reviewed and revised so as to re-strategize on how to provide more modern affordable housing to the American Citizen t by the government. The Obama administration is in the process of reviewing and restructuring where necessary the housing policies as follows.
Ronald has argued that the Obama administration has embarked on steps to deter ownership, it is further reported that his administration aims at reviewing afresh all the renting policies related to housing, the main goal of this planned review of the policy is to ensure that they come up with what Ronald has referred to as an “affordable housing”. What this actually means is that more tax payer subsidized housing will be provided. It was reported that demand for housing has surpassed supply of the same by 3million a problem that has prompted the Obama administration to drum up more support for an increase in the federal funding so as to bridge the demand, supply housing gap (Ronald).
Conclusion
In conclusion, as Dr. Weiss quotes Catherine Bauer in her famous article on “The Dreary Deadlock of Public Housing” in Architectural Forum, where she states: “But public housing, after more than two decades, still drags along in a kind of limbo, continuously controversial, not dead but never more than half alive.”, (Weiss).It is thus prudent to note that the American housing problem and policy to address it that began in the 1920 with the federal government funding from the American Presidents Nixon, Roosevelt, Truman and Bush’s administrations to the Homelessness and the Continuum of Care Initiative, The Hope VI Program to Transform Public Housing and National Homeownership Strategy all under President Clinton. Housing is still a thorn in the flesh of the American people to-date as the cost of building materials is on the increase with the rising standards of living and the climatic changes that have greatly frozen the economy it thus calls for reviews and subsequent restructuring of this policies on housing if cheap affordable modern housing is to be accessed they all Americans regardless of their financial status.
Work Cited
Anon. Housing Problem in America. Read Books, 2009.
Congress .Congressional Record, Volumes 109-122; Volumes 1963-1966 Congress: 2003: 15051
Doan, Mason C. American housing production, 1880-2000: a concise history, University Press of America, 1997
Ronald, Utt Obama’s Emerging Housing Policy: Will Ideology Trump Opportunity? Web.
Weiss, Marc A. National Housing Policy in the U.S. for the 21st Century. Web.
Wood, Edith E. The Housing of the Unskilled Wage Earner; America’s Next Problem. General Books LLC, 2009.