The Role Of Single Motherhood And Residential Mobility As A Measure Of Housing Stability Essay

The National Law Center on Homelesness and Poverty. “Homelessness stems from a lack of affordable housing. Increasing rents, destruction of traditional low-income housing, and cuts in federal housing programs threaten affordable housing with extinction.”

For the past fifty years the shift from meeting the housing needs of the poor through government projects-based housing to a more individual approach, has been slowly implemented. Housing vouchers now enable underprivileged populations to move from high-poverty, segregated neighborhoods to more un-segregated, low-poverty neighborhoods. Low-poverty neighborhoods have less crime, better opportunities for employment, and more diverse schooling options. Some housing advocates however, contend that housing assistance is unnecessary and is an income subsidy that should be combined with other social safety nets (Clark, W. 2008).

California’s housing situation is severe compared to the rest of the United States. California is included in the top three states with the most “housing cost burdened individuals” (Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, 2015). In a list of 20 cities where rents were highest compared to income, 10 of the 20 cities were in California with Los Angeles, CA topping the list (Dewan, 2014). Opponents might say that households in poverty could never afford housing due to their impoverished state but poverty measures of California show that the abnormally high cost of housing in California makes matters more severe and causes the amount of households that are severely cost afflicted to increase. Furthermore, when poverty measures take into account California’s uniquely expensive and insufficient housing supply, the results show that housing costs contribute significantly to poverty. For example, when housing costs were included in the California Poverty Measure as well as federal Supplemental Poverty Measure, the poverty rates rose substantially (Wimer, Mattingly, & Levin, 2013) (Short, 2015). And when high housing costs were artificially substituted with low housing costs, poverty rates significantly dropped (Bohn, Danielson, & Levin, 2013). And it’s not just the poor who are affected! Even those who are moderate income earners are becoming financially burdened by high housing costs. Those who are moderately well off compared to low income earners are financially burdened by rent costs in expensive cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles, CA (Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University,

In “The Complexities and Processes of Racial Housing discrimination” by Vincent J. Roscigno, Diana L. Karafin, and Griff tester, the main concept of racial disparity and inequality among neighborhoods is discussed, and how those inequalities became to be. They first highlight the wide range of potentially exclusionary practices, through qualitative and quantitative data comprised of over 750 verified housing discrimination cases (Roscigno, p. 162). Citing the U.S. Census, it is found that Blacks, compared to Hispanics and Asians, continue to experience high levels of residential segregation. This is done through discriminatory practices, whether they be by exclusionary or non-exclusionary methods. Even after the passing of the Fair Housing Act in 1988, discrimination against Blacks and Hispanics decreased somewhat, though African Americans still appeared to take part in racial steering, and Hispanics continued to have limitations in regards to opportunities and access to rental units (Roscigno, p. 163).

Families require stabilized housing that is affordable, safe and maintained. If they don’t have stabile housing they are moving more often and this can effect the children’s education when being moved from school to school. The parents are unable to focus on the other areas of their lives when they are unable to find decent housing.

Given evidence of the effect of race on housing issues, even as it relates to home ownership, an exploration of the empirical evidence in how it manifests within rental markets is necessary. One of the leading researchers in the contemporary study of eviction is Matthew Desmond. In “Eviction and the Reproduction of Urban Poverty (2012), he combines statistical and ethnographic analyses to investigate the ramifications of eviction on the lives of the urban poor. The primary independent variable in this study was gender, while the dependent was eviction rates as a percentage. Half of his quantitative analysis involved extracting legal records or court-ordered evictions that took place in Milwaukee County between 2003 to 2007 (n=29,960) (“Eviction and the Reproduction” 91). Using addresses, eviction records were merged with population estimates of Milwaukee’s 880 block groups (“neighborhoods”), and yearly eviction rates for each block group were calculated by gender and pooled to calculate annual averages (Eviction and Reproduction 94). Then risk ratios and differences were determined using 3 different samples: all groups with at least 1 male and female evictee, high poverty block groups where more than 40% of the population lived at or below 150% of the poverty line, and hyper-segregated neighborhoods where at least 85% of residents were same race/ethnicity (Eviction and Reproduction 94). While these measures provided reliable and exact measures of incidence and location,

Initially, Matthew Desmond’s book Evicted represents a profound and realistic ethnography about people’s day-to-day experiences of poverty with a particular focus on the outcomes of housing instability within the state. He exploits the evidence from housing court administrative records, excerpts from the news, and different surveys of renters to support his point of view revealed in the book. In his work, Desmond raises questions why the state is introducing the housing policy that deteriorates the position of tenants renting from private landlords and how a person with the monthly income of $628 and rent of $550 can not only provide his family but also survive. In Evicted, Matthew Desmond reasonably criticizes the American housing system according to which most of the low-income tenants are left alone in the private rental market and have no options to receive affordable apartments.

The policy relevance is that President Obama's immigration announcement regarding DACA permits created more opportunities for families to buy homes without fear of deportation but questions exist regarding the possible fate of these mortgages upon the end of Obama's presidency or if the DACA program is recalled. Possible sources include academic articles and interviews with organizations that do housing counseling within immigrant communities.

In Fiscal Year 2016, the area median income for Chicago was $76,900. Because Housing Choice Vouchers are intended to assist low income families, eligibility for vouchers is limited to households whose income does not exceed 80% of area median income, which was approximately $61,520 in 2016. More importantly, distribution requirements specify that at least 75% of Section 8 vouchers must go to households designated as “very low income,” meaning that their income does not exceed 30% of the area median income. In 2016 in Chicago, the figure constituting 30% of area median income was approximately $18,456. Complainant’s annual income, excluding the Section 8 voucher, was $8,796, thus placing her within the very low income threshold for housing seekers. Therefore, it appears that Respondent’s minimum income policy excluded over 75% of Section 8 voucher holders. As such, this facially-neutral policy has a disparate impact on persons with a Housing Choice Voucher as a source of

The educational gap between low-income children and the average American presents a serious problem that has only been perpetuated through government-funded public housing projects. Indeed, this divide eventually translates to a disparity of college acceptance rates and job placement rates. Thus, the academic success of children from low-income families directly threatens their upward mobility. A continued shift toward increased tenant-based housing would give families the opportunity to move out of their economically segregated neighborhoods and choose the neighborhood that best meets their children’s needs. Indeed, despite the Housing Choice voucher program’s current flaws, in each of the case studies, the housing choice vouchers have resulted

The Fair Housing Act impacts all family functions from single to two parent households. The policy affects any family that is seeking to purchase or rent housing. However, there are exemptions to the act for multifamily units referred to as Mrs. Murphy exemption (Powell, 2009). The exemption states that if a dwelling has four or fewer rental units and the owner lives in one of those units, that home is exempt from the FHA. In addition, the economic characteristics of families that are greatly affected by this policy are those in poverty. After the passing of FHA, “the poverty rate rose between 1999 and 2005, in the nation's 100 largest metro areas (which encompass two-thirds of the U.S. population), poverty rates rose by 52[%] for residents living below the poverty line. This was the first time in modern history that more poor people are in the suburbs than the city” (Powell, 2009, p.148).

The utilization of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit or LIHTC has had an overall positive effect on housing for low-income families in the United States. Four key outcomes of the LIHTC are: First, there is less likelihood of segregation within the tax-credit housing than in the government provided section 8 and government-subsidized voucher programs (Schwartz, p. 115). Second, the purpose of the program, which was to subsidize mixed income housing to low and working class families, is provisionally being met (Khadduri, Buron, & Lam, p. 10). Third, through decentralization of the implementation of the LIHTC program the federal government allowed the state governments more latitude in the dissemination of the tax credits to appropriate developers (Furman Center, p. 2). Finally, there is a correlation between the areas where LIHTC housing properties are developed in the impact on the sounding region. This correlation is both positive and negative in nature, but heavily is judged on the region that the LIHTC is built in and as to whether it is in an urban center, suburb, or in the metro areas (Deng, pp. 46-48). These four outcomes will guide the body of this paper about the overarching theme of LIHTC as a policy tool as opposed to section 8 housing or government provided housing.

The new study found that the poor families of the program that chose to move to better low poverty areas inadvertently give their children extremely better odds of escaping poverty. While families that chose to stay in high poverty areas like the city of Baltimore, for example have a very low chance of escaping poverty. The families who continue to live in high poverty areas become victims of income inequality and become frustrated that they are stuck in a rat race of life, they are also anxious about getting ahead and working hard to make a change in their family’s life. Poor families living in wealthier jurisdictions endure the loss of upward mobility in the form of earnings. Ethnicity also plays a large factor in upward mobility.

Each and everyday minorities are removed from their homes. Most times there's no valid reasoning behind this, the majority of the time, they are removed from their homes due to big companies. These minorities are affected in many ways besides losing their homes, they also lose their jobs. This all leads to different outcomes. Gentrification is a rapidly growing problem in Boston and the US in general. In an article written by Beth Treffeisen, whom works for the Boston Media Network, He states ¨More than a fifth of Boston neighborhoods – 21 percent of the 57 city tracts described as eligible to gentrify – have become gentrified since 2000.” This is showing how much of a problem Gentrification because it's constantly costing people their homes

For many Americans, geographical moves are a normal expectation of life. “Thirty-five million Americans had a geographic move between 2010 and 2011, that is, 10.6% of the population” (Milligan et al.). Whether moving for a job or for college, moving can either be a wonderful fresh step in a person’s life or a frightening, stressful experience. As moves approach, people often focus on the positive aspects of moving which blinds them of the possible problems that can come along with it, especially in families with children. Moving has negative effects on children because they encounter social hardships, they can develop mental health issues, and they struggle with education.