Latest news with #DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment
The Hill
5 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Ending emergency housing aid cuts a lifeline for domestic violence survivors
For most people, home is a place where they can relax and feel safe. But for people like me who have experienced domestic violence, an abusive home can feel more like a prison. Resources that help survivors escape from violent relationships and quickly find a safe place to live can literally be the difference between life and death. But right now, we are facing a looming crisis. The Emergency Housing Voucher program, a life-saving rental assistance initiative that has helped over 70,000 households experiencing homelessness or fleeing domestic violence, will run out of funding if the federal government doesn't act quickly. Loss of the program would push countless survivors back to their abusers, force tens of thousands of people into homelessness and hurt landlords across every state financially. Back in 2021, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government allocated $5 billion to create the Emergency Housing Voucher program. It was the first time that this type of rental assistance was made available to people at immediate risk of homelessness, escaping domestic violence and without a shelter history. The vouchers not only came with significant rental assistance, which is essential for people living in high-cost cities with low housing vacancies like New York, but they also provided individualized housing navigation. This service, which pairs a voucher recipient with a housing expert to help them quickly find a new apartment, was instrumental in helping me and thousands of others find our homes. These vouchers have helped house people faster than any other new Department of Housing and Urban Development voucher program — and now, they are at risk. The Emergency Housing Voucher program was designed to last 10 years, but the funding has been used faster than expected due to the significant increase in rental costs. More than 59,000 households across the country, including thousands of domestic violence survivors, currently rely on the program to afford their homes. If funding is not continued, many of us would be unable to make rent, forcing us onto the streets, into an overcrowded shelter or back with our abuser. I know it would be a struggle for my family and me, and for voucher holders in different circumstances, it would be an unmitigated, life-threatening disaster. As our country continues to grapple with the worst housing crisis in decades, this is simply not a tenable position. But the reasons to protect the Emergency Housing Voucher program go beyond the recipients who hold a voucher right now. The success of the program has been, in part, due to landlords willingly participating in the program and renting to voucher holders with the knowledge that the federal government could be trusted to pay their portion of the rent. In New York State alone, more than 5,700 property owners participate in the Emergency Housing Voucher program. If we cut off funding, landlords won't receive the rent they are owed and will be hurt financially, but also, they may forever lose the trust they had in voucher programs. It's already incredibly difficult for voucher holders to find an apartment — it took me almost an entire year, even with the help of a housing navigator — and if fewer landlords are willing to take them, their effectiveness will be greatly diminished. As a result, people are likely to stay in shelters even longer, which costs more than vouchers. Once you've escaped from an abusive relationship, a safe and stable home is a sanctuary. It's a place where you can unwind, heal from the trauma you experienced and begin to rebuild your new life free from violence and coercive control. Housing literally saves lives — it certainly saved mine. But now, that could all go away. We must remember that domestic violence can affect anyone, from Republicans to Democrats and everyone in between. Let me be clear: This is not a partisan issue. We need our elected leaders, from the White House to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), to stand up and fight for the Emergency Housing Voucher program. We cannot afford to let almost 60,000 families fall into homelessness. We cannot afford to push domestic violence survivors like me, who depend on vouchers, back to unsafe situations. The federal government must provide additional funding for the Emergency Housing Voucher program and protect survivors. Daniris Espinal is a domestic violence survivor and an Emergency Housing Voucher program recipient.
Hindustan Times
11-06-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Amid LA riots, Trump's HUD chief stuns Democrats with major anti-migrant moves
The US House Committee on Appropriations held budget hearings on June 10, as part of the Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations process. During the Department of Housing and Urban Development's hearing, priorities like affordable housing, homelessness programs, H.U.D.'s response to housing market challenges were addressed. Scott Turner, US Secretary for Housing and Urban Development answered questions posed by members of the committee. Watch the full hearing here.
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘It's really sad we got to this': Flooding concerns loom in Apopka as hurricane season begins
It was October of 2024 when Hurricane Milton hit Florida. Following its path, communities in Apopka were left underwater for several weeks. 'I don't want a repeat of last year,' said Amber Barrick, a long-time Apopka resident. 'It is really sad that we've gotten to this point, but let's get the long-term plans there.' Barrick lives at the Wekiva Village. As of Wednesday, it all looked normal and dry – quite a different picture from 2024, when the same community was left without power for more than a week, and their homes were filled with water streaming down their hallways. Since February, there's been a border lake project in the works that would address concerns for the entire city. However, neighbors say so far, the plan is just that - a plan. 'As of today, I don't believe the plan has been executed,' Barrick said. According to the City of Apopka, the work should not take long to begin. '[It should start] really soon,' Apopka Mayor Bryan Nelson said. 'I need to get city council approval; if I can get this document opened, I will present it.' City leaders debated the project on Wednesday, but they were not able to reach an agreement about when the project would start. Orange County claims all the details about their part in the project have been defined. 'The county has put in the gauges, has done a study, and prepared all the paperwork to submit to Saint John Water Management,' said Commissioner Christine Moore, who represents District 2. Channel 9 also confirmed that the City of Apopka was eligible for funds for flooding projects from Hurricane Ian. The money—more than 85 million dollars—was awarded to Orange County through the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery, offered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Municipalities could apply for the grant until February, but according to a county official, the City of Apopka never finished its application for the funds. Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Beacon Communities' May Building renovation back on track after federal grant approval
After a challenge by a new administration put a major downtown renovation project into doubt and delay, Beacon Communities expects now to move forward on a package of loans in order to refurbish its May Building property downtown. 'Those deals are moving ahead,' said Michael Polite, a senior vice president for Boston-based Beacon Communities. 'We are moving as fast as we can to get our deals to closing.' Beacon's on-again-off-again saga with its property at 111 Fifth Avenue in the Cultural District downtown began in late 2023 when the company was among the first awarded grant funding through the U.S, Department of Housing and Urban Development for a new program called the Green and Resilient Retrofit Program established through the Inflation Reduction Act. The development firm was awarded a $5.1 million grant to be used to help make the building more energy efficient and sustainable, a strategy expected to include new windows and building mechanicals and HVAC on a nationally registered building located within the Penn-Liberty Historic District downtown. Click here to read more from our partners at the Pittsburgh Business Times. Download the FREE WPXI News app for breaking news alerts. Follow Channel 11 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch WPXI NOW
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The latest GOP push to cut waste and spending: Work requirements
The Trump administration and congressional Republicans are increasingly turning to work requirements as part of a wide-ranging effort to slash spending on welfare benefits - extending GOP messaging around waste and fraud to argue that many people who get federal aid don't deserve it. In late May, the House passed a sweeping tax and budget bill that would impose new work requirements as part of a plan to cut Medicaid. The Agriculture Department is poised to broaden work requirements that already condition access to the nation's largest food assistance program. And the Department of Housing and Urban Development sees work requirements as an 'absolute priority' for rental assistance programs - possibly within President Donald Trump's first year in office - according to an official briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss plans that aren't finalized. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. Specific policies could change as the bill heads to the Senate, where multiple Republicans have expressed concerns over work requirements for Medicaid. Yet the proposals reflect a shifting view among Republicans in Washington about who should receive federal benefits. In a New York Times op-ed last month, four top Trump officials overseeing housing, health and food programs wrote that welfare programs were created to help the neediest but have 'deviated from their original mission both by drift and by design.' Even able-bodied adults should look to welfare as a 'short-term hand-up, not a lifetime handout,' wrote Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner. Meanwhile, Republican House leaders are also linking work requirements to broader efforts to root out fraud and abuse, and prevent undocumented immigrants from accessing public benefits. 'There are vulnerable citizens of this country who depend on the safety net,' House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) told The Washington Post last month. 'The safety net is weakened and is less sustainable when you are allowing these monies to go to people or to stakeholders … and used in other ways outside of supporting those who need it, depend on it and qualify for it.' The proposals have drawn sharp criticism from Democrats and left-leaning economists, who argue that work requirements are the wrong tool for this economy. They say the policies risk dropping some of the most vulnerable benefits recipients - such as people who work inconsistent hours, go through bouts of unemployment, struggle with health issues that don't qualify as disabilities or do unpaid work caring for relatives. 'We have never required a 64-year-old single widow who's taking care of her grandchild to work in order to be able to receive SNAP benefits,' said Lauren Bauer, a fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, referring to the food assistance program for low-income families. 'And I guess that's going to change.' Work requirements for benefits programs have been pushed at various times over decades. President Bill Clinton campaigned on a promise to 'end welfare as we know it' and in 1996 worked with the Republican-controlled Congress to overhaul benefits in a landmark law. The measure ended Aid to Families with Dependent Children - which effectively entitled the poorest Americans to federal help - and introduced Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, known more commonly as TANF. The number of people receiving federal welfare payments fell by half in four years, to 6.3 million in 2000. And the past few decades have given rise to debates over whether the changes worked, especially since measures of poverty fluctuate with recessions and other economic forces. The new policies under consideration could be even more far-reaching. Under the Affordable Care Act, adults with low incomes and no children or disabilities qualified for Medicaid for the first time, marking a significant expansion of the safety net insurance program. The new Republican plan would require beneficiaries to spend at least 80 hours a month working, training for a job, in school or volunteering to qualify for Medicaid. In May, Kennedy, the health and human services secretary, told the Senate that the changes would primarily affect people fraudulently receiving benefits and 'able-bodied male workers, males, who refuse to get a job.' Work requirements are meant to reduce the number of people on the program: Roughly a third of the $800 billion in health-care savings in the GOP's sweeping tax bill would come from the work rules, which would result in 4.8 million people becoming uninsured, according to an estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported by The Washington Post's Fact Checker. SNAP, the nation's largest food assistance program, already carries work requirements. Able-bodied adults between 18 and 54 who don't have dependents must work at least 80 hours a month to be eligible. Those who don't qualify can only receive food assistance for three months in a three-year period. People can be exempt because of homelessness, being in foster care or for other reasons, or states can apply for waivers if there aren't enough jobs in a region. Research is split on whether SNAP's existing work requirements have the intended effects. Bauer, the Brookings fellow, cited a 2021 study of Virginia food stamp recipients that found work requirements caused a large decline in SNAP participation without a corresponding boost in employment. The food stamp benefits 'are not binding disincentives against labor force participation for a population that overwhelmingly has no income,' the researchers wrote. Republicans have said current policies allow states to exempt too many people from work requirements. The GOP bill would alter the rules, raising the cutoff age to 64. It also newly subjects parents with dependent children ages 7 or older to work requirements, though a spouse in a two-parent household can still be exempt. The bill would also restrict place-based waivers to counties with an unemployment rate of over 10 percent: a bar many areas receiving waivers would not meet. A CBO analysis estimates the changes would reduce direct spending for SNAP by $92 billion over 10 years and push 3.2 million people out of the program. Work requirements are the 'right policy at the right time' for those in need and will stop able-bodied adults from being 'idle and disengaged,' Rollins, the agriculture secretary, said in a statement. The path for shifting housing policies is less clear. Most of the nation's 3,600 public housing agencies do not have work requirements. But about 140 are part of a narrow program called Moving to Work that gives local authorities room to test a range of rules that are not usually permitted, including those to boost self-sufficiency. Housing authorities, nonprofit groups, property managers and tenants are eager for details on whether work requirements will be mandatory, how many hours of work would be required and who would be exempt. The HUD official briefed on the matter told The Post that 'everything is on the table' and noted that the White House's proposal for a new two-year cap on rental assistance was another way of preventing long-term dependency. In 2024, nearly half of non-elderly, nondisabled households receiving HUD assistance did not include anyone who worked, said the official, citing internal data. Other research differs. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that based on 2022 data, 60 percent of working-age, nondisabled households receiving HUD rental assistance in 2022 included at least one worker. The HUD official said the administration also supports policies that shift power to local authorities and lets them decide which approaches are best. Within the Moving to Work cohort, the official said around 40 public housing agencies already have work requirements, are implementing them or plan to soon, and that such requirements often improve household incomes and employment. Opponents say an increase in work requirements would fall heavily on people who already have a harder time getting work, keeping steady housing or accessing health care. And they say the loss of benefits would be even more extensive given planned cuts to major services. For example, the White House budget proposal would significantly cut rental assistance programs for the fiscal year beginning in October, in part to shift more power to the states. It is unclear whether those cuts would be achieved through work requirements, since HUD's plans are still in flux. That could amount to millions of people losing aid whether they work or not, since many states won't be able to cover those losses. 'What this indicates is that the driver behind this policy isn't this goal of helping people to advance economically,' said Will Fischer, senior fellow and director of housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 'The driver is they're trying to cut what they are spending on these programs.' A large share of welfare recipients have jobs. About 32 million people who worked in 2023 got health coverage through Medicaid or food assistance through SNAP, according to a CBPP analysis of census data. In theory, new work requirements shouldn't jeopardize benefits for these recipients. But advocates and left-leaning economists say such requirements do sometimes have that effect - in part because enforcing the rules means enough new administrative burdens that people fall through the cracks. In Georgia, for example, just 12,000 of nearly 250,000 newly eligible recipients received Medicaid after the state implemented work requirements. That was in part because people who worked had a tough time proving it to state officials or their work didn't meet certain qualifications. Finally, those against the policies say even people with jobs sometimes need help making ends meet - so pushing recipients to work wouldn't necessarily solve their household budget problems. Homelessness is worsening among the employed, and inflation often falls hardest on poorer people. At Los Angeles's Downtown Women's Center, which works to end homelessness, regular job training programs are some of the most popular offerings, chief executive Amy Turk said. But even those with jobs need help. A report found that in 2022, nearly 30 percent of homeless women in Los Angeles County were working for pay. Monthly incomes averaged $1,186. In Los Angeles County, though, the average rent is more than $2,000. Analysts at left-leaning think tanks, and some researchers who have studied work requirements, say supporters of the policy have it backward: Health insurance, stable housing and access to food make it possible for people to find work and remain employed. They point to Arkansas, the first state to enact work requirements for Medicaid, as a key example. In 2018, the state implemented its work mandate, which led to 18,000 people losing insurance before a judge in 2019 struck down the requirements in a lawsuit brought by three nonprofits on behalf of some Medicaid recipients. One 40-year-old man lost health coverage after incorrectly reporting the details of his employment and could no longer afford his medication. He suffered complications from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lost his job and struggled to find work again. Others worked odd jobs that did not always allow them to meet the 80-hour-a-month requirement, like a landscaper who struggled to get work in rainy months. 'You cannot conclude that work makes people healthier,' said MaryBeth Musumeci, an associate professor of health policy and management at George Washington University's Milken Institute School of Public Health. 'You need to be physically and mentally healthy enough to work, and particularly for poor people, the types of jobs they are doing can create health problems.' Leaders of Opportunity Arkansas, a conservative policy group, said the state's data shows that most people who lost insurance did so because their incomes rose - exactly the goal of requiring work. 'If Congress is serious about restoring Medicaid as a safety net for the truly needy - not a long-term program for able-bodied adults - then policies that encourage work and self-sufficiency, like the one Arkansas implemented, need to be part of the conversation,' J. Robertson, the organization's public affairs director, said in an email. - - - Jacob Bogage contributed to this report. Related Content Black Democrats fume over 2024 while 'searching for a leader' in 2028 Joy, tension collide as WorldPride arrives in Trump's Washington Kari Lake won awards for overseas reporting. Now she has the job of cutting it.
