On June 9, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing titled “Universal Vouchers: Ending Homelessness and Expanding Economic Opportunity in America.” The hearing focused on several recently introduced articles of legislation that seek to expand Housing Choice Vouchers. The Committee heard from four expert witnesses on the topic: Ann Oliva, Senior Fellow, Center on Budget Policies and Priorities; Mary Cunningham, Senior Fellow and Vice President, Metropolitan Housing and Communities, Urban Institute; Benjamin Metcalf, Managing Director, Terner Center for Housing Innovation, University of California, Berkeley; Chancela Al-Mansour, Executive Director, Housing Rights Center; and Howard Husock, Adjunct Scholar, Domestic Policy, American Enterprise Institute. 

Background

Since 2016, homelessness has risen by an estimated 5.6%, with a majority of homeless located in unsheltered settings. Within the homeless population, Black, Indigenous, and Latino households are disproportionately represented. The lack of affordable housing stock has been credited as the primary driver of this trend. The inception of the COVID-19 pandemic has only further exacerbated issues of housing insecurity. While data on 2021 homelessness has not yet been released, research shows that renters and homeowners have been struggling with housing costs, with Census Pulse data indicating that more than 7 million renters are struggling with rent.

The Biden Administration and some Members of Congress are advocating for an expansion of the Housing Choice Voucher program as a commonsense solution to increasing housing security amongst economically distressed households. Currently, only 1 in 4 households that qualify for a Housing Choice Voucher are able to access the program. An expansion of the program that would allow all qualified households to receive a voucher would not only lift an estimated 8.3 million individuals out of poverty but would also provide greater economic opportunity for program participants. Currently, there are several articles of legislation being proposed that would seek to increase or provide universal voucher access including:


Opening Statements

The meeting began with a statement from Representative Emanual Cleaver (D-MO-5), the vice-chair of the committee. In his statement, Representative Cleaver noted that the pandemic has led to an increase in homelessness and housing insecurity throughout the nation and that it is imperative that policymakers pass legislation to increase housing voucher access. Current proposals seek to increase the Housing Choice Voucher program to all qualified households.

His remarks were followed by a statement from Representative Patrick McHenry (R-NC-10), ranking member of the committee. Representative McHenry expressed concerns over the last jobs report and other worries about HUD’s capacity that would result from a larger voucher program. He went on to argue that because the program doesn’t increase the supply of affordable housing stock, voucher expansion would risk increasing rental costs, further disadvantaging low-income households. He continued that it would make more sense to focus on current housing programs, such as rental assistance and eviction moratoria.

Following the introductory statements, Chairwoman Waters (D-CA-43) joined the meeting and called witnesses. Ann Oliva was first to give her statement, which focused on the lack of vouchers currently available. Highlighting that only 25% of households that qualify for vouchers actually receive one, Oliva noted that expanding vouchers to all who qualify could move up to 9.3 million individuals out of poverty. 

She was followed by Mary Cunningham. Her statement addressed Representative McHenry’s concerns about rising rental costs, noting that the housing market would likely absorb significant voucher expansion and that landlords would stand to benefit from a more robust housing voucher program. Aside from her support of the program, Cunningham also told the committee that voucher expansion should be part of a larger strategy that also includes changes to zoning, fair market rent calculations, and expansion of affordable units. 

Ben Metcalf’s statement focused on regulatory changes that should be made to the voucher program. He reiterated an earlier point that HUD should reassess Fair Market Rent Formulas but added that it would be important to change regulations around physical inspection of units and landlord discrimination. He also said that renter counseling and landlord outreach would also be crucial to the success of the program.

Chancela Al-Mansour, highlighted the growing waitlists for vouchers at Housing Authorities nationwide, which in some cities can be closed for years, in her opening statement. She noted that this problem can be compounded by landlords who discriminate against voucher holders.

The final witness was Howard Husock. He echoed the sentiment of Representative McHenry, when he noted that increasing voucher access without growing housing stock would only increase rental prices for voucher recipients. Likewise, he noted contended that many homeless individuals also have mental health issues that may make it difficult for them to be placed in permanent housing. As an alternative, he proposed bolstering Medicaid and creating a flat rent and fixed period for voucher holders. 

Q&A 

Following witness statements, members of the committee were given time to question witnesses. Questioning took on several themes, with multiple members inquiring about programs that would incorporate both medical treatment with housing. In this regard, California was frequently cited as a state that had successfully implemented a continuum of care program but that complex Medicaid waiver requirements, security deposits, and lack of outreach served as a barrier for other states to do the same. 

There was additional discussion on the current emergency rental relief and how programmatic dollars were being spent. Noting the lack of reporting, several members inquired with the witnesses about this issue. Responses focused on data collected by municipalities. California was cited by one witness, who noted that Emergency Rental Assistance funding was successfully deployed statewide. Going off this, there was further questioning on barriers to successful funding implementation. Several witnesses noted that many landlords had been hesitant to accept dollars through the program because their units are rent-restricted. They also noted that many tenants didn’t have bank accounts, which would make it more difficult to access funds. 

This shifted the conversation to best practices for increasing participation in the Housing Choice Voucher program. Witnesses noted that landlord participation is dependent on the housing authority's management of the program. In cities where the program is better managed, rejection rates tend to decline. Throughout the hearing, a number of other topics were discussed including zoning ordinances, incentives for landlord participation, and risks for homelessness. With Housing Choice Voucher expansion highlighted as a presidential priority, the hearing served as a barometer for where Committee members stood on the issue.

This blog was authored by Finn Dobkin, Appropriations Policy Intern.

Policy 
Upward Mobility