Substandard Housing: Suffering in the Abstract

By DON ROLLINS

If you think the term substandard housing refers to shag carpet and a noisy neighbor, chances are you’ve never seen substandard housing.

In actuality it’s a catch-all way to describe conditions no human should have to endure: mold, sewage backups, rodent and insect infestation, mildew, radon exposure, gas leaks, excessive heat or cold, lead-based paint — pretty much anything and everything guaranteed to make people chronically anxious, even sick in their own homes.

All this suffering comes courtesy of three primary offenders: unaccountable government agencies, unregulated corporate opportunists and unresponsive private owners. Taken together these entities account for about 7.7 million Americans living below the poverty line, yet spending over half their income on rented housing.

As with most things related to wealth and wealth inequality, there’s also a racial component to all this. Black people represent 13% of the population yet account for 40% of renters in public housing, the majority with incomes at or below $20,000 per year. Clearly skin pigment and zip codes are once again at play.

At least two other segments of society suffer in greater proportion than their numbers: financially at-risk seniors and those living with disabilities. The model used to support these populations is contained in Section 8 of the federal Housing Choice Vouchers program, wherein renters in privately owned units receive government vouchers based on their incomes.

The problems with this New Deal-era system are many, none more dire than the competition for even substandard housing in a decidedly owners’ market. As a result, in places across the nation the backlogs can be as long as five years, making it all but impossible for applicants to plan the rest of their lives, let alone claw their way out of poverty.

The all too common result is being on an indeterminate waiting list, hoping for a shot at an apartment that might send you to the ER.

Not surprisingly, Democratic leaning cities are being more proactive than others. An example is Chicago, where a working group was created to better process renters’ work orders and complaints. Other remedies include stepping up city inspections of all rentals, and assigning stiff fines to owners and managers that fail to meet stricter codes.

San Francisco is taking similar measures, including increased protection for renters at risk of eviction for reporting health and structural violations.

Seen from the macro-level, the immense financial costs incurred by substandard housing should drive conservatives to double the $40 billion Biden has proposed for improving public housing. This is yet another case for expanding, not contracting the 21st century social safety net.

As for progressives, their best play is to continue locating substandard housing as the moral and racial blight it is. Only then can we humanize what is for the rest of us just suffering in the abstract.

Don Rollins is a Unitarian Universalist minister living in Hendersonville, N.C. Email donaldlrollins@gmail.com.

From The Progressive Populist, December 1, 2021

Populist.com