Article Abstract:
A comprehensive national housing policy can be most effective if it addresses major issues that increase the cost of housing. The most significant of these considerations is the nation's regulatory system. Several layers of local, state and federal regulations raise the cost of a new home by thousands of dollars, delay or cancel construction of new homes and deny Americans the chance to enjoy decent, inexpensive housing. A housing policy should therefore be reformed to address the subject of excessive regulation and make market-rate housing affordable. Another significant issue that needs to be considered is the Not-in-My-Backyard syndrome, which is evidenced by people who object to growth and construction of new homes in their areas. Lastly, the issue of infrastructure funding should be dealt with because the coffer for essential infrastructure is quickly drying up.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
The 1996 report of Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies states that US households are increasingly divided in economic and spatial terms between high-income home owners and low-income renters. The former are concentrated in wealthy suburban or outlying communities while the latter commonly reside in decaying center cities or poor rural communities. The concerted initiatives of public, private and nonprofit agencies are needed if this gap between the housing haves and have-nots is to be eradicated. One option to encourage people who can buy their own homes to do so is to remove discriminatory barriers. Another alternative is to facilitate housing production and rehabilitation in the urban center. These have the function of stabilizing the economic base of depressed center cities and improving the quality of life for city and suburban residents alike.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
The House and Senate were not able to reach an agreement on housing reform by the end of the legislative session for 1996 even though their respective versions did not differ significantly. Although the House version was more ambitious and broad-based than the Senate bill, the minor differences of their languages seemed to point to the passage of a major deregulatory reform bill. Negotiators for the House reportedly took a hardline position on retaining their version of the bill that Democratic negotiators as well as Senate Republicans involved in the conference committee were eventually alienated. In the meantime, local housing and community development agencies would have to focus on temporary reforms implemented in 1996 while a major reform bill is still being debated.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic: