The Housing Selection Voucher Program, also known as Part 8, is a federal initiative designed to help low-income households, the aged, and people with disabilities in affording housing within the personal market. Beneficiaries obtain vouchers that subsidize a portion of their lease, permitting them to stay in privately owned residences, townhouses, and single-family houses. This system operates underneath the auspices of the Division of Housing and City Growth (HUD), with native public housing businesses (PHAs) administering the vouchers.
Examination of budgetary allocations and coverage adjustments throughout the Trump administration reveals no cessation of funding for the Housing Selection Voucher Program. Whereas proposed budgets generally included cuts to numerous HUD applications, together with potential impacts on voucher availability, this system continued to function. Congressional motion typically maintained funding ranges, stopping substantial reductions that may have considerably curtailed voucher distribution. This system’s continuation displays its established function within the social security web and ongoing bipartisan assist, even amidst broader debates about authorities spending.
Issues surrounding housing affordability and the effectiveness of federal housing applications stay related. This system’s complexities, together with funding fluctuations, administrative burdens, and challenges to find landlords keen to simply accept vouchers, warrant additional investigation and evaluation. Subsequent sections will delve into particular coverage initiatives and budgetary concerns that occurred throughout the specified timeframe and their general impact on the Housing Selection Voucher Program and its beneficiaries.
1. Program Funding Ranges
Evaluation of Program Funding Ranges is important to find out if the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8) was discontinued underneath the Trump administration. Analyzing appropriations payments, finances requests, and precise expenditures gives an empirical foundation for assessing this system’s standing.
-
Preliminary Finances Proposals
Presidential finances proposals usually mirror an administration’s priorities. Analyzing preliminary finances requests throughout the Trump administration reveals proposed alterations to HUD’s general finances, together with potential impacts on the Housing Selection Voucher Program. These proposals, nonetheless, are usually not remaining and are topic to Congressional modification.
-
Congressional Appropriations
The USA Congress holds the ability of the purse. Congressional appropriations payments dictate the precise funding allotted to federal applications. Evaluation of those payments throughout the Trump administration demonstrates that Congress persistently maintained funding for the Housing Selection Voucher Program, even when proposed budgets steered reductions. Bipartisan assist for this system usually prevented substantial cuts.
-
Annual Expenditure Evaluation
Analyzing precise expenditures gives a transparent image of program exercise. Monitoring the quantity of funds disbursed for Housing Selection Vouchers every fiscal yr throughout the Trump administration demonstrates this system’s continued operation. Knowledge on voucher utilization charges and the variety of households served gives additional perception.
-
Comparability with Earlier Administrations
Inserting funding ranges in historic context is essential. Evaluating funding ranges for the Housing Selection Voucher Program throughout the Trump administration with these of earlier administrations reveals traits and potential shifts in coverage priorities. This comparative evaluation gives a broader perspective on this system’s trajectory.
Whereas preliminary finances proposals could have indicated a need to scale back federal spending, the enacted appropriations payments ensured the Housing Selection Voucher Program continued to obtain funding all through the Trump administration. Due to this fact, based mostly on Program Funding Ranges, this system was not stopped.
2. Budgetary Proposals
Budgetary proposals are a key indicator of an administration’s priorities, offering insights into the meant course of federal applications. Evaluation of proposed budgets throughout Donald Trump’s presidency is important to understanding any potential impression on the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8), and figuring out whether or not efforts had been made to discontinue it.
-
Preliminary Requests and Said Aims
Presidential budgets provoke the appropriations course of. Analyzing the particular language and said goals accompanying finances requests submitted by the Trump administration reveals the meant scope and priorities for HUD and its related applications. Any proposed reductions to HUDs general finances, or particular statements concerning the Housing Selection Voucher Program, are essential for understanding the intent behind these budgetary proposals.
-
Proposed Cuts to HUD and Associated Applications
Budgetary proposals could have included steered reductions to the Division of Housing and City Growth’s (HUD) general finances. These proposed cuts, although in a roundabout way concentrating on the Housing Selection Voucher Program, might have not directly affected its operations. For instance, reductions in administrative funding for HUD or native Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) might have impacted the effectivity of voucher distribution and administration.
-
Rhetorical Framing and Justification
The rhetoric used to border budgetary proposals gives insights into the administration’s perspective on the function and effectiveness of federal housing applications. Analyzing statements made by administration officers relating to the necessity for fiscal accountability, program effectivity, or various approaches to addressing housing affordability sheds mild on the motivations behind budgetary choices. Such framing can reveal underlying coverage preferences.
-
Contingency Plans and Various Situations
Some budgetary paperwork could have outlined contingency plans or various eventualities within the occasion of funding reductions. These eventualities can present a glimpse into the potential penalties of proposed cuts, together with potential impacts on the variety of households served by the Housing Selection Voucher Program, ready listing administration, and general program accessibility.
Whereas budgetary proposals can point out an administration’s desired coverage course, the precise impression on the Housing Selection Voucher Program is dependent upon subsequent Congressional motion. Understanding the preliminary proposals, the reasoning behind them, and the potential penalties is essential for assessing whether or not there was an intent to cease this system, even when these proposals had been finally not enacted in full.
3. Congressional Appropriations
Congressional appropriations are the mechanism by which the US Congress allocates federal funds to authorities businesses and applications, together with the Division of Housing and City Growth (HUD) and its Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8). These appropriations instantly decide the extent of assets obtainable for this system, considerably influencing its means to function and serve eligible people and households. Whereas presidential finances requests set the stage for funding discussions, it’s finally Congress’s appropriations that change into regulation, dictating the precise sum of money obtainable for numerous applications. Due to this fact, understanding congressional appropriations is vital to evaluating whether or not any administration tried to curtail or eradicate the Housing Selection Voucher Program. If Congress persistently allotted funds ample to keep up or develop this system, regardless of any proposed cuts from the manager department, this system’s continuation could be evident. For example, even when the Trump administration proposed reductions to HUD’s finances, congressional motion might have restored and even elevated funding for the Housing Selection Voucher Program, successfully stopping any cessation of providers.
Analyzing particular appropriations payments handed throughout the Trump administration reveals that Congress typically maintained funding for the Housing Selection Voucher Program. This was usually achieved via bipartisan assist for this system, recognizing its significance in offering inexpensive housing to low-income people and households. In some situations, Congress allotted funding at ranges exceeding the President’s finances request, additional solidifying this system’s stability. The appropriations course of includes negotiation and compromise, reflecting the various priorities of various members of Congress. Due to this fact, the ultimate appropriations payments characterize a steadiness between the manager department’s proposals and the legislative department’s priorities. This demonstrates the essential examine and steadiness function Congress performs in figuring out federal funding allocations. A sensible instance of this dynamic is the constant Congressional rejection of deep cuts to HUD applications proposed within the Trump administration’s finances requests, guaranteeing the Housing Selection Voucher Program continued to function successfully.
In abstract, Congressional appropriations are the definitive consider figuring out the funding degree and operational capability of the Housing Selection Voucher Program. The actions of Congress throughout the Trump administration point out a constant dedication to sustaining funding for this system, regardless of any proposed finances cuts. This underscores the significance of understanding the appropriations course of and the function of Congress in shaping federal coverage. Whereas budgetary proposals can sign an administration’s intentions, the ultimate appropriations payments are the final word determinant of program funding. Thus, evaluation of Congressional appropriations demonstrates that the Housing Selection Voucher Program was not stopped throughout the Trump administration, and in lots of situations, funding ranges had been maintained and even elevated resulting from Congressional motion.
4. HUD Coverage Modifications
Coverage alterations carried out by the Division of Housing and City Growth (HUD) can profoundly affect the administration and effectiveness of the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8). Whereas budgetary actions instantly decide funding ranges, coverage adjustments form program accessibility, eligibility standards, and operational procedures, finally affecting program members and landlords. Analyzing these adjustments is essential for figuring out whether or not actions had been taken to successfully diminish or dismantle this system.
-
Small Space Truthful Market Rents (SAFMRs)
SAFMRs set up lease requirements based mostly on smaller geographic areas, probably permitting voucher holders to entry higher-opportunity neighborhoods. Modifications to SAFMR implementation or calculation strategies might affect voucher affordability in numerous areas. For instance, choices to droop or weaken SAFMR necessities might limit voucher holders’ housing choices, disproportionately impacting entry to communities with higher colleges and employment alternatives.
-
Lease Reasonableness Requirements
HUD units requirements for figuring out whether or not rents charged to voucher holders are affordable in comparison with related models within the space. Coverage adjustments impacting these requirements, corresponding to altering the methodology for assessing lease reasonableness or growing landlord flexibility in setting rents, might have an effect on voucher affordability and landlord participation in this system. Extra lenient requirements may improve rents past inexpensive ranges, decreasing the variety of obtainable models.
-
Inspection Protocols and Requirements
HUD mandates housing high quality requirements (HQS) that rental models should meet to be eligible for the Housing Selection Voucher Program. Modifications to inspection protocols, such because the frequency or stringency of inspections, can have an effect on each landlord participation and the standard of housing obtainable to voucher holders. Enjoyable inspection requirements might improve the variety of obtainable models however probably compromise tenant security and well-being.
-
Administrative Flexibility and Waivers
HUD gives some administrative flexibility to native Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) in implementing the Housing Selection Voucher Program. The issuance of waivers or adjustments to administrative tips can have an effect on program effectivity and accessibility. For instance, waivers permitting PHAs to streamline software processes or prioritize sure populations might impression the general effectiveness of this system.
These coverage adjustments, whereas in a roundabout way eliminating the Housing Selection Voucher Program, might have collectively altered its effectiveness and accessibility. Evaluating these modifications gives a nuanced understanding past merely monitoring funding ranges. The cumulative impact of those changes, whether or not meant or unintended, sheds mild on whether or not actions had been taken that might be construed as diminishing this system’s attain and impression.
5. Lease Affordability
Lease affordability serves as a vital indicator of the success and impression of any housing help program, together with the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8). Even when funding for this system stays constant, coverage adjustments or exterior financial components can considerably have an effect on the power of voucher holders to safe enough housing. Understanding the dynamics of lease affordability is thus important to evaluating whether or not actions taken throughout the Trump administration, even when in a roundabout way terminating this system, could have undermined its effectiveness.
-
Truthful Market Lease (FMR) Requirements
Truthful Market Rents (FMRs), established by HUD, are estimates of the typical gross lease (lease plus utilities) for modest rental models in a given space. The adequacy of FMRs instantly impacts voucher holders’ means to seek out appropriate housing. If FMRs lag behind precise market rents, voucher holders could battle to seek out residences that settle for vouchers and meet their wants. For example, if FMRs in a quickly rising metropolitan space remained stagnant, voucher holders would face growing problem in securing housing, successfully diminishing this system’s worth regardless of its continued existence. Any coverage adjustments affecting the calculation or implementation of FMRs throughout the Trump administration would thus instantly impression lease affordability for voucher recipients.
-
Voucher Fee Requirements
Voucher Fee Requirements (VPS) are decided by native Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) and are based mostly on FMRs. These requirements outline the utmost quantity the PHA pays in the direction of lease and utilities for a voucher holder. If VPS are set too low relative to market rents, voucher holders could also be required to pay a bigger portion of their earnings in the direction of lease, probably exceeding this system’s affordability tips. Consequently, inspecting whether or not PHAs adjusted VPS to maintain tempo with rising rents throughout the Trump administration gives perception into this system’s precise affordability for beneficiaries. Lack of changes would sign a lower in actual help offered by this system.
-
Revenue Verification and Calculation
The Housing Selection Voucher Program is designed to make sure that members pay not more than 30% of their adjusted gross earnings in the direction of lease and utilities. Correct earnings verification and calculation are due to this fact vital to making sure affordability. Modifications in earnings verification procedures or the definition of “adjusted gross earnings” might impression the quantity members are required to contribute in the direction of lease. Stricter earnings verification processes or alterations in deductions might inadvertently improve the monetary burden on voucher holders, decreasing their means to afford housing. Any such coverage shifts throughout the Trump administration would want cautious scrutiny to evaluate their impression on lease affordability.
-
Landlord Participation Charges
Even with enough FMRs and VPS, lease affordability is dependent upon landlord willingness to simply accept Housing Selection Vouchers. If landlords are unwilling to take part in this system, voucher holders face restricted housing choices, probably resulting in elevated competitors and better rents within the obtainable models. Components influencing landlord participation embrace administrative burdens, inspection necessities, and perceived dangers related to renting to voucher holders. Coverage adjustments impacting these components might not directly have an effect on lease affordability by decreasing the availability of accessible models. Due to this fact, traits in landlord participation charges throughout the Trump administration present precious perception into this system’s general effectiveness in guaranteeing inexpensive housing.
In conclusion, whereas the Trump administration didn’t explicitly cease the Housing Selection Voucher Program, adjustments in FMR requirements, VPS settings, earnings verification processes, and insurance policies affecting landlord participation might have influenced lease affordability for voucher holders. Evaluation of those components is essential for figuring out whether or not this system maintained its effectiveness in offering inexpensive housing, even within the absence of overt termination.
6. Eviction Charges
Eviction charges function a vital indicator of housing stability and the effectiveness of housing help applications, together with the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8). Whereas the Trump administration didn’t overtly dismantle this system, adjustments in insurance policies and financial circumstances throughout that interval might have not directly influenced eviction charges amongst voucher holders. A rise in evictions, even absent a proper cessation of Part 8, would counsel a weakening of this system’s means to guard weak households. For instance, stagnant Truthful Market Rents (FMRs) coupled with rising housing prices might power voucher holders into substandard housing or areas with restricted assets, growing their danger of eviction resulting from code violations or incapacity to afford the tenant portion of the lease. The importance of eviction charges lies of their means to disclose the real-world impression of coverage choices, even when these choices are usually not explicitly geared toward terminating a program.
Eviction charges amongst Part 8 recipients might be affected by a mess of things, together with adjustments to earnings verification procedures, elevated scrutiny of family composition, and alterations in landlord-tenant laws on the state and native ranges. An increase in evictions might point out that stricter enforcement of program guidelines, mixed with restricted entry to authorized assets, is making it more durable for voucher holders to keep up steady housing. Equally, financial downturns resulting in job losses or diminished work hours might improve the chance of eviction, whatever the program’s underlying construction. An instance of sensible software is the implementation of eviction prevention applications, which might mitigate the destructive results of coverage adjustments or financial hardship. Shut monitoring of eviction traits amongst Part 8 recipients, alongside evaluation of the underlying causes, can inform coverage changes and useful resource allocation to forestall housing instability.
In abstract, analyzing eviction charges gives a precious perspective on the Housing Selection Voucher Program’s true impression throughout the Trump administration, transferring past the query of whether or not this system was formally stopped. Elevated eviction charges might sign a weakening of this system’s effectiveness resulting from coverage adjustments, financial pressures, or different components. Understanding the connection between coverage and eviction charges highlights the complexities of sustaining housing stability for weak populations and underscores the necessity for complete approaches that deal with each the provision and the affordability of housing.
7. PHA Capability
Public Housing Company (PHA) capability represents a vital, usually ignored, part in evaluating whether or not the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8) was successfully undermined throughout the Trump administration. PHA capability encompasses a number of key components: staffing ranges, administrative assets, technological infrastructure, and experience in navigating advanced federal laws. Reductions in funding or elevated administrative burdens, even with out an express cessation of this system, can pressure PHA assets, instantly impacting their means to effectively administer vouchers, conduct well timed inspections, course of functions, and supply enough assist to voucher holders and landlords. For example, if a PHA experiences vital employees reductions resulting from finances cuts, the wait instances for voucher issuance and unit inspections might improve considerably, successfully limiting program entry and hindering its general effectiveness.
The connection between PHA capability and program effectiveness is especially evident within the context of coverage adjustments. If HUD carried out new laws or reporting necessities with out offering commensurate assets to PHAs, it could place an extra pressure on their already restricted capability. This might result in elevated errors, delays in processing paperwork, and diminished outreach to eligible households. An illustrative instance is the implementation of stricter earnings verification procedures. Whereas meant to make sure program integrity, these procedures require PHAs to dedicate extra employees time to gathering and verifying documentation, probably diverting assets from different important capabilities like housing counseling and landlord recruitment. Moreover, a decline in PHA capability can disproportionately have an effect on weak populations, corresponding to aged people or these with disabilities, who could require further help in navigating the complexities of this system. The significance of “PHA Capability” as a part of “did donald trump cease part 8” is about understanding the extent of accessibility. The flexibility of Part 8 is absolutely based mostly on the PHA’s capability.
In conclusion, whereas the Trump administration could not have explicitly stopped the Housing Selection Voucher Program, actions that diminished PHA capability might have considerably diminished its effectiveness and accessibility. Analyzing funding ranges, staffing ratios, and the implementation of recent laws reveals the oblique impression on PHAs and their means to serve eligible people and households. Monitoring indicators of PHA efficiency, corresponding to voucher utilization charges, inspection completion instances, and consumer satisfaction surveys, gives precious insights into this system’s general well being. Understanding the connection between PHA capability and program outcomes is essential for guaranteeing that housing help applications successfully meet the wants of those that depend on them. Challenges to PHA capability, even within the absence of direct program termination, warrant shut consideration and proactive measures to mitigate their antagonistic results.
8. Voucher Utilization
Voucher utilization fee, outlined as the share of Housing Selection Vouchers actively utilized by eligible households to safe housing, serves as a vital metric for gauging the effectiveness of this system. A decline in voucher utilization can sign systemic issues that undermine this system’s objective, even within the absence of overt termination. Throughout the Trump administration, if coverage adjustments, funding constraints, or administrative hurdles led to a lower in voucher utilization, it could counsel an oblique weakening of this system’s means to offer inexpensive housing to these in want. For example, if stricter earnings verification procedures elevated the effort and time required to qualify for a voucher, fewer eligible households may efficiently navigate the method, resulting in a decrease utilization fee. The relevance of voucher utilization as a part of “did donald trump cease part 8” is in its capability for use in measuring program effectiveness. Measuring the diploma of Part 8 Accessibility and the diploma of effectivity.
A number of components can have an effect on voucher utilization charges. Truthful Market Rents (FMRs) that lag behind precise market rents could make it tough for voucher holders to seek out appropriate models that settle for vouchers. Landlord participation charges additionally play a big function; if landlords are unwilling to lease to voucher holders resulting from administrative burdens or perceived dangers, voucher holders face a restricted provide of accessible models. Moreover, the capability of Public Housing Businesses (PHAs) to effectively course of functions, conduct inspections, and supply housing counseling can affect how rapidly and successfully vouchers are utilized. For instance, elevated administrative burdens on PHAs, ensuing from unfunded mandates or employees reductions, might decelerate the voucher issuance course of, resulting in a lower in utilization charges. An precise occasion associated to that’s when Trump Administration proposed insurance policies to extend native management, which led to huge variations in PHA insurance policies. Some PHA selected extra restrictive standards resulting in decrease voucher utilization.
In abstract, whereas the Trump administration didn’t explicitly cease the Housing Selection Voucher Program, analyzing voucher utilization charges gives insights into whether or not coverage adjustments, funding ranges, or administrative practices not directly diminished its effectiveness. A decline in utilization, even within the absence of formal program termination, would counsel that this system’s means to offer inexpensive housing was undermined. Understanding the connection between coverage choices, PHA capability, market circumstances, and voucher utilization is essential for guaranteeing that housing help applications successfully meet the wants of weak populations. Monitoring voucher utilization charges is important for figuring out and addressing systemic boundaries that stop eligible households from accessing and using housing help.
Continuously Requested Questions
The next questions deal with widespread inquiries relating to the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8) throughout the presidency of Donald Trump. These solutions are meant to offer factual and goal data based mostly on obtainable knowledge and official information.
Query 1: Did the Trump administration eradicate the Housing Selection Voucher Program?
No, the Housing Selection Voucher Program was not eradicated. Federal funding for this system continued all through the Trump administration, albeit with proposed budgetary adjustments that had been finally modified via congressional motion.
Query 2: Did the Trump administration suggest cuts to this system’s funding?
Sure, preliminary finances proposals submitted by the Trump administration included steered reductions to the Division of Housing and City Growth’s (HUD) general finances, which might have not directly affected the Housing Selection Voucher Program. Nonetheless, these proposals had been topic to congressional overview and modification.
Query 3: Did Congress approve the proposed cuts to this system?
No, Congress typically maintained funding for the Housing Selection Voucher Program via the annual appropriations course of. Bipartisan assist for this system usually prevented substantial cuts proposed by the manager department.
Query 4: What forms of coverage adjustments did HUD implement throughout the Trump administration that affected this system?
HUD carried out numerous coverage adjustments that would have not directly affected this system, together with modifications to Small Space Truthful Market Rents (SAFMRs), lease reasonableness requirements, and inspection protocols. The exact impression of those adjustments is topic to ongoing evaluation and debate.
Query 5: Did lease affordability for voucher holders change throughout the Trump administration?
Modifications in Truthful Market Rents (FMRs), Voucher Fee Requirements (VPS), and landlord participation charges might have influenced lease affordability for voucher holders. Additional analysis is required to completely assess the web impression of those components.
Query 6: Did eviction charges amongst voucher holders change throughout the Trump administration?
Knowledge on eviction charges amongst voucher holders can present insights into the general stability of housing for program members. Analyzing eviction traits together with coverage adjustments and financial circumstances may help assess this system’s effectiveness.
In abstract, whereas the Trump administration proposed some budgetary adjustments that would have impacted the Housing Selection Voucher Program, this system continued to function with federal funding all through his time period. Coverage adjustments carried out by HUD could have not directly affected this system’s effectiveness, and additional evaluation is required to completely perceive their impression on voucher holders and the general affordability of housing.
The subsequent part will delve into potential assets for additional data and analysis on this matter.
Analyzing the Housing Selection Voucher Program Throughout the Trump Administration
Analyzing the Housing Selection Voucher Program (Part 8) throughout the Trump administration requires a rigorous strategy, free from bias and grounded in verifiable information. The following tips supply a framework for goal investigation.
Tip 1: Concentrate on Verifiable Knowledge: Base conclusions on quantifiable knowledge sources, corresponding to HUD finances paperwork, congressional appropriations payments, and studies from respected analysis establishments. Keep away from relying solely on anecdotal proof or partisan commentary.
Tip 2: Distinguish Between Proposals and Enacted Insurance policies: Perceive the distinction between preliminary finances proposals and the ultimate enacted appropriations. The latter determines the precise funding allotted to this system.
Tip 3: Analyze HUD Coverage Modifications: Scrutinize HUD coverage modifications associated to Truthful Market Rents, lease reasonableness requirements, and inspection protocols. Assess the potential impression of those adjustments on voucher holders and landlords.
Tip 4: Study Voucher Utilization Charges: Monitor voucher utilization charges to find out if program accessibility was affected. A lower in utilization, even with constant funding, could point out underlying issues.
Tip 5: Think about PHA Capability: Consider the capability of Public Housing Businesses to manage this system successfully. Reductions in funding or elevated administrative burdens can pressure PHA assets and impression program supply.
Tip 6: Research Eviction Charge Developments: Monitor eviction charges amongst voucher holders as an indicator of housing stability. A rise in evictions could sign a weakening of this system’s protections.
Tip 7: Seek the advice of A number of Sources: Search data from numerous sources, together with authorities businesses, educational researchers, and non-partisan coverage organizations. Evaluate and distinction completely different views to realize a complete understanding.
By adhering to those rules, it’s potential to develop a balanced and knowledgeable evaluation of the Housing Selection Voucher Program throughout the specified interval.
The next part gives assets for additional analysis and exploration of this advanced matter.
Did Donald Trump Cease Part 8
An examination of budgetary actions and coverage shifts throughout the Trump administration reveals that the Housing Selection Voucher Program, generally referred to as Part 8, was not discontinued. Whereas preliminary finances proposals generally steered reductions to the Division of Housing and City Growth, congressional motion largely preserved funding for this system. Nonetheless, coverage adjustments associated to honest market rents, lease reasonableness requirements, and inspection protocols could have not directly affected this system’s effectiveness and accessibility. Evaluation of voucher utilization charges and eviction traits gives additional perception into the lived experiences of voucher holders throughout this era.
Understanding the complexities surrounding federal housing help requires continued vigilance and demanding evaluation. The nuances of budgetary proposals, coverage implementation, and the realities confronted by weak populations necessitate ongoing analysis to make sure these very important applications successfully serve their meant objective. Additional analysis into the long-term results of coverage modifications carried out throughout this era is warranted, as is a dedication to knowledgeable dialogue and evidence-based decision-making in addressing the nation’s housing wants.
