Section 8 Housing Vouchers Produce More Crime
It seems that every government program has unintended consequences. The great breakthrough in freeing poor people from crime-ridden, dysfunctional public housing and high-poverty neighborhoods was the housing voucher, known as Section 8. The voucher system — heralded as the conservative answer to poverty by innovators like former HUD Secretary Jack Kemp — was designed to give poor people a chance by giving them a choice.
The results are now in, and they aren’t good. As Hanna Rosin reports in the current Atlantic, the dispersal of poor people under Section 8 has not helped rid cities of poverty and crime, but instead seems to be aggravating both. Key paragraph:
While fewer Americans live in high-poverty neighborhoods, increasing numbers now live in places with “moderate” poverty rates, meaning rates of 20 to 40 percent. This pattern is not necessarily better, either for poor people trying to break away from bad neighborhoods or for cities, [housing expert George] Galster explains. His paper compares two scenarios: a city split into high-poverty and low-poverty areas, and a city dominated by median-poverty ones. The latter arrangement is likely to produce more bad neighborhoods and more total crime, he concludes, based on a computer model of how social dysfunction spreads.
Rosin’s piece concentrates on Memphis, where the data are conclusive. The Dallas Police Dept. and the Dallas Housing Authority could create a similar data map for Dallas to track whether the same pattern holds here.
Awards | Archives | Reprints | Custom Publishing | Jobs | Advertiser's Index
It will take several years, if not decades, for the success of the voucher program to be evident. The better educated kids must grow up, return to their communities, and help raise the quality of life for their community and future generations. It’s a ripple effect that will take time. Rome wasn’t built in a day.
So, housing vouchers to escape bad neighborhoods are bad,
but school vouchers to escape bad schools are good.
Hhhmmm. Interesting.
Why doesn’t D get a reporter to map it out? It’s all public record, correct?
Hmmmmm, the sage in the sauce Wick has provided seems to suggest the key ingredient in crime statistics is poverty.
Who woulda thunk?
Wow, some brilliant analysis going on here. I’ve heard of cause and effect but never really understood it until now.
What is the percentage of people who grow up in a bad neighborhood, get a good education, become successful, and then move back to said bad neighborhood?
Harvey,
Actually, the key ingredient in crime is not poverty — it is sorry people who prey on others. Whether they are rich or poor (yes, rich people do commit crimes), most people who commit crimes are just thugs and deviants. Now, if you are stealing food to feed your family — then I can understand. But poverty is no excuse to rob and steal so you can buy new rims for your car, travel to Europe, or by a new dvd player, the latest Eminem album or bling-bling.
I’m not sure the difference between “high poverty” and 40-percent poverty neighborhoods is appreciable on the ground. And in any event, Dallas is in scant danger of becoming “dominated by median-poverty [sic?] neighborhoods” anytime soon.
(long post warning)
I have my own issues with the article in the Atlantic part of which is its myopic approach to the issue at hand.
Maybe it’s the fact that the housing program needs some adjustments to make it more effective.
But there are real success stories within the housing voucher program. I have worked with people that have left Dallas projects like Turner Courts who have used vouchers to get a toehold to a better life and they are now employed and doing well and are self-sufficient. Their kids now have a better shot at life.
My mother started out in one of the worst housing projects in the country and lost her 5-year old daughter (first child) to crossfire shooting between gangs. My Mom was 24 at the time, and she was pregnant with me. She simply became more determined as a single Mom and produced 1 college student and 2 college graduates.
I remember when my Mother, on the meager salary of a phone operator, moved us to the poorest apt complex in the affluent suburbs just so I could get a decent education…and it worked. As a result, when I returned to Philly public schools I was able to go to the best middle school and high school in the state and get a college scholarship. Yet the middle school wouldn’t admit me until my Dad staged a one-man sit in at the superintendents office.
When you have entities like DART in Dallas, who have as a whole apply imbecilic approaches to public transportation in poor areas and do things like cancel the bus service so people can’t work enough hours to get ahead and move out of the projects, something is amiss.
The section 8 system does need adjustments, but I strongly disagree with those that think the system needs to be scrapped.
Such a report would seem like something that the Observer would look at if they weren’t so busy playing gotcha games with city council every week. Since they won’t, maybe D could look at such this issue since the readership is a higher-income demographic and could be enlightened in some respects.
Michael,I don’t think the program ought to be scrapped nor do I think the Atlantic article suggested it should. As one commenter says, it may just be a generational phase. The key point, which I think can be very helpful during the transition, is that police departments need to be aware of it and do the data-mapping so that they can concentrate on those new areas where Section 8 recipients cluster and where we now know, as a result of this study, that crime is likely to increase.
Let’s put this to a real test and get enough section 8 housing in the Park Cities to integrate the schools.
Is this not self-explanatory? Even criminals (most of whom are relatively less-well off) like to live in lower-crime neighborhoods.
The sad problem with Skeptic’s proposal is the limited number of apartments in Park Cities. The few they have probably don’t qualify for Sec. 8. And Southlake BTW has no multi-family housing which was part of the plan.
Don’t knock Southlake for not having multi-family. More traffic, overwhelming city services, higher crime, crowding for schools – gee, what’s not to like about having apartments in your backyard? And please don’t give the old line about cities who don’t want apartments just want to keep out minorities — I live in Sunnyvale with no apartments and my little neighborhood is quite diverse thank you very much. Homes make for great neighbors. Apartments do not.
What a great insight: good people live in single-family homes, and bad people live in apartments. That statement is wrong in so many ways I don’t know where to start. But I will start here: prove it.
Ten minutes each way in a car to go to the dry cleaners or grab a lousy beer, chain retaurants indiscernible from one another, no sidewalks or decent public spaces, the kids are on heroin or steroids and there’s a swinger’s club next door. What’s not to love about single-family-zoned suburbs?
Income diversity makes for great neighborhoods. Bigots do not.
Um swingers’ club, not swinger’s club, for my fellow usage scolds.
Unless it’s just one swinger. With one hand. Clapping.
Oh,spare the liberal indignation. I guess Bob and Daniel would be pleased as punch if a large, 500 unit, mobile home park moved in next door to their homes.
Never said that suburbs were superior to city living. My issue is that multi-family development is not beneficial to nearby neighborhoods.
The apartment issue is not about bigotry (I think that is in Chapter 4 in the liberal playbook). It’s about economics.
Having too much multi-family located near a neighborhood will reduce property values — it doesn’t matter if the apartments are full of 40 year old white people, 25 year old Hispanics or 30 year old African-Americans.
Apartments increase traffic, hurt property values and, just ask the folks who live west of 75 near upper, upper Greenville, apartments attract more crime. Their impact on local schools also are problematic — the amount of property tax revenue brought in by an apartment complex is not nearly enough to cover the cost of educating the large number of kids that come from the complex.
I think it is funny that so many people in the “we need diversity on Dallas” crowd — not just ethnic diversity, but also income diversity — are also the first to scream for extremely standards on apartments (amenities, security, landscaping) so that when they are finished, they are no longer affordable!
So, if you truly want income diversity, we should loosen zoning standards to allow for mobile homes throughout Dallas.
Bob ,
You are right about one thing — living in a home does not make you a good person and living in an apartment does not make you a bad person. However, living in an apartment DOES put you at risk — and as an extension, the surrounding neighborhoods are at risk.
Briefings to Dallas City Hall last year provided the following facts:
41% of Dallas’ auto thefts occur in apartment complexes. Compare that to 16% at residences and 17% on public streets.
Apartments make up 31% of the BMV (Burglary of Motor Vehicle) numbers. Compare that to 1% for shopping malls, 12% for residences, and 17% for public streets.
From January thru August 2007, 31 murders occurred in apartments and 23 have occurred in their parking lots (38% of the total).
Obamanator,
So if you have apartments in your neighborhood, your car is probably more safe, since that’s where the crime will occur. See!
I’d like to thank you for your “Letters from Sunnyvale.” And by the way, I’ve figured out who you are. Wick was right, too, that really was one heck of a column.
I have read this article and unfortunately, in some cases it may be true about crime festering in some areas more than others, but most of the time people who get these vouchers are geared toward the high crime areas, because no one will accept the voucher in better neighborhoods, and most times the land lords don’t even know what a section 8 voucher is!?! I have a section 8 voucher and I live in a good area that is quiet. But crime is everywhere in the “good areas” as well as “poor areas” so how can it be stated that having a voucher produce crime, when the cause goes much deeper than having a voucher…
The real Katrina tragedy was the relocation of the no account welfare people who came to Augusta GA from New Orleans. Has anyone else in other areas had similar experiences ? The last thing that Augusta GA needs is more section 8 housing and people on public assistance. I am not knocking all of them but about a third are riff raff. About 30 % of the section 8 people are dope dealers or their customers who destroy neighborhoods. See Clean Up Harrisburg Video at : http://www.nbcaugusta.com/news/local/27033799.html
The section 8 program was set up in a way to actually help irresponsible people live in established neighborhoods. What I am about to discuss may see so simple but please think about it in terms having a healthy neighborhood.
The section 8 payment goes directly to the landlord. This by passes the tenant of the responsibility of passing on to the landlord the house rent. If the section 8 payment went to the tenant It would give irresponsible tenants a chance to “screw up” and spend the money before they pay the rent. People who are screw ups usually cause other problems in the neighborhood anyway. Instead of paying the section 8 payment to the landlord why and enabling an irresponsible tenant to stay in the neighborhood for months why not give the tenant a change from the start to fail. This way the tenant can be kicked out of the section 8 program early and this saves decent neighborhood members from the tenants poor choices such as drug dealing, excessive alcohol use and domestic violence that affects surrounding neighbors. Would you want to live next door to a tenant who is not responsible enough to pass on the rent to their landlord ?
sabo, you are a genius indeed!
You may get a copy from the records department of the Augusta, GA Richmond county Sheriffs department: Case no. 08.256342 No all but far too many single welfare mothers are the true criminals, yet, they go unpunished. They allow thugs to live with them and their children in their section 8 houses. The one at 1711 Walker St has had dope dealers in her house since she moved in. Zertaur Alexis Gough and Jamal Khalil Gough were busted for pot and crack dealing at this 1711 Walker st address on Dec 19th. It is a slap on every taxpayers face to have this single mother knowingly harbour criminals and the Augusta Housing Authority has not take away her section 8 privilege. The sad part is that this is not an isolated case. We need accountability within the Augusta Housing Authority. You would also think that the Richmond County family and children services would remove children from this dangerous situation.
Are public housing authorities ignoring problems in other places too ?
I really think some of you people are being selfish.I had a real good job and I got the news from my Dr. who told me I had a illness and I had to get on employment. I’m on the section 8 waiting list and I’m trying to sell my 2007 infiniti coupe yes I said coupe. You see Im doing better then you because thats what GOD do for the people that are under him. Oh I’m sorry you severe money the other master.