NCIL - The National Council on Independent Living

National Council on Independent Living
HR1851 Section 8 Voucher Reform Act of 2007 (SEVRA) Position Paper
August, 2007

As a membership organization, NCIL advances independent living and the rights of people with disabilities through consumer-driven advocacy. NCIL envisions a world in which people with disabilities are valued equally and participate fully. For years, NCIL has advocated for the integration of people with disabilities into their communities.

However, there is a wealth of data and information that documents that there is both a critical lack of affordable, accessible and integrated housing for persons with disabilities as well as a high incidence of housing discrimination committed against persons with disabilities. A great deal of affordable housing is funded by the federal government; yet federal housing policies are often developed without the participation of or considering the special circumstances of persons with disabilities. Unfortunately, this may be happening with The Section 8 Voucher Reform Act (SEVRA).

NCIL understands the need to simplify the Section 8 program in a manner that is cost-effective for the federal government and does not result in increased rental payments for a majority of tenants. We are concerned that the financial circumstances of many seniors and persons with disabilities have not been considered when originally crafting SEVRA. This paper focuses on those aspects of SEVRA that we support and those aspects that cause concern.

We support a PHA’s ability to increase the payment standard up to 120 percent of Fair Market Rent (FMR) without having to seek HUD approval or above 120 percent of FMR with HUD approval as a reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities.

We support authorizing the funding for 20,000 new incremental vouchers in each of the five years 2008 through 2012, totaling 100,000 new vouchers. We support HUD issuing guidance to PHAs that received voucher assistance for non-elderly disabled families to ensure that these vouchers continue to be provided upon turnover to qualified non-elderly disabled families when practical.

We support the recertification of income and determination of contribution amounts for rent for persons with disabilities and seniors on fixed incomes from the current annual process to one that occurs every three years.

We support raising the standard deduction for persons with disabilities and seniors from the current $400 to $725 with a provision that allows for inflation adjustments in future years.

We oppose reducing the income adjustment for unreimbursed medical expenses for seniors and people with disabilities from those that exceed three percent of income to those exceeding ten percent of income. The impact on monthly rent of this change can seem minor but for those whose income is solely derived from Supplemental Security Insurance (SSI or State Supplemental Payment (SSP) this rent increase could be devastating. 2007 SSI amounts (and SSP for those states that provide supplemental payments to individuals living independently in the community) range from $623 (Federal) to $985 (Alaska). Based on these SSI/SSP amounts rents could increase from $13.08/month to $20.69/month. If we take into account the rent adjustment of $8.12/month provided by the $725 deduction it is apparent that the increased standard deduction does not make up for the loss of seven percent in deductible out-of-pocket medical expenses if your income is solely from SSI/SSP.

We oppose the expansion of the Housing Innovations Program (formerly Moving To Work (MTW) Demonstration Project. SEVRA increases the number of PHA’s able to participate in the Housing Innovations Program (HIP) Demonstration Project from 25 to 80 Public Housing Authorities (60 in the full program plus 20 referred to as “HIP Lite.” MTW was authorized as a demonstration project of up to 30 PHA’s under the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996. Encouraging work and resident self-sufficiency was not what the deregulation advocates were focused on when authorizing this program. Their focus was on housing management, operations, and control issues. HIP allows housing authorities flexibility in managing all public housing programs and can include rents that are not based on income. For seniors and persons with disabilities rent increases based on a stepped rent system or rent based on unit size could result in their rent becoming unaffordable. Depending on the size of the PHAs HUD selects the number of vouchers that will fall under this program will range from 33 to 41 percent of all vouchers in use in the country.

We oppose replacing the current Earned Income Disregard for persons who have received public benefits for at least 12 months and then return to work with a single annual adjustment of ten percent of earned income for everyone. This ten percent only applies to the first $10,000 earned (maximum deduction $1,000). Based on 2007 minimum wages which range from $5.85 (Federal) to $7.93 (Washington) this deduction would only apply to 60.6 percent to 82.2 percent of a full-time minimum wage worker’s earnings. Persons with disabilities face many obstacles when they want to enter or re-enter the workforce. The current EID allows the rent to stay at the prior year’s level for the first year the person works and only increase by 50 percent of the higher amount for the second year which allows for the increased expenses associated with beginning or returning to work to be covered.

We oppose the elimination of the deduction for reasonable child care expenses needed for either employment or education. Child care expenses vary widely and the impact of the elimination of this important deduction would result in a monthly rent increase of at least $100. We are especially concerned about the parents of a disabled child who were, until recently, exempted from work requirements in order to receive public assistance. Having to enter or re-enter the workforce in order to maintain benefits and being unable to deduct the high costs of child care could devastate families and result in children being uncared for while their parents are away from the household.

We oppose the requirement that all adult members of household receiving rental assistance provide valid personal identification in one of the following forms: social security card and a government issued photo identification card; a driver’s license/identification card that complies with the Real ID Act; passport; or USCIS photo identification card. Many adults with disabilities do not have these types of identification and do not have the financial resources to obtain the documents necessary to obtain them. This requirement could further complicate the transition process for those leaving nursing facilities to return to their communities.

NCIL strongly believes that reforms in the Section 8 Program can be achieved in a manner that is positive for everyone from PHA’s to seniors and persons with disabilities on fixed incomes. We have an opportunity to maintain the long-standing successes of this crucial program, increase flexibility and simplicity for those managing it on the local level and maintain the affordability of individual units for those who can least afford market rents.