Yes, I am following the election, but it’s hard to get excited about it in Illinois, and I just don’t feel up to trying to say something insightful, so here again, blogging about completely non-election-related topics.
In today’s Tribune:
The CHA opened its wait lists for new residents for the first time in more than four years.
Agency officials expect more than 250,000 families to apply for spots on three waiting lists — one for public housing, one for housing vouchers and one for apartments in privately owned subsidized housing . . .
The agency will take applications through Nov. 24. Applicants can fill out the paperwork online or can go to agency-designated community centers for help. Once applications are in, the agency will conduct a lottery to determine who will go on the wait lists, Ludwig said.
“Placement on one list does not affect placement on another,” she said. “Some people might get lucky and get their name on three wait lists. Some folks might not get on any list.”
Having their name on a list at the agency does not guarantee housing. It is simply one step closer to participating in the agency’s programs. Historically, the CHA has had wait lists that surpass 15,000 families for each of its programs, records show.
Residents can wait years to be called in for housing.
I wrote about this a while back, saying, in brief, that all the reports lamenting the insufficiency of food stamps back a year or so ago really had the wrong target. For the working poor, food stamps are supposed to supplement their own food purchases, but their housing costs are so high relative to their income that, in order to pay the rent, they try to make the food stamp allotment cover all their food costs, and visit food pantries when they run out.
And it’s not that housing benefits, for any given individual, are too stingy, it’s that, indeed, receiving these benefits is like winning a lottery, a matter of luck, rather than providing lower benefits to a greater number of people. In this case, of course, it literally is a matter of winning a lottery. And, from what I understand, if you “win” then you are dramatically better off, especially because public housing, unlike cash welfare, has earnings limits but no work requirement, and, in some cases, the vouchers provide for very comfortable housing — there was a story a while back on how the CHA was providing vouchers intended for recipients to move into upscale neighborhoods for diversity’s sake, though the reporter lamented that people generally didn’t do so because they wanted to stay in familiar neighborhoods.
One more example, I suppose, of a government program in need of reform but, instead, permanently in place. And at the same time, not dissimilar from charities in which certain individuals “win the lottery” in terms of charitable support.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In