Affordable housing and public health under a right-wing General Assembly

(Editor's note: During the month of October, NC Policy Watch is releasing a series of special reports that detail some of the policy initiatives that are likely to gain traction in the North Carolina General Assembly if ideologues on the far right assume significant power in 2011. This is the latest of those reports).

The "genius" of the market: For the modern ideologues on the far right, this is the answer to virtually every problem under the sun. Whether it's economic development, public education or even protecting the environment, far right politicians and think tankers can explain why intentional, public solutions are a bad idea and why leaving things up to the individual pursuit of wealth (i.e. greed) is a recipe for everything that ails us. As reported in this space recently, one of Raleigh's better know conservative groups has even argued for the complete deregulation of medicine (as in ending state licensing of health care professionals!) as a "fix" for the health care system.

Today, we examine two more topics in which the right has regularly elevated market rhetoric to ridiculous levels and in which significant backsliding in a far right-controlled North Carolina General Assembly seems all but certain: affordable housing and public health.

Affordable housing: Crisis? What crisis?

That North Carolina's economy has produced a serious shortage of safe, decent, affordable housing for people of modest means – especially people with disabilities – is beyond dispute. Walk down the street in a low income section of just about any community in the state to see this reality for yourself. If data are what you're after, however, consider the following facts from the nonpartisan experts at the North Carolina Housing Coalition:

• According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), affordable housing is defined as housing that costs its occupant (owner or renter) no more than 30% of their gross monthly income.

• In North Carolina, over 2 million people live in substandard housing or pay more than 30% of their gross monthly household income on housing costs.

• Over 300,000 households in the state spend more than half of their income on housing.

• The fair market rent (FMR) for a two-bedroom apartment in North Carolina is $718. For a minimum wage worker ($7.25/hr) to afford the FMR for a 2 bedroom apartment, he/she must work 76 hours per week, 52 weeks per year.

• Monthly Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments for a disabled individual are $674 in North Carolina. If SSI represents an individual's sole source of income, $202 in monthly rent is affordable, while the FMR for a one-bedroom is $627.

Despite these daunting statistics, state spending on affordable housing is, even under the current state leadership, pitifully inadequate. The state's flagship affordable housing program for very low-income people – an award-winning program known as the North Carolina Housing Trust Fund that does a remarkable job of squeezing every last brick and shingle out of the sums allocated and leveraging large amounts of private investment – will receive only $10 million in state dollars in the current Fiscal Year.

Of course, even this modest sum is too much for ideologues on the far right. The John Locke Foundation – a key advisor to many ultra-conservative officials and candidates – has repeatedly recommended eliminating the Trust Fund (and other programs designed to keep North Carolinians in affordable housing like the modest anti-home mortgage foreclosure program, the Home Protection Plan).

Perhaps not surprisingly, the last time the Trust Fund was zeroed out in the state budget was during the mid-1990s when the right took power in the state House of Representatives.

As for solutions to the state's chronic affordable housing shortage, proposals from the right are hard to find. For the most part, it seems that the "answer" is the same standard fallback that one always hears: "reduce regulation" (presumably in areas like zoning and environmental protection) and "unleash market forces." How the "market" is supposed make a profit by providing safe, decent and affordable housing to hundreds of thousands of disabled people attempting to subsist on $700 a month, however, is never really explained. Sadly, one suspects that such a "miracle" would take place in about the same way it does in the brave new, market-driven state mental health system-i.e. seldom or not at all.

Public health: Everyone is on their own

As with the debate over affordable housing, North Carolina conservatives evidence little interest in promoting public, intentional solutions to the state's numerous public health problems. Whether it's tobacco use, the explosion in obesity and diabetes or the plagues of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, the right's answer to what ails people (and particularly our children) is invariably the same simplistic response: "just say no."

It is under this guise that conservatives and their advocacy groups have consistently:

• opposed new tobacco taxes,

• opposed efforts to restrict smoking in public accommodations and workplaces,

• opposed efforts to limit soft drink machines in public schools,

• opposed efforts to promote "walkable" communities, public greenways and the use of public transportation,

• opposed the expansion of public vaccination programs,

• opposed efforts to adequately fund HIV treatment and prevention, and

• opposed efforts to promote comprehensive sexuality education.

In other words, while each of these topics readily lends itself to a host of obvious, popular, common sense public health solutions, the right-wing groups and their political allies (frequently with aid and comfort from various business lobbies) stand in the way at every opportunity. Whatever the issue, "property rights" (and/or old fashioned head-in-the-sand, moralistic conservatism) always trump direct, intentional solutions to promote the common good.

In the event conservative ideologues do muster a majority in next year's North Carolina General Assembly, it seems all but certain that progress in each of the areas listed above would be stopped in its tracks. Indeed significant backsliding – particularly in and around issues related to the smoking ban and sex education seem quite possible.

Here's what one veteran state legislator, Rep. Jerry Dockham, had to say earlier this year at a candidate forum about the smoking ban:

"Well, I won't pass the buck. If we do take over the House, there will be two Republicans that have been there longer than myself. I will introduce a bill to repeal that. If someone else introduces the bill, I'll be a co-sponsor. I'll sign on to do that. I'll promise you that."

And Dockham is actually one of the more moderate members of the House Republican caucus.

Meanwhile, on the sex education front, far right groups like the North Carolina Family Policy Council remain unrepentant about their remarkably obtuse opposition to telling teens the truth about human sexuality. Despite the fact that virtually every teenager in America has access to all kinds of sexually explicit material at the tips of his or her fingers, social conservatives remain wed to the almost quaint idea that providing thorough, factual information will somehow encourage young people to engage in behavior they would otherwise avoid.

Even when it comes to the health and wellbeing of children it seems, the far right is only too happy to place their faith in the "genius of the market."

Going forward

As noted this is the latest of several special features regarding some of the likely agenda items of a far right General Assembly in 2011. Check back frequently in the days ahead for additional reports.