Coalition to Protect Public Housing
984 N. Hudson Street
Chicago, IL USA
Ph:312-280-2298 Fx: 312-280-4526
Written Submission of the Coalition to Protect Public Housing in Chicago, IllinoisUSA to the Human Rights Committee at its 85th Session (2006)
I. Introduction
1. The following report is respectively submitted to the Human Rights Committee (Committee) in order to provide information for consideration in the context of the Committee's review of the periodic report of the Government of the United States.
2. This report addresses housing issues that rise to violations of Article 6 (the right to life), Article 17 (protection from arbitrary interference with ones family and home), Article 23 (the rights of the family),and Article 26 (prohibition of discrimination) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
II. Article 6
3. In its Concluding Observations on the fourth periodic report of the Government of Canada, issued in 1999, the Committee expressed its concern "that homelessness has led to serious health problems and even to death" and recommended "that the State party take positive measures required by Article 6 to address this serious problem."
4. The Committee must apply the same standard to the Government of the United States that it applied to the Government of Canada in 1999. Indeed, the proportion of homelessness vis-à-vis State wealth and income is even more egregious in the United States than in Canada.
5.The United States is failing to meet its obligations regarding the right to life, including through inadequate or inadequately implemented housing policies. While federal law supports a goal of adequate housing for all Americans, and federal housing programs offer assistance to low-income people, they are not adequately funded. In the City of Chicago, there is a shortage of over 150,000 units of housing for familieswho cannot afford market rate rent. The waiting list for federally funded housing, referred to as Public Housing, is over 50,000 families long and is closed. The waiting list for federal Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (rental assistance), is also more than 50,000 families long.
6. Presently, the United States is implementing a comprehensive plan to demolish nearly all government funded housing, called public housing. In Chicago, this has resulted in the demolition of over 15,000 units of housing over the past seven years with less than 1000 new replacement units constructed. This net loss of over 14,000 units of housing has resulted in homelessness for hundreds of former public housing residents (over 160 families were identified in a five month survey of 3 of Chicago's over 20 homeless shelters). The devastating consequences of homelessness has been well documented to the Commissions (footnote the COHRE Shadow Report)
7. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has provided many displaced public housing residents with Section 8Housing Choice Vouchers. However, residents were selected for this program based on a narrow set of criteria and squatters,families with outstanding utility bills or behind on rent, large families, unmarried men, women and men with criminal convictions, and other women, men and children, were displaced from public housing with no compensation (or say replacement housing¿).
8. The Housing Choice Voucher program has serious shortcomings in Chicago. In a two-year span over 160,000 units tested positive for harmful levels of lead paint. Thousands of more families with vouchers live in housing units that will do not meet building and health and safety codes. Hundreds of former public housing residentshave lost their Housing Choice Vouchersdue to utility shut offs,being unable to pay rent,or for reportingbad landlords. Furthermore, the drastic increase in the number of Housing Choice Vouchers in Chicago has raised rent in poor communities because the voucher will pay more than the market rate in very poor neighborhoods, thereby restricting the market and raising the cost of housing to meet what a landlord could receive from a voucher. A freeze has been placed on the waiting listfor the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and all monies from this program have been redirected to displaced public housing residents.
9. The funding for all Federal Low-Income Housing is in jeopardy. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development has attempted to introduce guidelines restricted federal housing assistance further, threatening an estimated 250,000 households with the loss of their housing. Moreover, Congress cut appropriations for low-income housing as well as assistance for homeless people for 2005.
10. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, in Fiscal Year 2006 alone, the public housing capital fund (used for modernization and rehabilitation of public housing) will be cut by $252 million. The public housing operating fund (used for building maintenance, utilities, resident services, etc.) will be cut by $25 million. The Resident Opportunities and Self Sufficiency (ROSS) Program, designed to link public housing residents with supportive services, resident empowerment activities and other assistance, would be cut in half. Similar cuts in housing programs meant to assist the poor have been seen all across the board.
III. Article 17
11. Article 17 prohibits ´arbitrary or unlawful interference with... family, (and) home...'and stated that ´Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.´
12. The arbitrary demolition of public housing and the forced evictions of public housing residents from their communities clearly violate Article 17. In the absence of adequate, on sight replacement housing, families are separated and whole communities dislocated. Research has shown that over 70% of public housing residents social support network is located in the development in which they live, a much higher percentage than the general population. When a public housing community is demolished, its former residents are scattered all over the City of Chicago and the surrounding region, dispersing extended families. Parents are separated from their adult children and grandchildren; parents are often separated from their children if they cannot provide for them; unwed couples are separated, usually removing fathers from their families.
13. In addition to being removed from their families, public housing residents are literally losing their homes. Their homes are being demolished and they are being removed from the geographical community- schools, jobs, medical care, churches etc., that has defined their ´home.
14. The destruction of these communities has been arbitrary. Public Housing residents have been left out of the decision to destroy their homes and the planning implementation of the demolition and reconstruction. Often, only one resident of a development is allowed to participate in the aforementioned discussions.
IV. Article 23
15. The rights of the family are to be protected as the ´fundamental group of society.' As we have documented, the cohesiveness of families has been shattered by the demolition of public housing.
16. Homeless families are at risk of having their children seized by the state. As families are made homeless by the demolition of public housing, they face the potentialloss of their children.
17. HUD and Chicago Housing Authority policy has prevented unwed fathers from living legally with their families in public housing and using Housing Choice Vouchers. Additionally, individuals with felony convictions are often restricted from living in units receiving Federal funds, furthering the problem of fathers being unable to live with their families.
V. Article 26
18. Article 26 prohibits discrimination, which is defined as "any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference which is based on any ground such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, and which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by all persons, on an equal footing, of all rights and freedoms."
19. In the United States, racial minorities disproportionately make up the ranks of the homeless and 95% of public housing residents are African-American, mostly women and children. Historically, African Americans have accessed Federal Funding for Housing by living in under funded and poorly maintained public housing or, more recently, by using Housing Choice Vouchers in high crime, high poverty, racially segregated neighborhoods. Conversely, their white and middle class counterparts have received Federal assistance in purchasing new homes or exercising Housing Choice Vouchers in better neighborhoods with more economic, educational, and recreational opportunities and better access to social services.
20. Two-thirds of the Federal Housing budget goes to home owners. A disproportionate percentage of African Americans are unable to qualify for these programs and are often those most in need are the least served.
21.Indeed, in 2000, the Government of the United States admitted to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination that “While the scourge of officially sanctioned segregation has been eliminated, de facto segregation and persistent racial discrimination continue to exist. The forms of discriminatory practices have changed and adapted over time, but racial and ethnic discrimination continues to restrict and limit equal opportunity in the UnitedStates." In the same report, the Government also admitted to "continued segregation and discrimination in housing, rental and sales of homes, public accommodation and consumer goods. Even where civil rights laws prohibit segregation and discrimination in these areas, such practices continue."
22. The de facto discrimination admitted by the Government of the United States may not be deemed to be unconstitutional, given the narrow interpretation that is applied to the Constitution of the United States – namely that to be unconstitutional discrimination must be the result of a discriminatory intent or purpose. However, under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, such discrimination does indeed violate the prohibition on discrimination, as the ICCPR definition of "discrimination" includes discriminatory effect.
VI. Conclusion and Recommended Concluding Observations
23. Based on the above-mentioned facts, the Human Rights Committee should conclude that the Government of the United States is in violations of its obligations under Article 6, Article 17, Article 23 and Article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights due to the extent of homelessness and inadequate and vulnerable housing conditions imposed by the demolition of public housing in Chicago and all of the United States, and the fact that such conditions disproportionately affect racial minorities and other marginalized or vulnerable persons. Consequently, the Coalition to Protect Public Housing respectfully requests that the Human Rights Committee consider the following draft concluding observations.
24.The Committee is concerned that the demolition of public housing has led to serious health problems and even to death. The Committee recommends that the State party take positive measures required by Article 6 to address this serious problem. It is recommended that (a) on-sight replacement housing is built before any demolition (b) more money for low-income housing programs are made available and (c) public housing residents determine each step of the process.
25. The Committee is concerned withthe protection offamilies and homes from arbitrary interference. TheCommittee Recommends thatthe State party take positive measurestoprovide families residing in public housing with protection by the law to prevent arbitrary interference. This should include measures to keep communities and families intact.
26. The Committee is concerned that racial minorities disproportionately make up those being made homeless and otherwise suffering hardship due to the demolition of public housing. The Committee recommends that the State party take positive measures, including affirmative action measures and increased funding,required by Article 26 to address this serious problem.
27 January 2006
______
Carol Steele
President, Coalition to Protect Public Housing
President, Cabrini Rowhouse Local Advisory Council