Once again a major domestic issue was completely absent from the President's State of the Union speech in January: housing. Federal low-income housing programs are so frequently left out of presidential addresses and campaign stump speeches alike that it is easy for many Americans to forget that the federal government even has a role to play in housing our nation's poor. If the public stops thinking that the feds are supposed to provide housing, then maybe they won't get too rattled when the funding for housing programs stops flowing. But it is also all too convenient for another reason: this invisibility provides an invaluable cloak for a drastic stealth campaign to decimate federal low-income housing programs right under our noses.

The lack of public acknowledgement of the issue of housing by the administration is by no means an indication that it is not on their radar screen. In fact the opposite is true.

Federally-subsidized housing programs such as Section 8 and Public Housing, which house the extremely low-income, have been clearly drawn targets throughout Bush's tenure. $1 billion dollars has been cut from the public housing budget alone since 2001.

In the "war room" of the Republicans rabid assault against domestic social programs, hangs a map of public housing sites where the bombs have been dropped.

Given the history of aggressive attacks on housing programs, it would be naïve to ask why the proposals to strengthen resources for housing have not been on the Whitehouse's policy agenda. It is not only because there is no real concern for maintaining current housing policies. It is in fact much more sinister than that. Housing issues are kept out of the limelight because it is easier to chop it to pieces if no one in leadership is mentioning it at all.

Meanwhile, while the Whitehouse remains silent, the most drastic cuts to public housing ever have been proposed. This year, Public Housing faces a 24% cut. This is in addition to successive years of pro-ration which consistently fall short of what HUD has determined is the actual need.

In 2005, housing authorities were given only 89% of need. Last year, this was dropped to 85%, and for 2007 local agencies are expected to make due with only 76% of what it takes to run their programs. This is $1 billion short of the nation's need. These numbers are not just academic. We have seen the disastrous impact of these cuts throughout the nation.

Since the cuts were announced, the Philadelphia Housing Authority has been forced to lay off 22% (350 employees) of their workforce. Newark, and Jersey City, NJ, Akron, OH, Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, PA Minneapolis and Mobile, Alabama, have all also announced major layoffs due to the latest round of funding cuts.

San Diego, St Paul and Salt Lake City all have plans to sell off their public housing units, since they can no longer afford to operate them.

Closer to home, the San Francisco Housing Authority has had a 50% reduction in staff in the past 5 years, from 500 in 2001 to a current 250 employees. The latest proposed funding cuts will mean a shortfall of $3.5 million for San Francisco.

Our public housing residents are already suffering terribly from the blows of the relentless draining of federal housing funds. Buildings are unable to be maintained without adequate funding and so have fallen into serious disrepair. A skeletal maintenance staff is unable to keep up with tenant's repair requests, leading to growing habitability problems.

Violent crime victimizes residents as funds to provide security, hire police protection, and install security features have been cut year after year. Services that lead youth with few economic choices away from the path of violence have also been cut, along with programs to assist the frail elderly and people with disabilities stay healthy and safe in their buildings.

A terribly sad outcome of the funding cuts in 2006 is that security services in San Francisco's senior and disabled buildings in high crime neighborhoods were eliminated, when the SFHA was forced to lay off nearly 30 employees.

The future is certain if Congress continues to let the axe fall. Eventually, our poorest residents will lose their homes.

The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO) has expressed great concern at what might befall housing authorities as a result of the latest round of cuts. They plainly state: "At this point, there is no room left in their budgets to cut. The next step may be the boarding up and shutting down of critically-needed housing."

It will fall on our cities to ensure that we don't have a sweeping rise in homelessness and displacement when this time comes. Can our local governments afford this?

The Republican agenda has been made abundantly clear by their policies: public housing should be starved to the point of extinction or until local governments pick up the ball.

If they talked as hawkish about their housing agenda, which will create homelessness, displacement, violence and crime and a huge burden for local communities to clean up, as they do about the war abroad, Americans would be up in arms. But voters wont revolt against something they don't realize is happening.

Thus, we should not expect to read press releases from the Whitehouse announcing housing cuts anytime soon.

It is not in the interest of the administration and their allies in Congress to publicize their aggressive attacks on federal housing programs. But advocates and citizens who believe that the federal government should not abandon their responsibility to house the poor deserve a fair fight. Americans should be told the hard truth about plans to eliminate a cornerstone government program that has been operating for 75 years.

This week, the Senate will vote on a joint funding resolution that, if left unchanged, will make the proposed cuts to public housing permanent for 2007. The House bill passed last week provides $300 million more for Public Housing, closing the gap further but still $700 million short of the need.

Our Senators should at minimum preserve the House funding levels, but ideally should fight to bring us even closer to funding America's true housing needs. This is an invaluable opportunity for our new Democratic leadership to challenge the immoral pattern of de-funding that has taken hold.

By insisting on adequate funding, Congress members would take a critical step forward towards shifting the tide in housing policy. By speaking out, they can help provide a fair playing field for Americans who believe in compassionate housing policies to keep the attacks on housing at bay.

By taking a public stand against the unconscionable cuts to low-income housing, the House Speaker and her colleagues in the Senate can not only assert their newly gained power to assert the fundamental "San Francisco values" of caring for our less fortunate by formulating new policy, but they also have the chance to "rally the troops" at home against the administration's disastrous housing policies.

Now is the perfect time for our Democratic leaders to blow the cover off of the mean-spirited effort to destroy public housing that has so purposely remained hidden from public view. To do so would show real leadership and would prove to the always skeptical Bay Area that a Democrat-controlled Congress does indeed mean real change.

Tell your representatives to stand up against the cuts to public housing today by sending a letter online at www.local-impact.org. To find out more about the HUD cuts, contact Sara@hrcsf.org.

Sara Shortt is the Director of Subsidized Housing Programs at the
Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco.