While doing research into a local housing authority's discretion to grant an exemption to Section 8 applicants with disqualifying criminal records, I came across an article in the Telegraph Herald, entitled Study: Section 8, crime linked, published on 12/6/2009.
The article discussed the result of a study by Alta Vista Research, which found that "Section 8 tenants, compared to other residents, are arrested far more often."
This can be evidence that links poverty and crime, as the article makes the case. Or it can be a reason to question the policing practice at Dubuque, IA. There are multiple ways to interpret this evidence. But how does this piece of evidence, if true, lead to the conclusion that we need to exclude "criminal elements" from Section 8?
By assuming that too many "criminal elements" are receiving Section 8 and that we can separate "criminal elements" from more "deserving" applicants for the benefit somehow--usually through a background check. But this is a flawed assumption. People are not neatly categorizable between the good and the bad. We're mostly just ugly. And no amount of background check can help us separate the three.
No comments:
Post a Comment