In the late 1990s, President Bill Clinton and Congress passed laws that cut public housing funding and froze the number of units at 1999 levels.¹ These changes came through the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act and its Faircloth Amendment.² Policymakers capped new construction and ended the rule that required one-for-one replacement of demolished units.³ Over the next decade, experts observed rising rates of homelessness as low-income families lost access to stable homes.⁴ This post shows how these funding cuts under Clinton worsened the homeless crisis. 🏚️🚫 #Triangulation

The Public Housing Funding Cuts

Public housing serves families who earn too little to afford private rents.⁵ It offers safe, stable apartments at 30% of household income.⁶ In 1998, lawmakers passed the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act, signed by President Clinton.⁷ It added the Faircloth Amendment, which froze the number of public housing units at the October 1, 1999 total.⁸ This cap stopped housing authorities from building any net new units.⁹

At the same time, Congress removed the one-for-one replacement rule for units torn down under revitalization efforts.¹⁰ Policymakers shifted federal housing dollars toward vouchers and mixed-income projects instead of traditional public housing.¹¹ Advocates warned that these changes would reduce the overall stock of affordable units.¹²

Impact on Homelessness

Housing experts link the funding cuts to a rise in homelessness. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of people sleeping in shelters or on the street increased in many major cities.¹³ One study found that every 10,000 public-housing units lost corresponded to a significant jump in local homelessness rates.¹⁴

Families who once counted on public housing vouchers faced multi-year waits instead.¹⁵ Many reported doubled or tripled waiting lists at local housing authorities.¹⁶ At the same time, local shelters struggled to keep up with demand. By 2005, some cities saw more veterans and children living unsheltered.¹⁷

Why Clinton Supported These Changes

Clinton and his administration argued that the old public housing model bred concentrated poverty and crime.¹⁸ They believed that mixed-income developments and Section 8 vouchers would help families move into stable neighborhoods.¹⁹ HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros promoted mixed-finance projects like HOPE VI, which tore down troubled high-rise projects and built smaller communities.²⁰

However, the HOPE VI program often demolished more units than it rebuilt right away.²¹ Many displaced families received vouchers but found few available units they could afford.²² Meanwhile, the Faircloth cap blocked future increases to the stock of traditional public housing.²³ Critics say this “reform” traded quantity for quality at the expense of the most vulnerable.²⁴

Conclusion

Clinton’s public housing reforms reshaped America’s low-income housing landscape. They ended the promise of expanding traditional public housing and shifted resources to new models. While mixed-income developments created better living conditions in some neighborhoods, these reforms also froze overall unit counts and let affordable homes disappear. As homelessness rose in the 2000s, many families found themselves without a roof. Today, advocates call on lawmakers to lift the Faircloth cap and invest in both new and existing public housing. Only then can we truly address the homelessness crisis that worsened under these policies. 🏚️🚫 #Triangulation

Footnotes

  1. Bratt, R. G., Greer, J., & Vey, J. (2002). The record of President Clinton, 1993–2000. Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies.
  2. Los Angeles Times. (1994, January 8). White House Reportedly Plans Public Housing Funds Cut: Budget. Los Angeles Times.
  3. Wikipedia. (n.d.). Subsidized housing in the United States. Retrieved April 25, 2025, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidized_housing_in_the_United_States
  4. National Coalition for the Homeless. (2022). Repeal the Faircloth Amendment: One-pager. NationalHomeless.org.
  5. Urban Institute. (2024). Lessons from 40 years of public housing policy. Urban Institute.
  6. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2024). Project-Based Vouchers: Lessons from the Past to Guide Future Policy. CBPP.org.
  7. Next City. (2021). What Is the Faircloth Amendment? Next City.
  8. National Homeless. (n.d.). What is the Faircloth Amendment? NationalHomeless.org.
  9. HUD.gov. (1999). Report Shows Cuts to HUD Budget Would Have Devastating Impact. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
  10. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2020, October 28). The death of public housing. Street Roots.
  11. Global Urban. (n.d.). National Housing Policy in the U.S. for the 21st Century. Retrieved April 25, 2025, from https://www.globalurban.org/housing_us.htm
  12. Harvard Joint Center. (2002). The record of President Clinton, 1993–2000. See note 1.
  13. Bratt et al., 2002. See note 1.
  14. Urban Institute, 2024. See note 5.
  15. CBPP, 2024. See note 6.
  16. CBPP, 2024. See note 6.
  17. National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2020. See note 10.
  18. Next City, 2021. See note 7.
  19. Next City, 2021. See note 7.
  20. Global Urban, n.d. See note 11.
  21. Urban Institute, 2024. See note 5.
  22. CBPP, 2024. See note 6.
  23. National Homeless, 2022. See note 4.
  24. National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2020. See note 10.