Administrative actions to strengthen anti-poverty programs
Under the tenure of former President Trump, several federal agencies changed rules for program standards that restricted access to effective anti-poverty programs for many families, especially those with immigrants and families of color. While our grassroots volunteers advocate with their members of Congress, these executive actions are not subject to Congressional approval. However, the rulemaking process includes time for public comment on proposed rules before finalized publishing. (For more information on Administrative Law, see this overview provided by the Congressional Research Service.) From the start of the Trump Administration’s proposed rules focused on anti-poverty policies, RESULTS was outspoken regarding these changes, describing how these actions would limit access and create new barriers for the individuals and families most in need.
Since taking office, President Biden has reversed several of the prior administration’s actions – both the more well-known and more discrete to undo the disproportionate harm done to oppressed communities. The President through Executive Order has committed to advancing racial equity and combating discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Besides indicating to federal agencies to include these approaches in their practices and policies, the Administration has undertaken the process to review and reverse executive orders, agency rules, and other actions issued under previous administrations that do not align with the President’s commitments to equity.
During these first months, President Biden has undone some of these policies in key issue areas for RESULTS.
- Housing. Within President Biden’s first week in office, he directed the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to review and re-evaluate how Trump-era rules have affected HUD’s ability to comply with requirements of the Fair Housing Act. The Trump Administration ended two prominent rules promulgated by HUD under President Obama: the disparate impact rule and the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) rule. The disparate impact rule finalized in 2013 provided a standard method for proving discrimination without evidence of intent under the Fair Housing Act, using the disparate impact method of proof. The 2015 AFFH rule required the use of federal funds and other housing program resources to intentionally counteract years of historic and contemporary practices that created or enabled housing segregation. By rescinding or otherwise undermining the effectiveness of these rules, the Trump Administration placed undue burden on individuals and families to prove discrimination and held unrealistic expectations regarding housing opportunities and access for families. On April 13, 2021, HUD began the process to reinstate both the 2013 disparate impact rule and the 2015 AFFH rule.
Under the Trump Administration, the US Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) included use of housing programs – such as Housing Choice Vouchers, public housing, and Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance – in ‘public charge’ determination. President Biden’s Executive Order on February 2, 2021 tasked federal agencies with reviewing and re-evaluating the public charge rule proposed under the former administration. In doing so, USCIS has declared a return to determining ‘public charge’ pursuant to the 1999 Field Guidance. As such, USCIS under President Biden will no longer consider use of these housing programs when determining if an applicant is a ‘public charge’.
In an effort to further support immigrant communities, HUD vacated the mixed-status rule. The Trump-era proposed rule prohibited HUD from prorating assistance to mixed-status families, regardless if some members were eligible to participate in HUD programs. By vacating the rule, mixed-status families are no longer forced to choose between staying together or receiving assistance that their members are eligible to receive.
Most recently, President Biden unveiled efforts to further alleviate the racial wealth gap. In commemoration of the 100-year anniversary of the Tulsa Race Massacre, the Administration revealed a first-ever interagency effort to address inequity in housing appraisals as well as conduct rulemaking in order to combat discrimination in housing. These actions seek to address the rampant racial inequities that exist in the US housing market.
- Nutrition. Under the direction of President Biden, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has taken actions to promote greater access to federal nutrition programs. Like the inclusion of public housing programs, the Trump Administration included SNAP as one of several anti-poverty programs to be used in a ‘public charge’ test. President Biden has sought to undo this harm by removing SNAP amongst others from the list of qualified programs used to determine ‘public charge’ status. Doing so opened doors for many mixed-status families to apply for and receive this crucial federal nutrition program.
Along with this effort to expand SNAP access, the USDA rescinded a restrictive rule that set time limits on access to SNAP benefits for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs). President Bident in addition has proposed to restore access to SNAP for individuals with past felony drug convictions in the American Families Plan. This key provision is a first step in addressing historical, racist, anti-drug policies and rhetoric of the 1960s and 1980s. Together, these actions would eliminate barriers for many individuals and families in desperate need for food assistance.
Moreover, USDA expanded SNAP emergency allotments to the individuals or families of the lowest incomes already receiving the maximum benefit. Under the former administration, these families and individuals were not eligible to receive the emergency allotments according to inequitable USDA guidance. Providing these benefits to program participants of the lowest incomes expands food budgets for many individuals struggling each day to put food on the table during the pandemic.
USDA has also withdrawn a Trump administration proposed rule, Revision of Categorial Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. This rule would have changed automatic eligibility standards as related to SNAP for recipients of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). In addition, this rule would have placed more administrative requirements on already overburdened state SNAP agencies. By withdrawing this rule, TANF recipients can continue to qualify for both programs without facing more hurdles to accessing the assistance they need.
- Tax. In part of his first steps to recognize how racial inequity plagues the tax code, President Biden has instructed the Secretary of the Treasury to oversee tax data analysis by race and ethnicity. These actions are the first steps to ensure greater transparency and equity in the tax code.
Federal agencies have begun the process of reviewing and promulgating new rules and issuing guidances for anti-poverty programs. Below are some comments that RESULTS has submitted in support of these anti-poverty programs and their participants. (Click on the bold titles below to see RESULTS’ comments.)
- Addressing Barriers for Immigrant Communities to Anti-Poverty Programs. When the Trump Administration first considered and then issued the public charge rule, immigrant communities raised the alarm of the sweeping negative impacts such a rule would have on families and their survival. Since issuing that rule, many immigrant families felt forced to make an impossible decision – risk access to basic needs or risk eligibility for citizenship. As the Biden Administration rescinded the Trump-era public charge rules, the US Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) has sought input on how to effectively move forward in engaging immigrant communities. RESULTS recognizes immigrants and their families play a crucial role in our country and provided comments advocating for clear communication regarding these rule changes.
- Taking a Closer Look at SNAP Benefit Calculations. In the 2018 Farm Bill, Congress required the USDA to complete an evaluation by 2022 of the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP). TFP is used as the basis for SNAP benefit calculations. The USDA has begun evaluating the TFP through listening sessions and written comments under the direction of President Biden. These listening sessions have included diverse coalitions of individuals reflecting on inadequacies found within the TFP, including commentary provided by RESULTS Board member and Expert on Poverty, Maxine Thomas. In addition, RESULTS will be providing written comments, incorporating reflections from other Experts on Poverty and coalition partners. USDA anticipates completing review of the TFP by the end of the fiscal year, as temporary COVID relief expansion ends. As the agency completes their review, advocates are hopeful that there will be a permanent increase to SNAP benefits, beginning October 1, 2021. SNAP is the most impactful anti-hunger program available, and the re-evaluation of TFP is a first step to make the program more effective.
- Implementing Monthly Child Tax Credits to Reduce Child Poverty. Through the American Rescue Plan (ARP), the Child Tax Credit (CTC) was expanded and made available as a monthly advance payment made to families. In an effort to support families to access this critical payment, RESULTS joined partners from the Automatic Benefits for Children (ABC) Coalition in urging the IRS to create user-friendly portals that will support families in accessing this benefit, even as life circumstances or banking information changes. Additionally, RESULTS has strongly advocated for the permanent expansion of the CTC, created under the ARP, which is estimated to lift over 5 million children out of poverty.
- Building a More Effective Housing Trust Fund. In a public comment submitted on June 25, 2021 to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, RESULTS shared their thoughts on how the Housing Trust Fund should be implemented. We support the income targeting rule which requires 100 percent of the Housing Trust Fund (HTF) to be used towards households with incomes at or less than the federal poverty line or 20 percent of the AMI, specifically in years where less than $1 billion is given towards the HTF. Additionally, RESULTS suggest to increase the affordability period from 30 to 50 years, as suggested by the National Housing Trust Fund Campaign. Finally, RESULTS proposed rent limitation when the federal poverty guideline exceeds 30 percent of the area median income (AMI) so household renters with this income at 30 percent of AMI will not be cost burdened by the maximum rent.
The federal anti-poverty programs are crucial mechanisms through which families access their basic needs to survive. While the current Administration is looking to “build back better” with explicit equity goals, as RESULTS advocates know, there is plenty more that we can do to eliminate inequity and create a poverty-free world.