A Phil Hall Op-Ed: President Trump submitted his proposed Fiscal Year 2026 budget to Congress and it reduces non-defense discretionary spending by $163 billion. Among the proposed cuts is the $33.6 billion reduction in funds allocated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), a 44% shrinkage from the current $77 billion level.
At first glance, this sounds severe. Indeed, when you review the proposed budget, you discover that HUD would be shorn of such fixtures as the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, the HOME Investment Partnership Program, the Pathways to Removing Obstacles (PRO) Housing program, and the Fair Housing Initiatives Program. Surviving programs are significantly streamlined.
In presenting these proposed changes, the Trump team makes a cogent argument of how these well-intended initiatives strayed too far from their goals and turned into misguided and often ridiculous endeavors that failed to address the problems they were supposed to solve.
In arguing for the end of CDBG, for example, the Trump budget offers this explanation: “CDBG is poorly targeted, and the program has been used for a variety of projects that the Federal Government should not be funding, such as improvement projects at a brewery, a plaza for concerts, and skateboard parks. This type of a program is better funded and administered at the State and local level. For example, the Town of Greenwich in Connecticut’s famously affluent ‘Gold Coast’ does not need Federal grants, yet it received nearly $4 million in CDBG funding in the last five years and spent it on wasteful projects like theater arts programming for students and public swimming pool renovations.”
As for the HOME Investment Partnership Program, there is this reasoning: “The Federal Government’s involvement increases the regulatory burden of producing affordable housing. State and local governments are better positioned to address comprehensively the array of unique market challenges, local policies, and impediments that lead to housing affordability problems.”
A consistent observation in the Trump budget is that housing issues – especially in regard to affordable housing – are better handled at a state and/or local level, where matters related to zoning, infrastructure and quality of life can be addressed with more expertise. It also keeps the federal agenda out of localities that don’t share Washington’s philosophy. This is especially obvious with the proposed elimination of PRO Housing, which the budget noted “was used by the previous administration to advance ‘equity’ under the guise of an affordable housing development program.”
The Trump budget will enable state and local governments to stop putting their hands out to Washington and instead take the lead in addressing the affordable housing and development challenges within their communities. Whether they prefer to continue to the discredited DEI agenda pushed by the Biden administration is their call.
The budget also recommends that the Section 8 housing voucher program be replaced with smaller block grants to states, which could then be allocated by the states “based on their unique needs and preferences.” Many organizations that supposedly advocate for affordable housing are furious over this assault on the status quo, claiming it will drive up homelessness. Never mind that homelessness reached record highs in the Biden era with Section 8 firmly in place – I don’t recall any of those organizations becoming melodramatic when that occurred.
The argument to keep these programs is not strong. Nikitra Bailey, executive vice president of the National Fair Housing Alliance, acknowledged that “the nation is in the throes of a fair and affordable housing crisis.” Well, that didn’t happen overnight – and if the HUD programs worked as they were originally designed, there wouldn’t be a crisis. What’s the point of sinking billions of dollars into programs that made no impact on their intended targets?
The real question is whether Congress – or to be more specific, the GOP members of Congress – will keep most of the proposed budget intact. Pressure from special interest groups, a mostly Trump-hating mainstream media and some of their constituents who feel threatened by the budget cuts will certainly interfere in the budget preparation process.
Nonetheless, the president’s proposed budget is a much-needed first step away from inefficient bureaucracy – hopefully, more steps will be undertaken to create a government that generates positive results for Americans and not one that seems to exist only to waste money without accomplishing anything of value.
Phil Hall is editor of Weekly Real Estate News. He can be reached at [email protected].
HUD is an iron booted monster perpetuating poverty for the political gain of the Democrats and RINOS. Shut it down. End the corruption. End the poverty.
I wholeheartedly agree. Stop worthless govt giveaway programs!!
There is a way to end homelessness in America, I’ve been working on it for years, but it would take a “village”. If President Trump has any interest, I’d be happy to speak with him about it. It would be a powerful legacy for him!! Look at what Henry did for “Give Kids the World” and what Walt Disney did. These programs are not helping, but there is a way!
Our federal government was made by Democrats for Democrats. Likewise, its many many “programs.” Democrat’s creation of the permanent welfare state along with enabling and perpetuation by fake conservatives/RINO’s, we now have a reliable Democrat voting block that will keep Democrats in power for perpetuity. Even though the Republicans are “in power” for now, you need to honestly ask the question “are they really?” when our current system of government really is a defacto Democrat government by design and with its entrenched and resistant leftist ideolog Deep State, “do Republican presidents even matter?” Keeping people on the government dole does not solve homeless and poverty, but it sure does buy votes.