Portside

The Trump administration is escalating its efforts to dismantle federal rental assistance, targeting the Housing Choice Voucher Program—commonly known as Section 8—through budget cuts, new eligibility requirements, and sweeping administrative directives. The changes could displace millions of households, including families with children, seniors, disabled tenants, and low-wage workers.

The Housing Choice Voucher Program is the largest federal rental assistance initiative, serving approximately 2.3 million low-income households across the country. According to data cited by USAFacts, the program provides stable housing to 2.7 percent of U.S. residents. Nearly a quarter of those living in subsidized housing have a disability, 33 percent of households include minor children, 74 percent are headed by women, 41 percent are headed by people over the age of 62, and 66 percent are headed by people of color.

HUD Secretary Scott Turner has taken a confrontational approach, demanding that more than 3,000 Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) nationwide turn over detailed tenant information, including proof of citizenship, names, addresses, and unit details. Turner warned, “D.C. Housing Authority is on notice—we are demanding all citizenship information for residents. We are telling the same to the more than 3,000 Public Housing Authorities across the country. The taxpayer-funded vacation is over.” He added, “Whether you like it or not, we will uphold the law to its fullest extent. If you are here illegally, it’s time to pack your bags.”

Proof of citizenship or eligible immigration status is already required for federal rental assistance, but HUD’s directive threatens PHAs with funding reviews if they fail to comply within 30 days. Advocates warn the data demand could sow fear among mixed-status households and immigrant families who already face barriers in accessing housing aid.

Beyond immigration enforcement, the administration is advancing a rule that would impose work requirements and time limits across federal housing programs. Deborah Thrope, deputy director of the National Housing Law Project, explained that the rule originated from the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs rather than HUD, a break from the standard rulemaking process. “We still don’t know the details of what they’re proposing or what time limit on residency they’re recommending, but we expect it to be between two and five years,” Thrope said. “We also expect the rule to require ‘able-bodied’ people under the age of 62 to work at least 20 hours a week if they are not already doing so. As advocates, we know that this is a way to cut benefits since almost everyone who can work is already working. It also imposes onerous paperwork on local agencies that will have to monitor compliance.”

She further noted that the administration might bypass the traditional public comment process altogether: “This time, it seems possible that Trump will completely undercut this process by declaring a housing emergency under the ill-defined National Emergencies Act of 1976.”

The proposals reflect priorities laid out in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which called for slashing Medicaid, SNAP, and housing subsidies, eliminating the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Program, removing undocumented people from subsidized households, and repealing the Fair Housing Act. Turner’s language echoed this agenda when he declared, “the taxpayer-funded vacation is over.”

Donald H. Whitehead Jr., executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, described the administration’s agenda bluntly. “This is a war on the poor. We have seen almost every decision this administration has made favor those at the top of the economic ladder, whether it’s about education, housing, or immigration,” he said. Whitehead pointed out that work rules are recycled policy: “The government keeps going back to this tired and faulty playbook.”

That playbook has already failed. In 1996, 39 housing authorities mandated work programs for recipients. The initiative was expanded in 2016 under the Moving to Work program, but by 2022 most agencies had abandoned it. HUD’s own literature conceded that “literature documenting outcomes of work requirement policies in other federal government programs reveals few, if any, beneficial outcomes and several negative outcomes for program participants.” When examining Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, HUD admitted the program had “failed to help families achieve financial independence” and had driven a rise in “deep poverty.”

Still, the Trump administration is pushing further. The president’s FY2025 budget proposal would slash HUD’s discretionary budget by 51 percent from its $89.1 billion level, effectively halving rental assistance. For FY2026, the administration proposes replacing federal vouchers with state formula grants capped at two years for most recipients, with limited exceptions for elderly and disabled tenants. The White House framed the change as empowerment for states: “The Budget empowers States by transforming the current Federal dysfunctional rental assistance programs into a State-based formula grant which would allow States to design their own rental assistance programs based on their unique needs and preferences.”

Independent analyses warn of dire consequences. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities projected that more than 3.3 million people—including 1.7 million children and 2 million households with at least one working adult—would be put at risk of eviction and homelessness. The group noted that “even working full-time at 40 hours per week, nearly half of all workers in the U.S. are not paid wages high enough to rent a modest one-bedroom home.” Rental assistance, it added, “helps people afford a stable home, which makes finding and keeping a job easier, improves health and educational outcomes, reduces the use of emergency services, and keeps children in their homes and families together.”

Families already struggling say they cannot withstand the blow. Lynette, a Bronx resident and certified nursing assistant, explained, “I work as a certified nursing assistant and pay $1050 for a two-bedroom unit. The full rent is $3885. My daughters, ages 3 and 12, and I were homeless for 8 months, and I am working hard, going to school to become a registered nurse, raising my children, and working at a demanding job. I’m trying to come out of poverty. Losing the subsidy would set us back and impact me emotionally as well as financially.”

Janet, a resident of Florence, Kentucky, described her daughter and grandchildren’s dependence on Section 8. “My 39-year-old daughter has migraines and mood swings but does not receive SSI or Disability benefits,” she said. “Her children, a 16-year-old son with autism, asthma, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and speech apraxia, and a 13-year-old daughter with anxiety and a severe speech impediment, get benefits totaling $1813 a month. They also receive $267 a month in child support. Their rent is $859, which is manageable since they also get SNAP and Medicaid, but if they lose their Section 8, all of our lives will be a roller coaster. I get paid to care for my 88-year-old mother. If my daughter and her kids have to move in with me, it will mean I have to find a new apartment, and go from paying $850 a month to probably $2400 a month because we’ll need such a big space.”

Tenant advocates stress that these cases are representative of a broader crisis. Benjamin Finegan of Bozeman Tenants United pointed to corporate landlords profiting off subsidized housing while tenants remain vulnerable. “Corporations own buildings meant to provide housing to low-income people and buy up these properties and then invest as little as possible to maximize their profits,” Finegan said. “We need to fight for more resources to protect people from displacement and homelessness and build a robust tenant movement. Long-term, we need social housing, but in the short term, we need to fight for affordable housing, federal support, and build tenant power.”

Asantewaa Nkrumah-Ture of the Philadelphia Tenants Union connected the current assault on housing assistance to a longer history of resistance to federal equity efforts. “I came of age during the turbulent 1960s and 1970s, when the Southern segregationist slogan of states’ rights was their way of pushing back on federal laws to promote justice, fairness, and equality,” she said. “Wages are stagnant and do not keep up with the cost of housing, childcare and food. Gasoline and transportation costs continue to go up. Public housing and Section 8 are being threatened and may be in shorter supply within the next decade. This will make poverty worse. I can only hope that the housing justice movement continues to do grassroots organizing, political education, research, and lobbying to make the idea of housing as a human right a reality.”

With Congress due to return September 2 and face a September 30 deadline to finalize federal funding, the fight over Section 8 is approaching a critical moment. Housing justice organizers are preparing for what many describe as a historic confrontation over whether safe and stable shelter will remain a public commitment or become another casualty of austerity politics.

Alexis Sterling is a seasoned War and Human Rights Reporter with a passion for reporting the truth in some of the world's most tumultuous regions. With a background in journalism and a keen interest in international affairs, Alexis's reporting is grounded in a commitment to human rights and a deep understanding of the complexities of global conflicts.

At NationofChange, our mission is to help people create a more compassionate, responsible, and value-driven world, powered by communities that focus on positive solutions to social and economic problems. We strive to accomplish this mission through fearless journalism combined with boots-on-the-ground activism in order to create real-world, actionable strategies for change.