With All the COVID-Relief Money Flowing, Why Is There an Eviction Crisis?

by James A. Bacon

We’ve been living with the COVID-19 epidemic in Virginia for more than four months now. Given the fact that hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens have lost their jobs, it should not surprise us that some have had trouble paying their rent.

But I am surprised to read that Virginia is in the midst of a full-blown eviction crisis. Apparently, there is a backlog of more than 12,000 eviction cases in the courts. The Supreme Court of Virginia suspended eviction hearings in the early weeks of the epidemic, but let eviction proceedings resume May 18.

“People who did all the right things, who worked and were able to pay their rent and their bills have found themselves our of work and also out of money,” said Governor Ralph Northam in June. Now spokesmen for the poverty lobby are warning that thousands of people could be thrown into the streets, exacerbating the public health crisis.

There very well may be a genuine problem here. I’m not denying that. But there is more than meets the eye to this eviction crisis, and taxpayers should demand an explanation.

Virginians filed more than 800,000 unemployment claims between March and mid-June, say Tram Nguyen and Elaine Poon, with the New Virginia Majority and Legal Aid Justice Center respectively, in a Virginia Mercury column. Many found new work, leaving 386,000 unemployed at last count.

People losing their jobs are entitled to unemployment insurance, which ranges between $60 and $378 a week, depending upon lost wages. Not only that, thanks to the federal CARES ACT, workers received a $600-per-week unemployment supplement through July 31. In other words, the typical laid-off worker was bringing home more than $3,000 a month, not counting benefits such as food stamps, Medicaid, and other forms of assistance. Financially, most laid-off workers were better off than when they were working.

But the story doesn’t end there. Governor Ralph Northam allocated $50 million in CARES dollars to mortgage and rent relief. To be eligible, recipients must have been laid off, experienced a reduction in work hours, lost child or spousal support, or had to stay home to care for children. (The program is limited to recipients making less than 80% of their locality’s median income.) “Communities of color,” which experience higher eviction rates, are being targeted for outreach. The state website does not say how much money it is willing to dole out, but we can make an order-of-magnitude guess at how many people the program can help. If the mortgage/rent relief program pays $600 lump sums on average — enough to help most low-income people over a one-month hump for paying the rent — it would provide assistance to more than 80,000 households.

Last but certainly not least, there was the federal stimulus payment mailed to every taxpayer. Low-income households should have received up to $1,200 per tax filer.

So, here’s my question: Thanks to all the stimulus dollars, the poor and unemployed are awash in more money than they are accustomed to. Why can’t they pay their rent? Indeed, why aren’t they catching up on back rent?

One possibility is that they aren’t getting the money. Maybe the Virginia Employment Commission, overwhelmed with unemployment filings, has been slow to push out checks. Maybe the US Post Office is to blame and checks are getting lost in the mail. We haven’t heard about either scenario being the case here in Virginia, so I’m skeptical that this is an explanation, but you never know.

Another possibility is that poor people became suddenly overwhelmed with additional financial burdens due to the epidemic. I don’t know what they might be — other than stocking up on masks and toilet paper. There’s a vast poverty industry out there to highlight every hint of human misfortune and suffering befalling the poor, and we haven’t heard about such burdens, so I doubt that this is the explanation either.

A third possibility is that some poor or unemployed people — nine or ten thousand out of hundreds of thousands — are squandering the money on stupid stuff or feeding their drug/alcohol addictions rather than using it to pay their rent. Indeed, some poor people may see the COVID-virus as license to game the system and get away with skipping their rent payments altogether. If that’s the case, you can be assured that the poverty lobby will not be broadcasting the fact. On the other hand, I have seen no evidence to confirm such a conjecture.

The fact is, we don’t know. And we don’t know because no one seems to be asking the question. One thing we can say with confidence is that there seems to be a mismatch between the inundation of federal and state aid and the surge in evictions. Whatever the explanation, we’re not getting the whole story.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

14 responses to “With All the COVID-Relief Money Flowing, Why Is There an Eviction Crisis?”

  1. Steve Haner Avatar
    Steve Haner

    The first data point, usually missing, should be how the number of petitions at the court compares to the last few years (and remember, Virginia had a reputation for easy evictions already.) It could be the normal level just built up in a big backlog. As has been pointed out, people can be evicted for doing damage, for lease or rules violations, or for other problems besides falling behind on rent. Those folks also got a pass under the moratoriums, which even Trump is talking about extending (among his un-enumerated powers….).

    No question, the VEC has had issues getting everybody their checks quickly, and the new program for self-employed “gig” workers was very slow getting off the ground. I actually think people who were diligent about paying before stayed diligent if they got those payments.

    The message to landlords is clear: Find another way to invest your capital, as the government will suddenly prevent your cash flow without warning. They have to pay their bills, and I’m sure the Tax Collector doesn’t accept the eviction moratorium as an excuse for their late taxes or utility bills.

    1. djrippert Avatar
      djrippert

      ” … nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

      How is the government interceding between a landlord and a tenant to prevent the landlord from executing a valid contract (called a lease) not an unlawful taking of private property without just compensation? Isn’t a valid, legal executed lease a form of private property?

  2. LGABRIEL Avatar

    It seemsg each individual taking as if this problem could have been avoided by requiring each individual taking advantage of the moratorium to provide the specific reasons he/she was doing so. If it was because of money issues, they should have to provide information about how the pandemic either decreased their income (after taking into consideration CARES-related income) or increased their expenses. They would be required to amend any statements if they later received any back pay or delayed unemployment or other compensation. These statements would then be available to the court in helping decide eviction cases.

    1. TooManyTaxes Avatar
      TooManyTaxes

      What, ask for responsible behavior? Don’t forget that medical school racist Ralph Northam has to continue making other people make his amends with their money. But the editorial board at the Post still supports him.

  3. Yet not a single politician or pundit mentions ‘mortgage relief’ for the landlords.

    Why are these home providers being squeezed?

  4. VaNavVet Avatar

    “Financially most laid-off workers were better off than when they were working”.
    Is there any actual evidence of this or is this merely more hyperbole from Jim? One would presume that some might be better off but can you really say most? The whole tone of the piece seems to be about dumping on the working poor many of whom were previously working more than one job to support their families and to keep current with their bills. This includes many single mothers and families with children having serious medical issues. It is easy to criticize from afar.

    1. VaNavVet, The CARES Act saw to it that every worker losing his/her job due to COVID-19 receive a $600-per-week check over and above his/her unemployment insurance check through July 31. $600 a week translates into $30,000 a year. How would it be even theoretically possible for a lower-income worker to not have more disposable income, especially if they were getting food stamps and other forms of assistance?

      Just give me a hypothetical how it might be otherwise.

  5. Baconator with extra cheese Avatar
    Baconator with extra cheese

    You ask Jim to back up his assertions (you have me with that one) then say “many single moms”. Can you back up the “many” or is that a guess?
    And when we hear about poor single moms I wish they would refer to those suffering as the “children of deadbeat dads”…
    My daughter’s mom is a single mom…. but as a dad I make sure my child is housed above all else… deadbeat dads (and moms… mine was a deadbeat mom) should be shamed to the ends of the earth…

  6. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    One thing that may well be going on is that the recipients knew the benefits would stop and doubted that the govt would act to reinstate them. There were many reports of people unable to get them also. So a lot of them are, no doubt, hedging their bets trying to make the money they got – last longer.

    So it turns out they were right. Congress can’t agree how or when to extend or if more than $200 so these folks are going to hold on to the money. $600 is not 30K a year if it’s only 3 months worth….

    The other thing, with the current “economy” – if the apartment owners actually can kick up the non-payers – is there any demand for apartments right now? I mean with so many unemployed or under-employed – are there really people looking around for apartments right now?

    This was back in march from WSJ:

    ” Financially strapped apartment landlords with government-backed mortgages can avoid foreclosure if they don’t evict tenants, the Federal Housing Finance Agency said Monday.

    The order applies to the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage companies, which will extend mortgage forbearance to any landlord “negatively affected by the coronavirus national emergency,” according to the agency.

    “Renters should not have to worry about being evicted from their home, and property owners should not have to worry about losing their building, due to the coronavirus.” said FHFA director Mark Calabria in a statement.”

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/fed-government-moves-to-protect-apartment-owners-tenants-11584991787

  7. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    Landlords can still make a hot fire to much to bear for a renter. People that don’t pay will be moving along.

  8. Atlas Rand Avatar
    Atlas Rand

    This is government theft, plain and simple. If they can mandate that my renters don’t have to pay, then the government should have to pay that rent. This is an egregious overreach into private agreements. I believe it will have long term affects, as liberals gain more control, to just mandate some bills/debts don’t have to be paid. It’s coming when the student loans start being forgiven. Why are student loan debts different than mortgage or credit card debt? If you can give everyone 50k dollar direct payment towards student loans, then why not 50k towards my mortgage? Theft and more theft.

  9. VaNavVet Avatar

    As I recall, the number of families who live paycheck to paycheck and can not afford an unexpected bill of $400 or more is between 40% and 50%. This could reasonably apply to VA as well. Thus, even when making over $30K per year they would not be better off financially with the enhanced unemployment benefits. There was of course delays of various lengths in the receipt of these benefits. Hence, families that lost jobs had to decide which bills to pay and which to let lapse. These decisions could well lead to fees and penalties that compound the problem. In addition to rent there could be recurring bills for prescription drugs, health insurance, utilities, car insurance, and the like. So in Va there would be hundreds of thousands of folks living paycheck to paycheck facing these decisions.

    1. That’s one reasonable explanation of why so many people are falling behind. There is lots of aid available, but a number of people are falling between the cracks. If that’s the case, perhaps we should work on identifying and filling the cracks.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        And it’s not 30K a year, it’s $600 a month until Congress stops it so hang on to it as long as you can until you know there is more coming.

Leave a Reply