Properly property
Who speaks for landlords?
LAST MONTH, we saw a crawler on CNN: “Eviction moratorium lapses with 11-plus million people behind on rent.”
That’s a problem. But only half the problem. Because for each of those renters who has fallen behind on rent, there is a property owner who counted on that rent to pay his own bills—perhaps a mortgage on the very property being rented out.
There are all kinds of controversies surrounding the on-again, off-again, onagain moratorium on evictions that the Centers for Disease Control implemented, starting in the Trump administration. It seems everybody and his columnist brother has an opinion on the problem.
Why is the CDC involved at all? When did folks handling the pandemic get the expertise to decide on who pays rent to whom and for how long?
All of that started in the last administration. But when the current administration decided to renew the moratorium on evictions at the beginning of this month (the first one expired on July 31), President Biden hemmed and hawed about its legality, suggesting his signature could at least buy time for renters as the situation winds its way through the slow-moving courts.
For a president to suggest what he’s doing isn’t quite legal but only a political delaying tactic might be refreshing for its honesty, but think about what the left would have done to the last president for saying something like that.
The current moratorium on evictions is supposed to last until Oct. 3, so that’s another two months that the rent will pile up for millions. And another two months that landlords—property owners—might go without getting paid.
There’s a whole ’nuther round of criticism about how the feds and states have money to relieve both renters and owners—passed and signed during the relief bill(s) of the pandemic—but because of the massive bureaucracy, everything has seized up.
One question not being asked often enough: With national unemployment at 5.4 percent, why must the government be involved in this anymore?
THERE’S a school of thought that anybody who questions these moratoriums just wants to kick poor people into the streets. For no better reason than to be a Republican/ landlord apologist/Snidely Whiplash. But don’t property owners provide a service, and shouldn’t the service be worth the cost?
Owners of apartments and rent houses and duplexes aren’t all faceless corporations. A lot are mom-and-pop operations—people who have a few properties on the side, which is one way to cash in on a good credit score. When did the term “landlord” get a bad rep, anyway? Without them, there would be millions of Americans trying to find shelter another way.
If these property owners can’t pay their bills, then bankruptcy is possible. And what good does it do anybody— owner, renter, local governments that depend on property taxes—if property owners go belly-up?
A Census Bureau survey taken way back in the spring said about one in six renters were behind, which could have been as high as a $57 billion shortfall at the time. That shortfall is happening on somebody’s books.
Congress came through with a $45 billion rental aid package. But property owners have been having trouble getting to the money. For one reason, dispatches say they’re having a hard time getting their renters to sign up, and the aid can’t be delivered except with the cooperation of the renter. A writer for National Review says the gap between payments and what renters owe grows by about $5 billion a month.
But put aside the National Review, The Wall Street Journal, and other conservative Snidelys. Because even The New York Times recently covered the horror story of a woman who couldn’t evict abusive tenants living in her own home because of the moratorium. Media on the right and left are starting to pay attention to the consequences of these government interventions, not just the intentions of the policies.
When it is all over—will it be over in October? Or will Delta or another variant still be criss-crossing the world?— how many billions will renters be behind on payments? Surely they won’t be asked to come up with it. Then what about property owners? Are they supposed to just take the loss? Or will it be put on the national debt tab, like so much else?
But the bigger question might be what this holds for the future. Would anybody be surprised if our friends on the left began talking about making taxpayer-funded rent permanent? If you would be surprised, you haven’t been paying attention.
Last year, “the squad” in Washington talked up a rent-and-mortgage cancellation bill, with no impact on credit rating or rental history, all the while creating a relief fund for landlords and an operational fund to allow local governments, nonprofits and public housing authorities to buy private rental properties “in order to increase the availability of affordable housing.”
Because you know how government mandates, government control and government operations make things better and cheaper.
Especially in housing. See San Francisco.
The pandemic might not be over, not with this Delta variant. But the country is open again, and people are working. The nation’s businesses added almost a million jobs last month. Now might be a good time to start talking about property rights when discussing the housing market.