Congressional Candidates Clash Over Housing

In San Francisco, after nearly 40 years of congressional representation by one person, candidates looking to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi are pushing new housing development strategies and a rejection of the status quo.

For the three leading candidates, the question of housing supply and affordability has become a central issue. State Sen. Scott Wiener – a shepherd of the YIMBY movement who, over the last decade, has led a sea change in the state government’s approach to housing – has put out the most detailed strategy, highlighted by a $1.2 trillion program to pay cities $10,000 per new unit of housing built.

His two rivals have focused on a more obscure solution to the housing crisis. Across debates and public appearances, Saikat Chakrabarti, a former staffer for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan have consistently pushed for the repeal of what’s known as the Faircloth Amendment, a federal, arcane rule some affordable housing developers aren’t even privy to.

In 1998, Congress permanently froze and capped the number of homes a public housing authority could manage. At the time, the program’s limited cash flow meant many projects were falling into disrepair. Living conditions waned, and demolitions increased.

Since public housing rents are kept affordable through an active subsidy from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Faircloth Amendment helps to curb federal spending on subsidies. The bill, named after its author, former Sen. Lauch Faircloth of North Carolina, fit into a broader wave of welfare reform in the 1990s.

“This is something that currently prevents us from building new social housing,” Chakrabarti said at a debate last week. He and Chan have said repealing it would help spur a much needed expansion of public housing throughout the country.

In 2024, Chakrabarti’s former boss, Ocasio-Cortez, proposed something similar, but the bill died. Wiener, who has pushed for greater federal investment in housing, has not publicly commented on the Faircloth Amendment.

In California, as cities and counties push to keep up with enhanced housing mandates from the state, the elimination of the Faircloth Amendment could provide additional opportunities for developers to partner with jurisdictions to add more very low-income units, which is often the most challenging housing type to generate.

Experts argue that getting rid of the amendment would remove a ceiling but wouldn’t necessarily raise the floor. Ryan Finnigan, deputy research director at Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation, told The Real Deal that the original concern that spurred the Faircloth Amendment — that more public housing means more people living in slums — is “a bit dated,” but also warned against a belief that the rule represents the only chokepoint for expanding public housing.

While San Francisco data was not immediately available via HUD, other major metros offer a glimpse of the legislation in practice. Los Angeles County currently operates at 99 percent capacity and could only add another 31 housing units before bumping against its ceiling. New York City would have to add more than 24,000 public housing units to reach their limit, while Chicago would need 19,500.

Nationally, more than 72 percent of the 3,053 public housing authorities are within 5 percent of hitting their Faircloth limits on public housing, according to HUD data. And nearly 61 percent have reached their cap, meaning they couldn’t build more public housing if they wanted to.

“Repealing the Faircloth Amendment is a practical step that makes sense but won’t do much on its own,” Finnigan said. “The money isn’t there. So, yes, let’s repeal the Faircloth Amendment but there needs to be more money for housing authorities to develop and operate their properties.”