Statement on the Expired CDC Eviction Moratorium

Photo via Getty Images

 
Friend,

Nobody deserves to wonder if one Supreme Court decision is the difference between keeping their family safely housed or becoming homeless.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision lacks acknowledgment of the ongoing public health crisis and the role housing provides in ensuring our collective health and safety. Both the federal and state governments have an opportunity to do right by those in precarious housing situations right now. MassBudget’s recent release, Piecemeal Progress: An Exploration of Massachusetts Housing Investments, highlights the long-standing relationship between state and federal policies impacting the day-to-day lives and housing options people in the Commonwealth have — or don’t have. The refusal to address the need for measures to keep people in their homes and communities lacks empathy as we’re still trying to recover from a pandemic that has laid bare our need to work toward collective well-being.

In light of last week’s Court decision, the state needs to step up its support for tenants and small landlords. Further, it needs to focus more on long-term solutions such as creating pathways toward homeownership — particularly among those who have been shut out of homeownership opportunities and could be pushed out of their communities by the end of eviction moratorium protections. Piecemeal Progress shows that the state’s approach to housing funding has been disjointed and shortsighted, and we have the chance not to do that again in this moment.

Readers can ask their legislators to support the Housing Equity Bill (H.1434/S.891) to provide people and their families with more protection as we recover from the pandemic. This bill would help to prevent displacement, ensure timely and equitable distribution of rental assistance, and promote racial and economic equity. Learn more from this Homes for All fact sheet.

La-Brina Almeida
State Policy Fellow & Policy Analyst

###

Latest

Where Might Home Sales Be Subject to the Fair Share Amendment? A Local Breakdown

In the majority of Massachusetts cities and towns, no homes sold for a net gain of $1 million or more, meaning they wouldn’t be subject to any additional taxes under the Fair Share Amendment.

Read More →

62F Credits Benefit the Rich

The “tax cap law,” or what is known as “62F,” sets an artificial limit on how much tax revenue Massachusetts can collect, regardless of the current needs of the Commonwealth. This law in effect transfers to higher income households tax revenue paid by lower income households and does nothing to improve racial or economic equity in our state.

Read More →

Interactive Map: Most Home Sales Will Not Likely Lead to Fair Share Tax Payments

Even in Massachusetts’ hot housing market with many homes selling for over $1 million, the vast majority of all home sales will not subject the home sellers to a proposed “millionaire’s tax.”

Read More →
Scroll to Top

Get news from Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center in your inbox.