Affordable Housing Bonds

I read a blog that was posted on Burnt Orange Report, a liberal political blog. The blogger addressed the issue of amendment for affordable housing bonds that will be up for vote in the November election. The purpose of the blog was for Burnt Orange Report to endorse a "yes" for the vote, and get other supporters on board with it. The affordable housing bonds would be specific bonds set in place for the city of Austin, and would be used for constructing and improving affordable housing for low-income citizens, acquiring land and property for the affordable housing, and funding non-profit affordable housing programs that are already in place. The blogger points out that these funds would help families, senior citizens, those with disabilities, and everyone else in between with the growing cost of Austin as a city. The funds would not come from taxation, since the funds are within the City of Austin's existing bonding capacity. Also, all recipients of these funds would be paying rent or have some sort of payment set up for their housing.

I thought this blog was interesting, and thought it could have some impact on several of my peers within the class. The author's intended audience was obviously those who share a liberal view of politics. I thought the blog was written to highlight the benefits of the housing funds, which was done nicely, but was also very vague on the details. The author states that these funds are "within the City of Austin's existing bonding capacity", but does not state what programs would lose funding if we adopted these housing bonds. They also state that a purpose of the funds would be for "acquiring land and property", but there is no mention of where this land and property come from. This vagueness in the details of the program makes me weary of the consequences of its adoption. It sounds like a great program, one that could serve progressively to a great number of people. However, I would appreciate more insight to effects that these funds would place on other issues. As stated earlier, the blogger was definitely trying to appeal to a more liberal leaning group of people. This became apparent when it was written, "For those who oppose "government hand-outs," (and who probably do not read this blog anyways) it's worth noting that all residents of housing supported by these bonds pay rent or put some of their own money into purchasing their homes." While this is a great point, the apparent stab at conservative leaning supporters could be viewed as an ignorant remark. I thought this took away some credibility from the author, and could possibly discourage people, who are on the fence about the issue, from supporting the issue.

Overall, I thought the blog fit its purpose. However, there were many flaws that created some hesitation for supporting these affordable housing bonds. The benefits of these bonds seem very useful to many people, and I hope that a balance can be reached so they can be implemented. I would recommend looking more into more sources about the details of this amendment rather than just basing a decision off what is written in this blog.