To: Darryl LaCounte, Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs
From: Esme Bikales
Date: May 15th, 2023
RE: Addressing Indian Housing Problems By Tackling Underlying Poverty
Executive Summary
American Indians and Alaska Natives must be able to secure the full rights to
their land to liberate themselves from the poverty that causes dire housing conditions
and other social problems in tribal communities. The housing conditions that plague
tribal lands today are perpetuated by persistent poverty, low income, and high
unemployment. The current housing policy, the Native American Housing Assistance
and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA), helps build homes on tribal lands but fails to
address underlying poverty and stimulate much-needed economic development, despite
this being one of its objectives. Additionally, NAHASDA is routinely underfunded, like
many social programs for American Indians. Solving the tribal housing crisis is urgent as
the American Indian population is growing rapidly.
Since American Indian housing problems are intrinsically linked to tribal poverty
and require solutions beyond what the Department of Housing and Urban Development
can offer, this memo addresses the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the principal government
agency on enhancing the well-being of American Indian individuals, communities, and
tribes.
Scope of the Issue
American Indians and Alaska Natives living on tribal lands experience more
severe housing problems than other Americans. Their communities’ unique
circumstances - remoteness, lack of electrical, water, and roadway infrastructure, and
complex historical legal issues over land and home ownership - make improving
housing conditions extremely difficult. In a 2017 US Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) report on the housing needs of American Indians in tribal areas,
Pindus et al. (2017, p. xviii) noted that plumbing, gas, and electrical deficiencies,
structural and condition deficiencies, and overcrowding significantly burden AIAN
families on tribal lands. 34% of AIAN households on tribal lands suffer from at least one
housing problem compared to 7% of households in the United States (Pindus et al.,
2017, p. xix). Incidents of housing problems are highest in Plains, Arizona/New Mexico,
and Alaska, coincidentally the poorest regions.
Housing problems on tribal lands lead to persistent overcrowding, as tribe
members are more likely to take in family and other loved ones who do not have a place
to stay. According to Pindus et al. (2017, p. xx), 19% of AIAN household heads reported
housing more people than could live comfortably, while 2% of households nationwide
are overcrowded. Overcrowding seriously harms the overall well-being of Native
communities. It leads to decreased education and health problems, as well as increased
incidents of domestic violence and suicide attempts.
Substandard housing on tribal lands is perpetuated by persistent poverty and low
income. According to the American Community Survey, one-third of American Indian
households on tribal lands live in poverty compared to 18% of households nationwide
(US Census Bureau, 2021).
A significant hurdle of private home development and mortgage lending in Indian
Country is the trust land system, which contains most tribal lands. The United States
holds tribal land in trusts to protect and reserve it for the tribe and maintains much
administrative control. This makes it incredibly difficult to start local businesses, develop
land, and capitalize on their land’s resources. The land cannot be readily sold or
mortgaged as it is subject to significant oversight by the federal government (Pindus et
al., 2017, p. 134). Executing a mortgage can require approval from the Secretary of the
Interior, an issue non-Indians do not generally deal with. According to Adam Crepelle,
on Indian lands, companies must go through four government agencies and 49 steps to
acquire a permit for energy development. Off the reservation, it only takes four steps
(2023). Complex jurisdictional issues also deter business development. Therefore,
tribes improving homes and increasing homeownership on tribal lands is very difficult
due to the lack of capital. This keeps tribal lands dependent on funds from the
government, which are routinely insufficient for pulling American Indians out of poverty.
Existing Policy
The Native American Housing and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA)
effectively builds homes for AIAN individuals. Still, it fails to remedy underlying tribal
poverty or liberate tribes from the complex legal issues surrounding their land ownership
rights. NAHASDA recognized the federal government’s obligation to provide safe and
affordable housing on tribal lands and that the tribes can run their housing programs, a
win for tribes’ self-determination and participation rights.
Under NAHASDA, federal assistance is distributed through Indian Housing Block
Grants (IHBG), which are received directly by American Indian tribes. The Act seeks to
develop safe and affordable housing on tribal lands, increase American Indian access to
private mortgage markets, integrate infrastructure and housing resources for tribes, and
promote the development of private capital markets in Indian Country (Pindus et al.,
2017, p. 95). Tribes engage in self-monitoring by submitting a plan of how they intend to
use their funds and an annual performance report quantifying what the recipient has
achieved with the funds and accounts for the quality of homes built and restored.
Between 1998 and 2014, about 158,100 housing units were constructed or rehabilitated
under NAHASDA, proving that tribal governments can be more effective in managing
themselves than the more professionalized Indian Housing Authority system had been
(Pindus et al., 2017, p. 114).
NAHASDA falls short of curing tribal housing problems in several ways. The
IHBG programs support cluster housing to build infrastructure more efficiently and
manage land and building resources. However, according to multiple tribe leaders
interviewed by the Government Accountability Office, American Indian individuals often
prefer to live in sparsely populated areas. They often view the cluster housing
developments as “reservation ghettos” that have “disrupted original social networks”
and are breeding grounds for crime (GAO, 2014, p. 26). Additionally, under NAHASDA,
there is no mechanism for IHBG recipients to evaluate the program’s effectiveness and
in addressing their current housing problems.
The most significant gap in NAHASDA is its failure to stimulate economic
development on tribal lands and reduce poverty. Violence, abuse, and poor physical and
mental health outcomes persist in the population. These are symptoms of poverty and
of hundreds of years of oppression to which NAHASDA does not respond. It would not
cure the poverty and subsequent issues on tribal lands even if sufficiently funded.
Policy Options
Three policy options for amending NAHASDA to tackle tribal poverty and
subsequent housing problems better are granting American Indians full rights to their
land, a monthly universal income for all American Indian individuals, and creating an
American Indian child tax credit. All three options respect tribes’ capability to foster their
well-being. Here is a more detailed look at the options:
1. A system that turns trust lands into lands owned by Indian tribes or individuals
a. Advantages:
i. This would stimulate economic development and private
investment, as companies could more easily come to Indian land
and provide capital and jobs.
ii. American Indians could capitalize on their land’s natural resources,
including energy resources. Companies would be less avoidant of
tribal land.
iii. American Indians could more easily become homeowners through
landownership and/or mortgage lending. According to Pindus et al.,
68% of American Indian households were homeowners in 2015,
while 90% of renters would prefer to own their homes (p. xxi).
Indians would have better access to mortgage lending as well.
iv.
American Indians could build homes that align with tribes’
traditional ways of life, unlike the cluster housing built under
NAHASDA, which tribes are often unsatisfied with.
v. It would open the door to developing infrastructure systems, like
electricity to remote areas, that Indian lands often lack.
b. Disadvantages:
i. This option does not directly provide more capital to tribes. The
benefit would be long-term and risky, as it could fail to increase
economic development on tribal lands for many reasons.
ii. Individuals may lack education on how to properly manage their
homes and/or land. This would require funding and developing
education programs on home and land ownership financial
management.
iii. Tribes and American Indian landowners would likely have to pay
higher land taxes, as the trust land system guarantees lower taxes.
2. Universal monthly income for all American Indians
a. Advantages:
i. Individuals and households would have more spending money.
Universal income has proven many times to decrease poverty.
ii.
Universal income supports self-determination and decision-making
power.
iii. It could provide necessary funds for households to fix their housing
problems.
iv.
Universal income could help local businesses on tribal lands, such
as mom-and-pop grocery stores.
b. Disadvantages:
i. Universal income is purely federal assistance. It does not address
the antiquated bureaucratic landowning system on tribal lands.
ii. It likely would not lead to improving infrastructure, such as plumbing
or electricity.
3. Child tax credit to all Indian families on tribal lands regardless of income
a. Advantages:
i. Child tax credits are effective at reducing poverty and increasing
disposable income.
ii. This policy is in line with the high birthrate of American Indians. In
2015 8% of women on tribal lands gave birth compared to 5% of
American women (Sorensen, 2023).
iii. This policy may help to reduce overcrowding, as families with more
children will have more money to improve their homes or build new
ones.
b. Disadvantages:
i. Due to the rampant unemployment, families may not have any
income or enough income to qualify for a tax credit.
ii. A tax credit is also merely government assistance that does not
support tribal sovereignty over their ancestral lands.
iii. Like a universal income, a tax credit would not likely lead to
infrastructure improvements.
Recommendation
I recommend allowing tribes to free their land from the trust land system. Poverty
is not an Indigenous trait. Tribal economies can thrive and create safe housing for their
families when given access to land and capital. According to a 1996 Urban Institute
report written by Kingsley et al. and referenced by Pindus et al. (2017),
Federal assistance in and of itself will never be a sufficient or appropriate way to
deal with the full range of housing problems and opportunities in Indian Country.
Further priority needs to be given to economic development in tribal areas with
related policy thrust to encourage more private investment in Indian housing. (p.
95)
To address NAHASDA’s shortcomings and provide American Indian tribes with the self
sovereignty and determination our government promises, tribes must have the option to
own and use their ancestral lands.
References
Crepelle, A. Federal Policies Trap Tribes in Poverty (2023). American Bar Association.
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_h
ome/wealth-disparities-in-civil-rights/federal-policies-trap-tribes-in-poverty/
Pindus, N., Kingsley, T., Biess, J., Levy, D., Simington, J. K., & Hayes, C. J. (2017).
Housing Needs of American Indians and Alaska Natives in Tribal Areas: A Report
from the Assessment of American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian
Housing Needs. Social Science Research Network.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3055776
Sorensen, E. Exploring Tribal Demographic Data: Part Three (2023). Administration for
Children & Families.
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/ocsedatablog/2023/03/exploring-tribal-demographicdata-prt-three#:~:text=About%208%25%20of%20Native%20American,ages%20
of%2015%20and%2050.
United States Government Accountability Office. (2014). Native American Housing:
Additional Actions Needed to Better Support Tribal Efforts.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-14-255.pdf