No abstract

No abstract

is a research associate in the Urban Institute's Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center. His research focuses on economic and community development of low-income neighborhoods, affordable housing, and access to capital for low-income individuals and communities.

We study an Illinois state government program called “member initiative spending” and examine the extent to which three competing theories can explain the program's allocations among Illinois's 118 House districts. We show that member initiative monies distributed before the 2000 general election were disproportionately allocated to districts that were politically competitive, represented by legislative leaders, or represented by moderate legislators. Our analysis supports theories that claim budgetary decisions made by elected officials are tactical, and it shows that the Illinois decision makers who allocated member initiative funds sought to distribute them in a way that would be most beneficial in the sense of vote buying.

Shared equity initiatives provide homeownership opportunities to low-and moderateincome families who buy homes at below-market prices. The appreciation that can be earned by resellers is limited to preserve the homes' affordability at resale. This article analyses affordability, personal wealth, security of tenure, and mobility outcomes for seven shared equity programs across the USA. Homebuyers earned returns that were competitive with what they would have received if they had invested in stocks or bonds. In addition, homes remained affordable to lower income buyers over time as the homes were resold. Homeownership under these programs was sustainable: there were very low delinquency and foreclosure rates and many families who sold their homes were able to use their sales' proceeds to purchase market-rate homes. Owners also showed little evidence of being locked in place, and moved to new homes at rates near the national average.