Some theorists argue that cooperative intergovernmental relations are critical to policy implementation in the United States. This assertion is explored in the context of fair housing enforcement by comparing favorable administrative outcomes in fair housing complaints at the federal, state, and local levels from 1989 to 2004. What conclusions can be drawn from this systematic comparison of intergovernmental enforcement in one policy area over an extended period of time? First, cooperative federalism works well in fair housing enforcement. Second, of special significance, state civil rights agencies resolve complaints in favor of complainants nearly as often as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and localities sometimes do so even more frequently.

Housing segregation and discrimination remain contemporary American problems despite 40 years of policy initiatives aimed at combating them. Since strong presidential support and active bureaucratic enforcement of fair housing laws should reduce these problems, we investigate variation over time in presidential support for the Fair Housing Acts of 1968 and 1988 (Title VIII) and their enforcement. Our findings first indicate that President Nixon's interpretation of Title VIII notably weakened its scope and enforcement, but the most liberal outcomes in Title VIII policy and enforcement since the 1960s ironically surfaced during the Reagan years. Then merging two unique databases, we explore variations in Title VIII enforcement and find some fluctuation across enforcement indicators. Our study suggests that housing discrimination and segregation can be expected to continue absent strong presidential support and active bureaucratic enforcement of Title VIII that encourages a significant role for state and local civil rights agencies.Segregation and discrimination continue in the American housing market despite 40 years of major policy initiatives aimed at combating them. Consider housing segregation. Since the passage of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968), studies have repeatedly concluded that residential segregation is widespread and persistent, that it remains high but has

This article systematically compares the efficiency of federal, state, and local civil rights agencies in enforcing national fair housing policy over time, with special attention to the South. State and local agencies processed Fair Housing Act complaints more efficiently than the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), southern agencies outperformed HUD, and the probability that a racial discrimination complaint resulted in a favorable outcome for the alleged victim was the same for complaints originating within and outside the South. These findings suggest that the fair housing enforcement model may provide useful concepts for sharing power in other policy areas in the American federal system.

ObjectiveWe investigate how three levels of government have enforced the Fair Housing Act as a cooperative federalism program.MethodsBased on data obtained from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), we test a multivariate fixed effects logistic regression model.ResultsFirst, the Fair Housing Act's substantial equivalency requirement and HUD's Fair Housing Assistance Program have enabled state and local civil rights agencies to play an essential role in enforcing national fair housing policy. Second, there is little difference in the extent to which federal, state, and local agencies provide outcomes favorable to fair housing complainants. Third, local agencies have been most likely to provide favorable outcomes in recent years.ConclusionEncouraging state and particularly local agencies to participate more actively in fair housing enforcement would strengthen American federalism without significantly affecting complainants’ outcomes. Research involving effectiveness and efficiency in fair housing enforcement reinforces this argument.

Objective. This study investigates the effect of attitudes, case facts, and political control on the fair housing decisions made by administrative law judges (ALJs) at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Methods. Based on data obtained from HUD under a Freedom of Information Act request, we use Probit regression to model the outcomes of every housing discrimination case decided by the entire population of ALJs between 1989 and 2003. Results. We discover significant variation in the likelihood of a pro-complainant outcome and the amount of actual damages awarded in fair housing disputes. Conclusion. The attitudinal model of judicial decision making appears to apply to ALJ behavior in housing discrimination cases. At the same time, case facts, bureaucratic oversight, and other legal factors constrain ALJs.