Bill Overview
Title: Military Housing Affordability Act of 2022
Description: This bill extends certain authorities of the Department of Defense (DOD) to adjust basic housing allowances for military housing in certain areas. Specifically, the bill extends to December 31, 2024, DOD's authority to increase the rates of basic housing allowance in areas of a declared major disaster or areas containing one or more military installations that are experiencing a sudden increase in the number of members assigned to the installation. The bill also extends to September 30, 2024, DOD's authority to prescribe a temporary adjustment to basic housing allowance rates if DOD determines the costs of adequate housing for civilians in that military housing area differs from the current allowance rates by more than 20%.
Sponsors: Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5]
Target Audience
Population: Military personnel in the United States and their families
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The bill addresses housing allowance adjustments for military personnel, affecting military members stationed in certain areas.
- Adjustments are pertinent where there are declared major disasters or sudden increases in military personnel at installations, implying large local impacts where those conditions are met.
- Areas with housing costs deviating significantly from current allowances will also be impacted, indicating potential localized economic effects.
Reasoning
- This policy primarily targets military personnel living off-base in specific areas experiencing major disasters or sudden population influxes due to changes in military assignments.
- Given the budget, the impacts will be felt most significantly in locations meeting the policy's criteria.
- Those not in these specific areas or unaffected by the local economic conditions will likely see minimal to no impact from the policy.
- Military personnel make up a significant, yet targeted, subgroup within the US population, so other citizens will not be directly affected by this policy.
Simulated Interviews
Active-duty Military (Fort Carson, Colorado)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this policy will help us manage our housing expenses as it has become increasingly difficult with the local price hikes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Navy Personnel (Jacksonville, Florida)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this policy affects me much, since my area hasn't seen much change in housing costs.
- I do feel it's unfair that only certain areas benefit from this.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
Marine Corps Officer (San Diego, California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy could significantly ease the burden of housing costs in high-demand areas like San Diego.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Army Soldier (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Housing in Hawaii is already expensive. Such a policy is crucial to offset these costs for military families.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Military Reserve (Fort Hood, Texas)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see my situation changing much with this policy, as Fort Hood hasn't seen the drastic housing fluctuations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Air Force Pilot (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Current housing costs are really squeezing my budget. Adjustments would be helpful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Coast Guard Officer (Norfolk, Virginia)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy seems fair, but it really won't change much in our area.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Military Contractor (Anchorage, Alaska)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While not directly impacted, I'm curious to see if this policy affects housing market dynamics here indirectly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
DOD Official (Washington D.C.)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My role allows me to see the broad benefits of such policies, though personally unaffected. It's critical for adjusting personnel logistics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Military Spouse (Fort Bragg, North Carolina)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy seems targeted at current active-duty folks, and as a retiree on a fixed income, I remain unaffected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $55000000 (Low: $32000000, High: $75000000)
Year 3: $60000000 (Low: $35000000, High: $80000000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill targets specific geographic areas, making federal budget impacts dependent on regional housing market conditions.
- The policy aligns with temporary needs during disasters or sudden demographic shifts around military installations.
- Unpredictability in housing market conditions in specified areas adds variability to cost estimates.