Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Federal Funding for Housing Projects. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 4 page paper evaluates an article called Losing Hope that focuses on Hope VI, a program involved with funding public housing. The paper focuses on a thesis and how the article both proves and disproves that thesis. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: RT13_SA342ph.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
importantly to provide a roof over the heads of those who could not do that for themselves. While not a perfect system, public housing has been moderately successful. Critics
argue that the projects (as they are often called) are crime ridden and that the programs have not worked. At the same time, many residents would be without a place
to live without the funding that is used to provide them with shelter. According to a student, there have always been very specific problems associated with public housing in
the United States. To some extent, a Washington Business Journal article entitled "Losing Hope" illustrates and supports the hypothesis. At the same time, some elements disprove the hypothesis. The
article, written by Sean Madigan (2003), explains that the Senate appropriations committee cut funding for the Hope VI program, hence the title "Losing Hope." Hope is in fact the ticket
to success for public housing projects. Yet, the money was no longer flowing from the government. This sets up an immediate suggestion that the primary problem with public housing is
that it is dependent on federal aid. The article goes on to say that the 2004 budget includes no money for Hope VI (2003). The money to emanate from the
Hope budget goes to assisting the rebuilding of dilapidated housing projects and the author sees the funds as vital for "redeveloping poor neighborhoods" (2003, p.1). The author
seems to support Hope but also cites critics who contend that the program is too slow and that the same thing can be accomplished in other ways (Madigan, 2003). Another
important element of the program is that it does not build up projects and keep the poor segregated. Rather, its intent is to combine subsidized housing with market rate housing
...