by Anna Aguilar and Sidney Lee
In 1971, Congress tasked the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) with establishing procedures to “eliminate as far as practicable” the dangers of lead poisoning. Yet, HUD has repeatedly fallen short of accomplishing this. More than 50 years later, for children in federally assisted housing in the United States, lead exposure is hardly a thing of the past. Government inaction by HUD has consistently marred efforts to eliminate lead poisoning. HUD typically only takes action to prevent lead poisoning in federally assisted housing when compelled by Congress or a government watchdog. Protecting the health of children should not be reserved only when an agency is compelled to do so – especially when delay places children in jeopardy.
Any amount to lead exposure is hazardous, and young children – especially those under age six – are at particular risk. Even small amounts of lead can cause severe and irreversible harm to the brain. For the 3.6 million children currently living in homes with lead-based paint, each day is a gamble with their health.
Despite knowing the extensive and well-documented dangers of lead, HUD has resisted its obligation to eliminate lead exposure in federally-assisted housing. A 1980 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) criticized HUD, finding that “many tenants may be unnecessarily exposed to lead paint hazards” and “…despite a 7-year-old regulatory mission, HUD has never evaluated past results of its lead-based paint regulatory efforts and still lacks the basic management tools with which to properly monitor its regulatory performance.”
In response to years of HUD’s inadequacy, Congress later enacted the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act (“Title X”) in 1992 to compel the elimination of lead hazards “as expeditiously as possible.” Despite Congress’ clear directive, HUD delayed until 1999 to promulgate the Lead Safe Housing Rule – seven years after they were required to do so.
Today, both GAO and the Office of the Inspector General have repeatedly exposed HUD’s inaction and antiquated lead hazard testing methods, citing hundreds of lead poisoning cases in the Housing Choice Voucher (“HCV”) and project-based Section 8 programs (“Section 8 housing.”) As it stands, children must develop lead poisoning before a meaningful risk assessment occurs. Today, HUD only requires an ineffective visual assessment, which has been scientifically proven to be ineffective at identifying common lead hazards, before a child moves into a unit in HCV and Section 8 housing. Because lead cannot be detected by the human eye alone, these inspections, which merely look for peeling or chipped paint, cannot identify the majority of lead hazards that result in lead poisoning. This method stands in stark contrast to HUD’s other programs where a more robust, scientifically backed “risk assessment” is required. Some localities have already implemented these more comprehensive inspection standards, and offer remediation support through federal Lead Hazard Reduction Grants.
In practice, HUD’s approach suggests the agency believes that children in HCV and Section 8 housing are not entitled to the same protections as those participating in other federal programs. HUD’s actions are inconsistent with its legal mandates and the GAO agrees, finding that the actual language under Title X does not exclude Section 8 housing or HCV units. Even Congress has clearly told HUD that it has authority to implement the same protective measures in Section 8 housing: “HUD’s current visual lead inspections have proven insufficient, and more rigorous standards, such as requiring risk assessments prior to a family moving into a home, should be implemented to ensure that children living in federally assisted housing are protected from lead poisoning.”
HUD’s refusal to heed the GAO and the intent of Congress has unraveled real consequences for families living under federally assisted housing. We recently met with Mrs. Donna Black, whose story was also featured in the Washington Post. Mrs. Black and her family are intimately acquainted with the ramifications of government delays – it upended their lives. To the Black family, receiving a voucher meant the end of homelessness and a place to finally call home. The heart of their new home was the kitchen, where Mrs. Black cooked and looked out the kitchen window as her children played. Within a few months, her daughter Donna tested positive for lead poisoning. It was then that they realized the kitchen window was coated in lead dust and chipped lead paint. Mrs. Black was shocked, as the home had passed inspection.
To protect her family from further lead exposure, Mrs. Black transferred her voucher and moved her family to another unit. After a housing inspector conducted a visual assessment, the D.C. Housing Authority approved the unit for occupancy. Soon after moving in, Mrs. Black’s children, including her newborn baby, Damion, were all diagnosed with lead poisoning for the second time. After documenting the lead exposure and engaging the public health department for help, the Black family faced retaliation: their landlord issued an eviction notice.
The Black family has been homeless ever since.
Like many other children with elevated blood lead levels, Mrs. Black’s children suffered the permanent consequences of lead exposure. Mrs. Black’s daughter, Donna, was meeting every academic milestone before entering the HCV program. Today, as a teenager, she reads at a kindergarten level. Damion, who was an infant at the time of exposure, suffers from intellectual and behavioral disabilities that require constant care. HUD’s refusal to update their standards to match scientific standards and meet their duty to provide “decent, safe, and sanitary housing” robbed these children of their futures before they even stepped into the world.
The lead poisoning of Damion, Donna, and countless other children is entirely avoidable. If the United States is ever to end the scourge of lead poisoning, HUD must stop treating vulnerable children as proverbial canaries in the coalmine and, instead, fulfill its statutory duty to sufficiently identify and remediate lead hazards by requiring risk assessments in the HCV and Section 8 housing, in line with current science, instead of using children’s developing bodies as lead detectors. Without stricter inspection requirements, children will inevitably be poisoned and suffer irreparable harm. No family should be forced to choose between lead poisoning and homelessness.
Anna Aguilar (JD ‘25) and Sidney Lee (JD ‘25) are Student Attorneys under the supervision of Professor Emily Benfer at The George Washington University Law School’s Jacob Burns Community Legal Clinic in the Health, Equity, Policy & Advocacy – Environmental Justice Division.
