Broader Fair Housing Law Nearing Passage in House

WASHINGTON — Amid strong bipartisan support, the House moved Thursday toward passage of historic legislation that would toughen the enforcement of federal fair housing laws and extend protection from discrimination to children and the handicapped.

Passage of the bill was all but assured when the members voted, 401 to 0, for a key amendment to strengthen the enforcement of fair-housing statutes, but final action was delayed until next week.

Both Sides Support Bill

The legislation represents a major compromise between the civil rights groups and realtors’ associations, whose bitter dispute over enforcement of housing discrimination laws had stalled congressional action for nearly 11 years. Both sides support the new bill, as do President Reagan and the congressional leaders of both parties.

Congress has tried for years to strengthen the 1968 Fair Housing Act, which bans discrimination in rentals and sales on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin. A 1974 law prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of sex. Civil rights activists complained, however, that the government has had virtually no power to enforce these statutes.

Under the law, for example, the Housing and Urban Development Department may convene “conciliation sessions” between landlords and prospective tenants when it receives allegations of discrimination, but the complaining parties have the burden of taking their opponents to court, a time-consuming, costly process.

The new proposal would empower HUD officials to institute legal proceedings against parties they believe are guilty of discrimination, but, in a major concession to real estate interests, those accused of discrimination would have the choice of taking their cases before an administrative law judge or a trial court.

Bitter Disagreement

Although that compromise won unanimous support, there was bitter disagreement Thursday over the proposed ban on housing discrimination against families with children under 18. Opponents said the provision would threaten housing developed for senior citizens, but they were defeated, 289 to 116.

Under the proposed legislation, housing designed for the elderly would be exempt from the fair housing law. The measure would require such housing to be “intended for and at least 90% occupied by at least one person aged 55 or over per unit.” Such housing also would have to have facilities and services specifically designed to meet the “physical or social needs” of elderly people.

Rep. E. Clay Shaw Jr. (R-Fla.), whose district is the home of many retired people, said the anti-discrimination measure would not adequately protect their rights to live in separate communities. He said that many seniors’ housing projects might not have the “special facilities” needed to be exempt from the housing law.

“Granted, discrimination is not right against anybody,” he said, “but I don’t think seniors who want to live in a seniors’ community should be told by us in Washington they can no longer do so.”

Backing of Seniors’ Groups

Others disagreed, saying that the law is designed to protect retirement communities such as Leisure World and Sun City. They said the legislation has the strong backing of the American Assn. of Retired Persons and other seniors’ groups.

Supporters also cited HUD reports indicating that children are excluded from 25% of the nation’s apartments, and that in another 50% of apartments there are limits on the ages and number of children in rental units.

“Are we saying that children are not protected by the Constitution because they’re short? Because they wear diapers?” demanded Rep. George Miller (D-Martinez). “If we took this provision out of the law, it would be the most anti-family, anti-children action I’ve seen in years.”