Reactions to Ben Carson
Last week, as we all waited for Ben Carson to accept Donald Trump’s initiation to run the Department of Housing and Urban Development, reactions poured in from all sides about whether HUD Secretary Ben Carson is a good idea or not.
Well, now that’s officially official, with an announcement coming Monday that Carson accepted Trump’s offer, reactions are no longer based on hypotheticals about Carson as a potential choice.
Carson is Trump’s choice to run HUD.
Here’s a sampling of the reaction.
Vice President-elect Mike Pence took to Twitter on Monday to celebrate Carson’s nomination, saying that the retired neurosurgeon will help “strengthen communities” while at HUD.
While some Republicans feel that Carson is a good choice, much of the media reaction to Carson’s nomination focuses on his lack of experience in housing and urban development and the impact that will have.
Over at the Wall Street Journal, Nick Timiraos and Damian Paletta have a good recap of what HUD means for the country and what Carson is walking into on his first day.
From the article:
HUD, with a budget of $47.9 billion and some 8,400 employees, has played critical roles stabilizing the housing market after last decade’s boom and bust. The federal government currently insures one in every six new home-purchase mortgages made through the Federal Housing Administration, which is part of HUD. The department also oversees funding for some 1.2 million low-income households in public-housing units managed by some 3,300 local housing agencies.
Much of the reaction to Carson as HUD secretary tends to point out (as the WSJ does) an op-ed authored by Carson in The Washington Times in 2015.
From the WSJ:
Critics say the rules undercut local control by making it too easy to advance lawsuits questioning zoning decisions. The GOP platform approved earlier this year said the rules went beyond the government’s “legitimate role in enforcing nondiscrimination laws.”
Mr. Carson echoed the party’s stance when he called those policies “mandated social-engineering schemes” that repeated a pattern of “failed socialist experiments in this country” in a 2015 op-ed published in The Washington Times.
In the New York Times, Sheryl Gay Stolberg recaps some of why Carson’s “critics” are concerned about his nomination.
One of the critics not cited in Stolberg’s article is the Washington Post Editorial Board, which calls Carson’s selection as HUD secretary “beyond baffling.”