This paper compiles the history of the development of public housing in Phoenix, Arizona between the years 1930 and 1970. Starting with the national public housing program created as part of the New Deal programs, the thesis examines how public housing was started, viewed, and supported in Phoenix. There has always been a shortage of affordable housing for low-income residents in Phoenix and the housing history examines the reasons why Phoenix has struggled to construct affordable housing in the past. Public opposition, city values, racial prejudice, and business influence over government were revealed to be some of the many reasons Phoenix struggled and continues to struggle today. In chronological order, the thesis will examine how Phoenix interacted with public housing legislation during the mid-1900s to provide a comprehensive history of what has been done that has not worked.

This study attempts to answer the following questions: Is civic engagement a social activity among 18-25-year-old college students? How are opinions regarding civic and political engagement impacted by social settings? How are civic and political engagement atmospheres impacted by social distancing and isolation protocol? In this study, the researcher hypothesized that civic and political engagement are social activities, so they are therefore susceptible to changing social context. Since the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted typical social interaction through social distancing and isolation protocol, the researcher hypothesized that it also altered mechanisms of civic and political engagement. Political engagement would be more prevalent among students who participate with others even in pandemic conditions that may otherwise decrease close contact and social interactions. These findings seem to disagree with the literature that suggests young people are supplanting voting with other forms of engagement (Zukin et al., 2006). Rather, the “complexity” denoted in interviews and in reports of engagements on the pre- and post-election surveys suggests that young people are voting as well as dedicating their time to other activities. Voting does seem to be a social activity according to the interviews, poll observations, and the surveys. This is consistent with the literature regarding social norms and group predictors. However, this social aspect of engagement seems to manifest in a wider variety of formats that originally thought. Finally, students continued to engage in the context of the pandemic that surrounded the election in question. It seems that the formats through which students engaged have expanded to maintain the connections that are crucial to civic participation.