A national moratorium on evictions, issued by the Centers for Disease Control to suppress the spread of COVID-19, had been set to expire Sunday, but it was extended to at least March 31 under the Biden administration. The new president also plans to offer $30 billion in additional rental assistance for the over 14 million Americans behind on rent, and is proposing to further extend the moratorium through September.

While an impressive commitment, if the next round of assistance were targeted at every household in need, it would only cover around two months of the remaining three in the moratorium (at $1,000 monthly median rent in the U.S.), to say nothing of the additional seven months if the moratorium goes through September. More assistance is necessary, both to aid renters and to help landlords survive — millions of whom are small business owners who are vital to insuring a solid economic recovery and the preservation of the low-end rental market.

We agree with the CDC that evictions can spread COVID-19 and cause harmful disruptions to the lives of families and children. In our research with hundreds of poor families across the country, we heard over and over again that many renters’ economic margins are razor thin, which often led to housing instability and overcrowding even before the pandemic. Now, instability and overcrowding pose even greater risk for contracting the virus or developing other health problems as a result of the stress and financial hardship that follow. We also spoke to over 150 landlords who rent to low-income tenants. Similarly, we learned that their balance sheets were sometimes razor thin. Now, many are stretched past their limit. We believe that adequate rent relief funding, in addition to the eviction moratorium, is necessary to stave off serious damage to renters, the stock of decent affordable rental housing and the economy. Without it, landlords will suffer meaningful financial losses as a result of tenants who, while struggling to pay rent as a result of the pandemic-induced economic crisis, are still unable to make good on their debts.

Most of the small landlords who dominate the low-end rental market cannot bear such losses, the way large corporations can. We’ve found that in many poorer, post-industrial cities like Baltimore, the majority of the affordable rental housing is provided by small, amateur landlords with limited access to capital. These landlords are often retirees or poorly capitalized entrepreneurs who lacked financial security even prior to the pandemic. The large majority do not outright own the properties they rent out, but instead must pay mortgages even when their tenants fail to pay rent.

Marlene Davis and her husband have owned 19 properties in Baltimore for over 20 years. But, they haven’t been as successful as she had hoped. They sold several properties in 2002 when they couldn’t afford needed repairs, and then lost a great deal of capital in the 2008 downturn. Money is now tight for the family, which is trying to save for their kids’ college tuition. Even before the twin crises, Marlene barely eked out enough to meet her mortgage obligations. “We owe all those mortgages, [so] if even a few tenants are late, I can easily go under,” she explained.

Without cash flow, small landlords face a tough decision: accrue debt, sell the property or walk away from an underwater property. The housing market may be booming, but a flood of lower-end rentals may be more than the market can absorb, leaving banks holding the bag. Significantly, the CDC still allows evictions for foreclosures. So while landlords cannot evict, the banks that own these properties can, causing the very health effects the CDC seeks to avoid. Decent, affordable rental housing is already scarce. Reducing the stock even further will drive up rents, exposing lower-income tenants to even more insecurity and overcrowding. Moreover, it will hurt the recovery: The working poor need to live where they work. Higher living costs will slow growth in the recovery just as it has always slowed growth in high cost areas like California compared to low cost areas like Texas.

By our estimates, the level of rental assistance the CDC is now considering will not come close to saving small landlords and shielding low-income tenants from eviction. Given the need for swift action, temporarily expanding the existing program that pays qualified landlords for providing affordable housing to the poor — the Housing Choice Voucher program — is the best way forward. This is a moment when the traditional political antagonism between tenant and landlord advocates has the potential to do more harm than good. Far from a zero-sum game, the only way to truly protect tenants is to protect their landlords, and vice versa. Helping landlords means helping to preserve the decent, affordable housing stock in places like Baltimore, and bring stability to millions of low-income tenants — many of them front-line workers — who are vital to the nation’s recovery.

Stefanie DeLuca (sdeluca@jhu.edu) is the James Coleman Professor of Sociology and Social Policy at Johns Hopkins University. Meredith Greif (mgreif1@jhu.edu) is assistant research professor of sociology at Johns Hopkins University. Also contributing to this piece are: Philip M.E. Garboden, Hawaii Community Reinvestment Corporation assistant professor in affordable housing economics at the University of Hawaii; Eva Rosen, assistant professor of public policy at Georgetown University; and Kathryn Edin, William Church Osborn Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs at Princeton University.