Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Lucy Barnable

Obama administration to unveil major new rules targeting segregation across U.S.

16 posts in this topic

When the Fair Housing Act was passed in 1968, it barred the outright racial discrimination that was then routine. It also required the government to go one step further — to actively dismantle segregation and foster integration in its place — a mandate that for decades has been largely forgotten, neglected and unenforced.

Now, on Wednesday, the Obama administration will announce long-awaited rules designed to repair the law’s unfulfilled promise and promote the kind of racially integrated neighborhoods that have long eluded deeply segregated cities like Chicago and Baltimore. The new rules, a top demand of civil-rights groups, will require cities and towns all over the country to scrutinize their housing patterns for racial bias and to publicly report, every three to five years, the results. Communities will also have to set goals, which will be tracked over time, for how they will further reduce segregation.

“This is the most serious effort that HUD has ever undertaken to do that,” says Julian Castro, the secretary of the department of Housing and Urban Development, who will announce the new rules in Chicago on Wednesday. “I believe that it’s historic.”

Officials insist that they want to work with and not punish communities where segregation exists. But the new reports will make it harder to conceal when communities consistently flout the law. And in the most flagrant cases, HUD holds out the possibility of withholding a portion of the billions of dollars of federal funding it hands out each year.
-----
“Housing discrimination is the unfinished business of civil rights,” says Sherrilyn Ifill, the president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund. “It goes right to the heart of our divide from one another. It goes right to the heart of whether you believe that African American people’s lives matter, that you respect them, that you believe they can be your neighbors, that you want them to play with your children.”
-----

 

But conservatives have sounded alarm. Republicans in the House of Representatives, worried by what they see as government intrusion into local planning, have already tried to defund implementation of the rule. Conservative commentators say it represents an experiment in “social engineering” in which the federal government will force white suburbs to change their racial makeup.

“Let local communities do what’s best in their communities, and I would predict we’d end up with a freer and fairer society in 20 years than we have today,” says Rick Manning, the president of Americans for Limited Government. “Far freer and fairer than anything that would be dictated from Washington.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/08/obama-administration-to-unveil-major-new-rules-targeting-segregation-across-u-s/?hpid=z2

This isn't just about moving poor African Americans out of the ghetto. It's about placing "new Americans" in every middle class neighborhood.
Meet your new neighbors:   

 ZZ

 

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not just America Its around the world where Zionist have power ..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2015, 5:05:14, CSB said:

Its not just America Its around the world where Zionist have power ..

 

I've seen that video before and it's exactly what's happening.
White flight is occurring in my small town now and I'll be a part of it. :sad:

Somali and other Muslim refugees are also being placed in towns all over.

LIST OF 190 CITIES WHERE OBAMA WILL BE PLACING SYRIAN MUSLIM REFUGEES

The importation of these Muslim immigrants is part of the overall plan to destroy America from within. As revealed in a recent White House conference call on immigration, the intention is to establish ‘seedling communities’ across the U.S., then grow them all to become a ‘nation within a nation’, eventually with the immigrant nation overtaking the host.
-----
One major problem for the communities receiving these Muslim refugees that that little to no information is provided on the background of these immigrants. 100,00 Muslims brought in every year, and no info available on any of them.

http://cdn.truthandaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/muslim-immigration.jpg

http://www.truthandaction.org/list-190-cities-obama-will-placing-syrian-muslim-refugees/2/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Additionally, some places have already passed laws that require all landlords to accept Section 8 vouchers.

Law Requires Landlords to Accept Section 8

Kirkland, Washington lawmakers this week passed an ordinance prohibiting landlords there from turning away applicants who rely on Section 8 vouchers.

The measure does not prohibit choice among tenant applicants based on other factors.

According to a news report, the 4-3 vote this week came after city council members expressed concern over discrimination against those receiving government subsidies. Several voucher holders said they’d been turned away because the landlord did not accept vouchers.

Landlords expressed concern over the government bureaucracy that accompanies Section 8 vouchers, including inspections, restrictions on evictions and problems with collecting for damage done to a rental unit.

- See more at: http://www.american-apartment-owners-association.org/property-management/latest-news/law-requires-landlords-to-accept-section-8/#sthash.2QyOX7hI.dpuf

Discrimination ban on Section 8 to become law

For people who use a federal housing voucher subsidy to rent an apartment, one phrase has been a constant barrier: “No Section 8.”

Under Oregon law, and despite a whole list of equal rights protections for renters, landlords could legally bar anyone who received Section 8 housing assistance from consideration at tenants.

This session’s passage of HB 2639 changes all that. Starting in July 2014, landlords will no longer be able to discriminate against Section 8, or Housing Choice voucher holders.

“It will open up a lot of desirable, affordable apartments in places in the city where it has been off limits,” says Portland City Commissioner Nick Fish, who campaigned for the measure. “To landlords, it says is you have to treat a voucher holder the same as any other prospective tenant. It takes the stigma out and gives the voucher holder equal standing.”

Congress established the Housing Choice program in 1937 to subsidize the rent of the very poor, elderly and disabled. In order to be eligible for the program, participants must make 50 percent or less than the median family income, less than $34,000 for a family of four in the Portland area.

Despite guaranteed rent, some landlords are reluctant to take Section 8 tenants because they worry they will be bad tenants and find the program burdensome. And in a saturated rental market, property owners and landlords could afford to turn away low-income renters.

http://news.streetroots.org/2013/07/27/discrimination-ban-section-8-become-law

So even if you only own a cottage or a duplex you have to accept any qualified renter.
 Also, you can't run background checks on illegals. It comes back with NO MATCH FOUND.
To question this is considered discrimination according to the new Fair Housing Laws.
Landlords have no idea who they're renting to and tenants don't know if they're living next to criminals.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just a relic from the past....when your neighbors were basically on the same socio-economic scale as you because of earnings, not entitlements. As a result of this commonality, crime (violent or petty) wasn't much of an issue.

The feds are clearly violating the rights of property owners and landlords.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2015, 4:42:39, Lucy Barnable said:

When the Fair Housing Act was passed in 1968, it barred the outright racial discrimination that was then routine. It also required the government to go one step further — to actively dismantle segregation and foster integration in its place — a mandate that for decades has been largely forgotten, neglected and unenforced.

Now, on Wednesday, the Obama administration will announce long-awaited rules designed to repair the law’s unfulfilled promise and promote the kind of racially integrated neighborhoods that have long eluded deeply segregated cities like Chicago and Baltimore. The new rules, a top demand of civil-rights groups, will require cities and towns all over the country to scrutinize their housing patterns for racial bias and to publicly report, every three to five years, the results. Communities will also have to set goals, which will be tracked over time, for how they will further reduce segregation.

“This is the most serious effort that HUD has ever undertaken to do that,” says Julian Castro, the secretary of the department of Housing and Urban Development, who will announce the new rules in Chicago on Wednesday. “I believe that it’s historic.”

Officials insist that they want to work with and not punish communities where segregation exists. But the new reports will make it harder to conceal when communities consistently flout the law. And in the most flagrant cases, HUD holds out the possibility of withholding a portion of the billions of dollars of federal funding it hands out each year.
-----
“Housing discrimination is the unfinished business of civil rights,” says Sherrilyn Ifill, the president of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund. “It goes right to the heart of our divide from one another. It goes right to the heart of whether you believe that African American people’s lives matter, that you respect them, that you believe they can be your neighbors, that you want them to play with your children.”
-----

 

But conservatives have sounded alarm. Republicans in the House of Representatives, worried by what they see as government intrusion into local planning, have already tried to defund implementation of the rule. Conservative commentators say it represents an experiment in “social engineering” in which the federal government will force white suburbs to change their racial makeup.

“Let local communities do what’s best in their communities, and I would predict we’d end up with a freer and fairer society in 20 years than we have today,” says Rick Manning, the president of Americans for Limited Government. “Far freer and fairer than anything that would be dictated from Washington.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/08/obama-administration-to-unveil-major-new-rules-targeting-segregation-across-u-s/?hpid=z2

This isn't just about moving poor African Americans out of the ghetto. It's about placing "new Americans" in every middle class neighborhood.
Meet your new neighbors:   

 ZZ

 

 

 

 

Wonder if they will force the Asian communities like China town to integrate too. Is called China Town for a reason ya know. That said most reasonable logical thinking people that want their children to grow up in safe communities have been moving out of the big and mid-sized cities in droves. The old back road i live off of has had about 7 families in the past 10 years buy large plots of land and build homes on them. All moved 85 miles south of Atlanta, Ga. in fact. The County of Georgia I live in only has a population of about 9,000 people. Basically farming country. You are not going to see section 8 housing way out in the country side and smart people looking to get out of the crime ridden bigger cities know that and are moving out in large numbers.

One thing you cannot force is association with people whom do not want to associate with. No matter the reason. I am going to associate with or not associate with whom I dam well please no matter if someone does or doesn't like my reasons. If I only want to associate with people that have green eyes that is my right to.  Also if i don't want to live around you that is my right also. It's called freedom of association.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several years ago I moved to a rural town, a hour outside of a major city, with a population about 4,000. There was very little diversity and almost no crime. I thought it would be the perfect place to live for the rest of my life. But then a huge apartment complex was built on the edge of town and filled with Hispanic immigrants. HUD also bought up the foreclosed homes and gave them to immigrants. The elementary school is now over 50% Hispanic. They had to hire bilingual teachers and tutors and add additions on to accommodate them. They also had to hire two more police officers to deal with the rising crime rates. So our property taxes go up and our property values go down.

I just learned  this area is an illegal immigrant sanctuary so maybe that's why we're seeing this here now.
I don't know how long it will be before other rural areas get hit. The middle class suburbs will probably be targeted first.

"Communities nationwide will be given a series of questions designed to help them figure out whether racial bias is causing segregated neighborhoods, racial or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, unequal access to opportunity or disproportionate housing needs in their jurisdiction. They will be required to set goals related to that data and publicly report on their progress every three to five years.
-----
HUD will compile the data into a central database where anyone can look at the mapped data and determine what kinds of changes need to happen in their community. HUD will support communities working to integrate and federal dollars will be on the line."


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/08/obama-orders-cities-and-towns-to-racially-integrate/#ixzz3fRITaoer

 

Oh, and freedom of association is now called racism along with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, kimonos and the word citizen. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Seattle doing away with single-family homes?

If adopted, ideas being considered by a Seattle housing committee would be devastating to the city's appeal, KIRO Radio's Dori Monson said.

Get rid of single-family zoning in Seattle. That's the big message in a draft report being worked on by Mayor Ed Murray's housing committee, obtained by The Seattle Times.

According to a draft letter, the city needs to move away from the idea that all families can live in their own home on a piece of land, the Times reports.

"Today, as Seattle expands rapidly and experiences massive economic and population growth, we are held back by policies and historical precedents that are no longer viable for the long-term survival or our city," the draft letter from committee co-chairs Faith Pettis and David Werthheimer states.

The draft letter says that single-family zoning has "roots in racial and class exclusion. The zoning remains "among the largest obstacles to realizing the city's goals for equity and affordability," the Times reports

http://mynorthwest.com/76/2782087/Report-Committee-considers-eliminating-singlefamily-zoning-in-Seattle

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did this after Katrina, and it took 3 years to get rid of all the scum. Violence, prostitution, shootings, breaking, kidnappings, robberies, wide scale theft, looting. Yeah sounds good, go f yourself...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did this after Katrina, and it took 3 years to get rid of all the scum. Violence, prostitution, shootings, breaking, kidnappings, robberies, wide scale theft, looting. Yeah sounds good, go f yourself...

I've posted this before but if you haven't seen it it's worth a read.

The downside of diversity

A Harvard political scientist finds that diversity hurts civic life. What happens when a liberal scholar unearths an inconvenient truth?

IT HAS BECOME increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger.

But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings.

"The extent of the effect is shocking," says Scott Page, a University of Michigan political scientist.
-----
The results of his new study come from a survey Putnam directed among residents in 41 US communities, including Boston. Residents were sorted into the four principal categories used by the US Census: black, white, Hispanic, and Asian. They were asked how much they trusted their neighbors and those of each racial category, and questioned about a long list of civic attitudes and practices, including their views on local government, their involvement in community projects, and their friendships. What emerged in more diverse communities was a bleak picture of civic desolation, affecting everything from political engagement to the state of social ties.
-----

"People would say, 'I bet you forgot about X,'" Putnam says of the string of suggestions from colleagues. "There were 20 or 30 X's."

But even after statistically taking them all into account, the connection remained strong: Higher diversity meant lower social capital. In his findings, Putnam writes that those in more diverse communities tend to "distrust their neighbors, regardless of the color of their skin, to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more but have less faith that they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television."

"People living in ethnically diverse settings appear to 'hunker down' -- that is, to pull in like a turtle," Putnam writes.

In documenting that hunkering down, Putnam challenged the two dominant schools of thought on ethnic and racial diversity, the "contact" theory and the "conflict" theory. Under the contact theory, more time spent with those of other backgrounds leads to greater understanding and harmony between groups. Under the conflict theory, that proximity produces tension and discord.

Putnam's findings reject both theories. In more diverse communities, he says, there were neither great bonds formed across group lines nor heightened ethnic tensions, but a general civic malaise. And in perhaps the most surprising result of all, levels of trust were not only lower between groups in more diverse settings, but even among members of the same group.
-----
Birds of different feathers may sometimes flock together, but they are also less likely to look out for one another. "Everyone is a little self-conscious that this is not politically correct stuff," says Kahn.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

 

-And welcome rbear.
:cheers:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted this before but if you haven't seen it it's worth a read.

The downside of diversity

A Harvard political scientist finds that diversity hurts civic life. What happens when a liberal scholar unearths an inconvenient truth?

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

 

-And welcome rbear.
:cheers:

Thanks, I read this before, but it wasn't fresh in my mind. Thx for the reply in case others missed it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot subjugate a rock solid country. There can be no conquering without division. Back when sec 8 housing was first introduced they did not allow the fathers to live with the family unless they had jobs. No one would give jobs to African American men. That divided the family. Take a bunch of unsupervised youth with no direction or hope you add an ample supply of drugs and you keep them in slavery. The modern day share cropper. Big money to be made in the hood.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Restore formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor


Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.