Obama Land Grab

This case in Westchester county, New York has huge implications.  The courts with the aid of the Obama administration have decided that there are not enough poor people or minorities living in wealthy neighborhoods.  So now they force Westchester county to build “affordable housing” in “zip codes” that historically are not inhabited by lower income families or minorities.  Here are some bulleted thoughts on the implications of this decision.

  • The right to “fair” housing doesn’t mean you can live anywhere that you want to.  It means you can live anywhere you can AFFORD.  There is a huge difference.
  • Where is the land for this mandated “affordable housing” going to come from?  It will be taken from those who own it and paid for it.
  • Who will pay for this “affordable housing?”  The land owners and taxpayers will be forced to pay through the nose.
  • What will happen to the property values of the current residents of Westchester county (or anywhere else the government confiscates land and redistributes it and the wealth associated with it)?  The values will plummet as people move in who did not earn what they are being given, and won’t take care of it.  The neighborhoods will decay, and those who can afford to move will leave, taking their tax money with them.

This is at the very least unconstitutional.  This is the communist Chinese and Soviet system of land ownership.  This is one of the things our founding fathers were trying to prevent.

I’ve said before that Obama and the liberal democrats were driving this country toward a violent revolution.  If this spreads to the rest of the country, this will be the match in the tinder box.  Most of the country will not stand for having their land and possessions confiscated.

__________________________________

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574346862154177606.html

AUGUST 14, 2009, 6:32 P.M. ET

Color-Coding the Suburbs

The social engineers come to Scarsdale.

The bad news is that Westchester County, the sprawling suburb just north of New York City, has been pressured to settle a federal lawsuit brought by liberal activists over “affordable” housing. The worse news is that the Obama Administration wants the settlement to be a template for the rest of the nation.

The three-year-old lawsuit alleged that Westchester had accepted federal housing funds but failed to provide enough affordable housing and reduce segregation in some of its wealthier communities, such as Scarsdale and Chappaqua, home to Bill and Hillary Clinton. In February a U.S. District Court judge in Manhattan ruled that Westchester’s integration efforts were insufficient, and rather than risk losing out on more federal money, county officials struck a deal with the Department of Housing and Urban Development this week. Within seven years, the county will construct or acquire 750 homes or apartments, 630 of which must be located in communities that are less than 3% black and 7% Hispanic.

“We’re clearly messaging other jurisdictions across the country that there has been a significant change in the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and we’re going to ask them to pursue similar goals as well,” said HUD Deputy Secretary Ron Sims. Westchester County, he added, “can serve as a model for building strong, inclusive sustainable communities in suburban areas across the entire United States.”

Westchester officials admit no wrongdoing, which isn’t surprising given that prior to the lawsuit HUD not only had never denied the county funds but had praised its housing practices. The bigger concern, however, is the Obama Administration’s intention to promote housing polices that have a history of dividing communities and creating racial tension. Integrated neighborhoods are an admirable goal, but how you get there matters.

In the 1960s, Chicago’s Gautreaux Program moved several thousand inner-city residents to the suburbs over the objections of whites and black community leaders alike, which stoked racial unrest and resulted in unprecedented “white flight.” In the 1970s, the Philadelphia suburb of Mount Laurel, New Jersey, was ordered to build subsidized housing. Local opposition was so strong that municipalities ultimately were permitted to pay into a fund and have much of the housing built in places like Newark and Camden instead.

Blacks have long populated Westchester towns such as White Plains, New Rochelle and Mount Vernon, and the Administration is assuming that low percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in places like Scarsdale are a result of discrimination. Yet there’s no pattern of fair housing complaints or other evidence showing that black families with incomes similar to whites in more upscale neighborhoods were barred from those jurisdictions. History also demonstrates that racial and ethnic minorities have incurred far less resistance when they move into neighborhoods where they can afford to live.

The black and Latino suburban population is increasing steadily as the household incomes of those groups rise. But social engineers who want to force the issue risk creating more problems than they solve. Most people believe in integrated neighborhoods provided they’re a consequence of genuine choice, not the government deciding where it wants people to live.

Related Articles:

WSJ: Wealthy Suburbs Accept Low-Income Homes

New York Times: Westchester Adds Housing to Desegregation Pact

________________________________________

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: