Posted on 05/01/2013 2:23:13 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
When Americans think of the federal government taking on locals to combat racism, they think of Ike sending troops into a Little Rock high school, of JFK sending the National Guard to Ole Miss or LBJ announcing on television the FBI’s arrest of Klansmen for killing a Freedom Rider.
Now the Obama administration is arguing that the leafy hamlets of Westchester County are guilty of their own racial discrimination. And the Department of Housing and Urban Development is using all the power it has to bring the locals to heel.
The leverage comes from a 2009 consent decree designed to counter what HUD says is housing discrimination. The decree obligates Westchester to build 750 units of “affordable” housing in high-income, largely white neighborhoods and “market them aggressively” to minorities. The county is doing so, and is even ahead of schedule.
That hasn’t satisfied HUD, because it’s really after something different: a standard of discrimination based on statistics, not actual demonstrations of people who have been denied housing because of race. It’s called “disparate impact.”
In other words, what we have here is social engineering. As one of its officials has admitted, HUD wants “to remove zip codes as a factor in the quality of life in America.” In other words, anyone has the right to live anywhere — even if he can’t afford it. So even though blacks and Hispanics and other racial minorities who can afford Westchester housing prices are as welcome as anyone, HUD sees only racism.
Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino has been fighting this, and losing, for some years. The latest wrinkle was a threat from Justice to hold Astorino in contempt if he did not introduce legislation that would require landlords to accept Section 8 vouchers — public assistance — for rentals.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
If Westchester loses, it will have national implications. Because if a concept as arbitrary as disparate impact becomes the measure of discrimination, local authorities everywhere will have no effective defense against bureaucrats in Washington bent on finding racism to justify imposing their own ideological agendas.
I know a Jewish couple who live there[Chappaqua] and they love diversity, so good let them build the projects right next to where they live seeing as they want diversity and fairness for all
I'd like to know are these section-8ers or their landlords also gonna cough up the dough for the privilege?
Obama , or more likely his bosses, miss nothing.
Chappaqua? Hillary likes diversity.
More of this to come. This is one of the worse consequences of the reelection of the 0ne.
what could go wrong?
...
I predict a 1960’s white flight from Westchester.
LOL I kid you not, I dated her and she was alright but she married a staunch Jewish guy and has turned radical lefty.
They moved to Chappaqua to be near the Clintons
I kid you not on that.
Isn’t high time that the government get’s out of our lives, our business, our religion and our houses.
It seems the only thing that the Lib’s don’t want the government in is the bedroom.
Welcome to the USSSA . . . comrade.
yeah...the rich support the rats so let them live in their own desires...have fun....
It's Agenda 21 and there's no way to stop it.
How can it possibly be legal to force landlords to accept Section 8?
I own 3 rentals in NY. My cash, my sacrifices, my work and skill go into these units, how in the hell can the G-D gub’mint require people like me to rent to people unwilling to get out of the damned ghetto on their own?
I don’t make a lot of money at this, I’ve bought the houses as a hedge against retirement poverty. Having Sec 8 people as renters would so lower the value of my properties.
I refuse to rent to them - how the tenants take care of their free apartments is disgustingly obvious at addresses that do.
I found they’re trying to force this in Maryland, as well. Is this the new trend?
Snip:
<March 26, 2013 at 11:12 pm
By Ilana Kowarski
Ilana@MarylandReporter.com
Sen. Jim Brochin
A bill that would require landlords to accept tenants through the federal Section 8 program sparked a debate about civil rights on the Senate floor Tuesday.
The bill, SB487, is intended to prevent landlords from rejecting tenants that receive public assistance simply because they are poor. But critics of the legislation said that it would force landlords to participate in social welfare programs <
How does Westchester vote? Is there a R vs. D breakdown of how Westchester votes?
(shrug) I can tell you that in some neighborhoods, the “affordable housing” would get very, very expensive after it kept getting burned to the ground. Not that the Democrats care - - lol, it’s only other people’s money.
This is actually mandated in many, many places around the country...it is rarely enforced....or it was...
The local pols know it’s a death blow to their re-election if they comply with the mandates...
This is standard Democrat-President-second-term stuff. Clinton did it, Carter did it.
Johnson didn’t do it because he didn’t have a second term. During his first term, however, Democrat core constituents burned the cities they lived in. One side of the equation, in a sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.