HUD Defies
Law to Push “Economic Diversity” and “Religion Desegregation” by John Anthony, Sustainable
Freedom Lab
HUD continues to expand
its Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing program far beyond housing
desegregation. Their newest push contorts Civil Rights Law giving the
agency the authority to advance 'economic diversity' and the
administration's own prejudiced outlook on the Christian religion.
When community members expose the dangers of federal intervention in local communities, more than self-interest motivates them. They often face an uphill battle. They fight because they understand the importance of property rights and local rule to future generations. Below is a video of one community member’s presentation to her County Planning Commission.
When community members expose the dangers of federal intervention in local communities, more than self-interest motivates them. They often face an uphill battle. They fight because they understand the importance of property rights and local rule to future generations. Below is a video of one community member’s presentation to her County Planning Commission.
HUD sees their
new Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule as a ”regulatory
lever” to foster “inclusive communities.” Their vision is stretching
the bounds of law.
In June 2016, HUD, the Department of Education and the Department of Transportation partnered to help states and local leaders “narrow the opportunity gap” for low-income families by increasing diversity in schools. Using recent reports, the agencies reasoned that the children of low-income families would improve academically, by moving them to better schools in more affluent areas.
To accomplish this “economic diversity,” HUD must uproot families; realign classroom populations by income, and re-engineer entire neighborhoods. HUD calls this, their “move to opportunity” (MTO) program.
HUD has gone so far as to create Regional Equity Assistance Centers to assure socioeconomic diversity in elementary and secondary classrooms. The centers are funded through President Obama’s $120M “Stronger Together” program outlined in his 2017 Education Budget.
The goal of the Centers is “to render technical assistance to [applicants requesting their help] in the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans for the desegregation of public schools.”
The money funds grants to promote transformative activities such as (see P21) “revising school boundary and assignment policies to establish open or controlled school-choice zones spanning a variety of neighborhoods across traditional school district lines;” and “restructuring existing schools, such as through grade configuration, to promote inclusive environments…”
But, is enforced economic diversity even legal? Nothing in the 1964 Civil Rights Act nor the 1968 Fair Housing Act says or implies the government has the authority to relocate families to attain economic diversity.
In one case, Title IV of the Civil Rights Act, cited by the administration as its authority for “Stronger Together,” Congress specifically denies federal agencies the right to “assign” students to overcome perceived imbalances.
“"Desegregation" means the assignment of students to public schools and within such schools without regard to their race, color, religion, or national origin, but "desegregation" shall not mean the assignment of students to public schools in order to overcome racial imbalance.”
HUD’s liberal interpretations of the Fair Housing Act become even more disturbing.
Buried in the Federal Register’s text of the 2016 proposed rule to establish Regional Equity Centers is the intent of the administration to add religion desegregation (see highlighted text on page 2) to the Centers’ diversity objectives.
“The proposed regulations would add religion to the areas of desegregation assistance, as religion is specifically cited in Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as an area of desegregation assistance, and add a definition for the term ‘‘religion desegregation’’ that is consistent with the terms describing race, sex, and national origin desegregation.”
While Title IV mentions religion along with race, color and national origin, it does not grant any agency the authority to redistribute students based on religious preferences.
In June 2016, HUD, the Department of Education and the Department of Transportation partnered to help states and local leaders “narrow the opportunity gap” for low-income families by increasing diversity in schools. Using recent reports, the agencies reasoned that the children of low-income families would improve academically, by moving them to better schools in more affluent areas.
To accomplish this “economic diversity,” HUD must uproot families; realign classroom populations by income, and re-engineer entire neighborhoods. HUD calls this, their “move to opportunity” (MTO) program.
HUD has gone so far as to create Regional Equity Assistance Centers to assure socioeconomic diversity in elementary and secondary classrooms. The centers are funded through President Obama’s $120M “Stronger Together” program outlined in his 2017 Education Budget.
The goal of the Centers is “to render technical assistance to [applicants requesting their help] in the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans for the desegregation of public schools.”
The money funds grants to promote transformative activities such as (see P21) “revising school boundary and assignment policies to establish open or controlled school-choice zones spanning a variety of neighborhoods across traditional school district lines;” and “restructuring existing schools, such as through grade configuration, to promote inclusive environments…”
But, is enforced economic diversity even legal? Nothing in the 1964 Civil Rights Act nor the 1968 Fair Housing Act says or implies the government has the authority to relocate families to attain economic diversity.
In one case, Title IV of the Civil Rights Act, cited by the administration as its authority for “Stronger Together,” Congress specifically denies federal agencies the right to “assign” students to overcome perceived imbalances.
“"Desegregation" means the assignment of students to public schools and within such schools without regard to their race, color, religion, or national origin, but "desegregation" shall not mean the assignment of students to public schools in order to overcome racial imbalance.”
HUD’s liberal interpretations of the Fair Housing Act become even more disturbing.
Buried in the Federal Register’s text of the 2016 proposed rule to establish Regional Equity Centers is the intent of the administration to add religion desegregation (see highlighted text on page 2) to the Centers’ diversity objectives.
“The proposed regulations would add religion to the areas of desegregation assistance, as religion is specifically cited in Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as an area of desegregation assistance, and add a definition for the term ‘‘religion desegregation’’ that is consistent with the terms describing race, sex, and national origin desegregation.”
While Title IV mentions religion along with race, color and national origin, it does not grant any agency the authority to redistribute students based on religious preferences.
Unfortunately, the law’s limitations
have had little impact on the administrations’ decisions to advance their
interpretations of ‘desegregation.’
How far is the administration willing to stretch Civil Rights laws to obtain religion segregation?
Shortly after HUD’s Equity Assistance Centers were established, the progressive Daily Beast ran an article decrying Christian and Catholic Schools as hotbeds of racial discrimination. Many in the administration agree. As HUD Secretary Julian Castro said:
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia or any form of intolerance. … today, as in past, religion is being used as both a weapon and a shield by those seeking to deny others equality. In our nation’s past religion has been used to justify slavery and later, Jim Crow laws.”
Title IV only applies to Public School desegregation. Private religious institutions are exempt. They may not be for long.
The 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act, increased access to federal funds for religious schools. But acceptance of the funds also means acceptance of an array of federal requirements, giving the Department of Education, and now its new partner HUD, a pathway into private religious institutions.
It may seem overly cautious to worry about Equity Assistance Centers, since program participation is voluntary. But, as communities that accepted HUD grants are learning, once an entity takes the money, whether from HUD or the Department of Education, the stipulations cease to be voluntary. The real question is, “When will HUD mandate ‘income diversity’ and ‘religion desegregation’ as requirements to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing?”
How far is the administration willing to stretch Civil Rights laws to obtain religion segregation?
Shortly after HUD’s Equity Assistance Centers were established, the progressive Daily Beast ran an article decrying Christian and Catholic Schools as hotbeds of racial discrimination. Many in the administration agree. As HUD Secretary Julian Castro said:
“The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ will stand for nothing except hypocrisy so long as they remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia or any form of intolerance. … today, as in past, religion is being used as both a weapon and a shield by those seeking to deny others equality. In our nation’s past religion has been used to justify slavery and later, Jim Crow laws.”
Title IV only applies to Public School desegregation. Private religious institutions are exempt. They may not be for long.
The 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act, increased access to federal funds for religious schools. But acceptance of the funds also means acceptance of an array of federal requirements, giving the Department of Education, and now its new partner HUD, a pathway into private religious institutions.
It may seem overly cautious to worry about Equity Assistance Centers, since program participation is voluntary. But, as communities that accepted HUD grants are learning, once an entity takes the money, whether from HUD or the Department of Education, the stipulations cease to be voluntary. The real question is, “When will HUD mandate ‘income diversity’ and ‘religion desegregation’ as requirements to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing?”
http://us11.campaign-archive1.com/?u=ec7f192a872c6e 5829dbbc97e&id=9d4e0973e9&e=90dca35998
Comments
Our property values are tied in part
to the quality of our schools and this is totally dependent on the quality of
the students in these schools. HUD wants
to unhinge this system with more “over the top” antidiscrimination laws.
These caused the 2008 Meltdown as
lenders were forced to give mortgages to unqualified buyers whose loans went
into default. We can either have a functioning economy or we
can have antidiscrimination laws, but we can’t have both. It’s time to close HUD.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party
Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment